For independent global news, visit Democracy Now!
For a newsletter about the history behind today’s politics, subscribe to Heather Cox Richardson’s newsletter, Letters from an American.
Friday, 1 December 2023:
Federal Judge Tanya Chutkan Rejects Trump’s Claims That He Enjoys Absolute Immunity From Criminal Charges Accusing Him of Seeking to Reverse the 2020 Election. The ruling is likely to spark a series of appeals that the former president’s lawyers hope will push the trial on election interference charges past the 2024 election. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Friday, 1 December 2023: “A federal judge on Friday rejected claims by former President Donald J. Trump that he enjoyed absolute immunity from criminal charges accusing him of seeking to reverse the 2020 election, slapping down his argument that the indictment should be tossed out because it was based on actions he took while he was in office. The ruling by the judge, Tanya S. Chutkan, was her first denying one of Mr. Trump’s many motions to dismiss the election interference case, which is set to go to trial in Federal District Court in Washington in about three months. It offered a sweeping condemnation of what Judge Chutkan called Mr. Trump’s attempts to ‘usurp the reins of government’ and cited foundational American texts like the Federalist Papers and George Washington’s farewell address. Mr. Trump’s lawyers had expected the immunity motion to fail. They have, in fact, been planning for weeks to use the defeat to begin a long-shot strategy to put off the impending trial. They intend to appeal Judge Chutkan’s ruling all the way to the Supreme Court if they can, hoping that even if they lose, their challenges will eat up time and keep the case from going in front of a jury until after the 2024 election…. The former president’s lawyers essentially claimed that all the steps he took to subvert the election he lost to President Biden were not crimes, but rather examples of performing his presidential duties to ensure the integrity of a race that he believed had been stolen from him. Judge Chutkan had little patience for such arguments, saying on Friday evening that neither the Constitution nor American history supported the contention that a former president enjoyed total immunity from prosecution. ‘Whatever immunities a sitting president may enjoy, the United States has only one chief executive at a time, and that position does not confer a lifelong get-out-of-jail-free pass,’ Judge Chutkan wrote. ‘Former presidents enjoy no special conditions on their federal criminal liability. Defendant may be subject to federal investigation, indictment, prosecution, conviction and punishment for any criminal acts undertaken while in office.’ She added, ‘Defendant’s four-year service as commander in chief did not bestow on him the divine right of kings to evade the criminal accountability that governs his fellow citizens.'” See also, Federal judge Tanya Chutkan rejects Trump immunity claim in January 6 criminal prosecution. Chutkan’s ruling sets the clock ticking on whether the Supreme Court will agree and allow Trump to face federal trial in Washington before the 2024 election. The Washington Post, Spencer S. Hus and Rachel Weiner, Friday, 1 December 2023: “A federal judge on Friday rejected Donald Trump’s claim of ‘absolute immunity’ from criminal prosecution for actions taken while he was president, setting the stage for a legal battle over presidential power probably headed to the U.S. Supreme Court and starting the clock ticking on whether the justices will agree to allow him to face trial in Washington before the 2024 election. U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan denied Trump’s request to toss out his four-count August indictment on charges of conspiring to defraud the federal government’s election process, to obstruct Congress’s certification of the vote on Jan. 6, 2021, and to disenfranchise American voters.” See also, Federal judge Tanya Chutkan rules that Trump is not immune from election-subversion prosecution. ‘A former President’s exposure to federal criminal liability is essential to fulfilling our constitutional promise of equal justice under the law,’ Chutkan ruled. Politico, Kyle Cheney, Friday, 1 December 2023: “Donald Trump is not immune from prosecution for his attempt to subvert the 2020 election, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled Friday, concluding that his term as president does not serve as a shield against charges that he sought to defraud and disenfranchise millions of Americans. ‘Defendant’s four-year service as Commander in Chief did not bestow on him the divine right of kings to evade the criminal accountability that governs his fellow citizens,’ Chutkan ruled in a 48-page opinion, sweeping aside Trump’s most intricate attempt to derail the case against him.”
Federal Appeals Court Rules That Civil Lawsuits Seeking to Hold Former President Donald Trump accountable For the Violence That Erupted at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, Can Move Forward For Now. The court left open the possibility that the former president could still prevail in his effort to claim immunity from civil cases seeking to hold him accountable for the violence. The New York Times, Alan Feuer and Charlie Savage, Friday, 1 December 2023: “A federal appeals court ruled on Friday that civil lawsuits seeking to hold former President Donald J. Trump accountable for the violence that erupted at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, can move forward for now, rejecting a broad assertion of immunity that Mr. Trump’s legal team had invoked to try to get the cases dismissed. But the decision, by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, left open the possibility that Mr. Trump could still prevail in his immunity claims after he makes further arguments as to why his fiery speech to supporters near the White House on Jan. 6 should be considered an official presidential act, rather than part of his re-election campaign. The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution gives presidents immunity from being sued over actions taken as part of their official duties, but not from suits based on private, unofficial acts. The civil cases brought against Mr. Trump have raised the question of which role he was playing at the rally he staged on Jan. 6, when he told supporters to “fight like hell” and urged them to march to the Capitol. Essentially, the appeals court ruled that at this stage of the case, that question has yet to be definitively answered. It said Mr. Trump must be given an opportunity to present factual evidence to rebut the plaintiffs’ claims that the rally was a campaign event — scrutinizing issues like whether campaign officials had organized it and campaign funds were used to pay for it.” See also, Federal Appeals Court rules Trump doesn’t have presidential immunity from civil lawsuits related to the January 6, 2021, US Capitol riot, CNN Politics, Katelyn Polantz and Holmes Lybrand, Friday, 1 December 2023: “Former President Donald Trump can be sued in civil lawsuits related to the January 6, 2021, US Capitol riot in a long-awaited, consequential decision from the federal appeals court in Washington, DC. The decision will have significant implications for several cases against Trump in the Washington, DC, federal court related to the 2020 election. The decision arises out of lawsuits brought by Capitol Police officers and Democrats in Congress. The opinion, written by Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan, states that not everything a president does or says while in office is protected from liability.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson wrote foreword for book filled with conspiracy theories and homophobic insults, CNN Politics, Andrew Kaczynski and Em Steck, Friday, 1 December 2023: “Speaker of the House Mike Johnson wrote the foreword and publicly promoted a 2022 book that spread baseless and discredited conspiracy theories and used derogatory homophobic insults. Written by Scott McKay, a local Louisiana politics blogger, the book, ‘The Revivalist Manifesto,’ gives credence to unfounded conspiracy theories often embraced by the far-right – including the ‘Pizzagate’ hoax, which falsely claimed top Democratic officials were involved in a pedophile ring, among other conspiracies. The book also propagates baseless and inaccurate claims, implying that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts was subjected to blackmail and connected to the disgraced underage sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.” See also, House Speaker Mike Johnson Wrote the Foreward for a Racist, Homophobic, Anti-Poor Book That Endorsed Pizzagate and Denigrated a Prisoner of War, Vanity Fair, Bess Levin, Friday, 1 December 2023: “With George Santos’s expulsion drama taking up all the attention in Congress this week, you might have forgotten that the new leader of the House, Mike Johnson, has a history of deeply homophobic remarks that have come out on a near-daily basis since he was elected, as well as equally shitty takes on things like abortion, mass shootings, and democracy. But he does! And on a whole bunch of other stuff as well. CNN’s KFile reports that Johnson wrote the foreward for and then promoted a 2022 book written by Scott McKay called The Revivalist Manifesto, which: 1. Says poor voters are ‘unsophisticated and susceptible to government dependency’ and easy to manipulate with ‘Black Lives Matter defund the police pandering’; 2. Describes Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg as the ‘queer choice’ for the Cabinet job, calls him ‘openly, and obnoxiously, gay,’ and refers to him as ‘Gay Mayor Pete Buttigieg’; 3. Claims the Biden administration purposely let undocumented immigrants into the US for voting purposes; 4. Says Barack Obama’s ‘chief selling point was that he was black’; 5. Writes of the debunked conspiracy theory that Democratic officials ran a pedophile ring out of a pizza shop: ‘The Pizzagate scandal was born, and though some of the most outlandish allegations made in it were clearly disproven, other elements were not; the whole thing just seemed to be dismissed as debunked, and no explanation was ever given”; 6. Suggests Supreme Court Chief justice John Roberts had ties to sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein; 7. Declares John McCain used five and a half years as a prisoner of war during Vietnam ‘as a political get-out-of-jail-free card.'”
Continue reading Aftermath of the Trump Administration, December 2023:
Saturday, 2 December 2023:
Biden Administration Announces Rule to Cut Millions of Tons of Methane Emissions. The measure, which requires oil and gas producers to detect and fix leaks of the greenhouse gas, came as U.S. vice president Kamala Harris spoke at the COP28 climate summit. The New York Times, Jim Tankersley and Lisa Friedman, Saturday, 2 December 2023: “Vice President Kamala Harris pledged at a United Nations climate summit on Saturday that the United States would spend billions more to help developing nations fight and adapt to climate change, telling world leaders that ‘we must do more’ to limit global temperature rise. Her remarks followed an announcement by U.S. officials at the summit the same day that the federal government would, for the first time, require oil and gas producers to detect and fix leaks of methane. It was the most ambitious move to reduce fossil fuel emissions that President Biden’s administration was expected to unveil at the summit, known as COP28. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas that wafts into the atmosphere from pipelines, drill sites and storage facilities, and dangerously speeds the rate of global warming.” See also, US announces rule to slash powerful planet-warming methane by nearly 80% from oil and gas, CNN, Ella Nilsen, Saturday, 2 December 2023: “The Biden administration has finalized a rule to significantly cut the US oil and gas industry’s emissions of methane, a powerful planet-warming gas that scientists and climate advocacy groups have pressed nations to rapidly reduce as global temperature soars. The announcement came amid a wave of commitments at the COP28 climate summit in Dubai on Saturday, including a pledge from at least 117 countries to triple renewable energy by 2030. Vice President Kamala Harris also announced the US was committing another $3 billion to global climate action. Methane, the main component of natural gas and a byproduct of fossil fuel drilling, is a potent source of climate pollution with more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide during its first two decades in the atmosphere. The oil and gas industry is one of the main sources of global methane emissions, according to the International Energy Agency. The new US rule, which will be implemented by the Environmental Protection Agency, is expected to slash methane emissions by nearly 80% through 2038, compared to what they would have been without the rule. The EPA estimates it will stop about 58 million tons of methane from escaping into the atmosphere during that period – the equivalent of taking more than 300 million gas-powered cars off the road for a year.”
Sunday, 3 December 2023:
Details of Sexual Assault allegation Against Florida Republican Chair Christian Ziegler Add to Party Turmoil. the details of the allegation against Ziegler emerged in an affidavit. He has denied any wrongdoing. The New York Times, Colbi Edmonds, Sunday, 3 December 2023: “Details of a sexual assault allegation against the chairman of the Florida Republican Party in an affidavit from state authorities are fueling turmoil within the party. The affidavit recounts that a woman says that the chairman, Christian Ziegler, assaulted her in her apartment in October. It was filed in Florida court as part of a warrant application seeking access to electronic communications and recordings on Mr. Ziegler’s Google account. A spokeswoman for the Police Department in Sarasota, Fla., confirmed on Thursday that there was an ‘active investigation’ involving Mr. Ziegler. No charges have been filed against him, and he has denied wrongdoing through his lawyer, Derek Byrd, who did not respond on Sunday for a request for comment. In an earlier statement, he said that ‘we are confident that once the police investigation is concluded that no charges will be filed and Mr. Ziegler will be completely exonerated.’ In the affidavit, a written declaration made under oath, a law enforcement officer said that the woman and Mr. Ziegler had known each other for 20 years and that she told the police she had agreed to a sexual encounter on Oct. 2 with Mr. Ziegler and his wife, Bridget Ziegler, an elected member of the Sarasota County School Board and a founder of the right-wing national group Moms for Liberty. (She is no longer one of the organization’s officers.) Ms. Ziegler said in an interview with the authorities that she and her husband had been involved in one sexual encounter with the woman over a year ago, the affidavit said. When the woman learned that Ms. Ziegler would not be present for the October encounter, the woman said she changed her mind and canceled with Mr. Ziegler, the affidavit said. But the woman said Mr. Ziegler came to her apartment uninvited and sexually assaulted her.”
Monday, 4 December 2023:
Why a Second Trump Presidency May Be More Radical Than His First. Trump has long exhibited authoritarian impulses, but his policy operation is now more sophisticated, and the buffers to check him are weaker. The New York Times, Charlie Savage, Jonathan Swan, and Maggie Haberman, Monday, 4 December 2023: “Mr. Trump’s violent and authoritarian rhetoric on the 2024 campaign trail has attracted growing alarm and comparisons to historical fascist dictators and contemporary populist strongmen. In recent weeks, he has dehumanized his adversaries as ‘vermin’ who must be ‘rooted out,’ declared that immigrants are ‘poisoning the blood of our country,’ encouraged the shooting of shoplifters and suggested that the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, deserved to be executed for treason. As he runs for president again facing four criminal prosecutions, Mr. Trump may seem more angry, desperate and dangerous to American-style democracy than in his first term. But the throughline that emerges is far more long-running: He has glorified political violence and spoken admiringly of autocrats for decades…. What would be different in a second Trump administration is not so much his character as his surroundings. Forces that somewhat contained his autocratic tendencies in his first term — staff members who saw their job as sometimes restraining him, a few congressional Republicans episodically willing to criticize or oppose him, a partisan balance on the Supreme Court that occasionally ruled against him — would all be weaker. As a result, Mr. Trump’s and his advisers’ more extreme policy plans and ideas for a second term would have a greater prospect of becoming reality.”
The Danger Ahead. If Donald Trump returns to the White House, he’d bring a better understanding of the system’s vulnerabilities, more willing enablers, and a more focused agenda of retaliation against his adversaries. The Atlantic, David Frum, Monday, 4 December 2023: “Trump operates so far outside the normal bounds of human behavior—never mind normal political behavior—that it is difficult to accept what he may actually do, even when he declares his intentions openly. What’s more, we have experienced one Trump presidency already. We can take false comfort from that previous experience: We’ve lived through it once. American democracy survived. Maybe the danger is less than feared? In his first term, Trump’s corruption and brutality were mitigated by his ignorance and laziness. In a second, Trump would arrive with a much better understanding of the system’s vulnerabilities, more willing enablers in tow, and a much more focused agenda of retaliation against his adversaries and impunity for himself. When people wonder what another Trump term might hold, their minds underestimate the chaos that would lie ahead.”
Tuesday, 5 December 2023:
Prosecutors Working for Special Counsel Jack Smith Intend to Show Long Pattern of Threats and Baseless Claims by Trump. In a court filing, federal prosecutors laid out plans to use Trump’s trial on charges of trying to overturn the 2020 election to show a yearslong history of using lies and intimidation. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Tuesday, 5 December 2023: “When former President Donald J. Trump goes on trial on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, federal prosecutors intend to tell a sweeping story, informing the jury about everything from his support for the far-right Proud Boys to his decade-long history of making baseless claims about election fraud, according to court papers unsealed on Tuesday. The prosecutors said in the papers that they also planned to offer evidence about how Mr. Trump and his allies had threatened his adversaries over the years and encouraged violence against them. And they indicated that they intended to tie Mr. Trump more closely to the violence that erupted at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, than the indictment in the case initially suggested. Moreover, the prosecutors said they planned to demonstrate how the former president had continued to display ‘steadfast support’ for the people involved in the events of Jan. 6 — among them, Enrique Tarrio, the former leader of the Proud Boys, and a group of inmates at the District of Columbia jail who call themselves the ‘Jan. 6 Choir.’ ‘The defendant’s embrace of Jan. 6 rioters is evidence of his intent during the charged conspiracies, because it shows that these individuals acted as he directed them to act,’ the prosecutors wrote. ‘Indeed, this evidence shows that the rioters’ disruption of the certification proceeding is exactly what the defendant intended on Jan. 6.’ The court papers, originally filed under seal on Monday night in Federal District Court in Washington, contained an array of allegations against the former president that prosecutors working for the special counsel Jack Smith want to introduce at the election interference trial even though they technically fall outside the span of the conspiracy charges Mr. Trump is facing.” See also, Prosecutors working for special counsel Jack Smith allege Trump ‘sent’ supporters on path to January 6 violence. In D.C. court filing, Donald Trump is accused of a history of election lies and ‘public endorsement and encouragement of violence.’ The Washington Post, Spencer S. Hsu and Devlin Barrett, Tuesday, 5 December 2023: “Federal prosecutors on Tuesday accused former president Donald Trump of a long pattern of lying about elections and encouraging violence, saying he ‘sent’ supporters to the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to criminally block the election results. In a new court filing, prosecutors working for special counsel Jack Smith went further than they did in their August indictment in attempting to tie Trump to the riot. They said that at Trump’s criminal trial in Washington, currently scheduled for early March, they intend to introduce evidence of his acts before the November 2020 presidential election, and his subsequent alleged threats, to establish his motive, intent and preparation for attempting to subvert Joe Biden’s legitimate election victory. ‘Evidence of the defendant’s post-conspiracy embrace of particularly violent and notorious rioters is admissible to establish the defendant’s motive and intent on January 6 — that he sent supporters, including groups like the Proud Boys, whom he knew were angry, and whom he now calls “patriots,” to the Capitol to achieve the criminal objective of obstructing the congressional certification,’ prosecutors alleged in a nine-page filing. ‘At trial, the Government will introduce evidence of this conduct — including the defendant’s public endorsement and encouragement of violence — and further will elicit testimony from witnesses about the threats and harassment they received after the defendant targeted them in relation to the 2020 election.'” See also, Special counsel Jack Smith to use Trump’s continued embrace of January 6 rioters against him at trial, CNN, Katelyn Polantz, Hannah Rabinowitz, and Holmes Lybrand, Tuesday, 5 December 2023: “Special counsel Jack Smith plans to present evidence at Donald Trump’s federal election subversion trial next year that his continued support for US Capitol rioters helps to show he intended to inspire violence on January 6, 2021, as part of a conspiracy he led to overturn the 2020 election. In a court filing made public Tuesday, prosecutors point to Trump endorsing the Proud Boys during a 2020 presidential debate, saying he would pardon January 6 rioters and playing a recording of the National Anthem from imprisoned January 6 defendants at a campaign rally. The filing goes further than the indictment against Trump by tying him directly to the rioters. Trump has been charged with conspiracy and obstruction. He has pleaded not guilty. The trial is scheduled for March in Washington, DC.”
Trump Says He Wouldn’t Be a Dictator, ‘Except for Day 1.’ Pressed by Sean Hannity to promise not to abuse power, Donald Trump agreed he wouldn’t, ‘other than Day 1,’ adding: ‘We’re closing the border. And we’re drilling, drilling, drilling. After that, I’m not a dictator.’ The New York Times, Michael Gold, Tuesday, 5 December 2023: “Twice during a town hall on ‘Fox News’ on Tuesday night, Sean Hannity asked former President Donald J. Trump to say categorically that he would not abuse presidential power and retaliate against his political opponents if elected next year. Both times, Mr. Trump declined to give an outright denial. First, Mr. Hannity, the moderator, asked Mr. Trump to respond to concerns raised by recent reporting that has detailed his violent rhetoric on the campaign trail and his vow to use the Justice Department against his political foes. ‘Do you in any way have any plans whatsoever, if re-elected president, to abuse power?’ Mr. Hannity asked. ‘To break the law? To use the government to go after people?’ But Mr. Hannity, a longtime Trump ally, was apparently unsatisfied, and five minutes later, he brought up the issue again. ‘You are promising America tonight, you would never abuse this power as retribution against anybody?’ he said. ‘Except for Day 1,’ Mr. Trump said breezily.” See also, Trump says he will be a dictator only on ‘day one’ if elected president. At town hall event in Iowa with Fox News host Sean Hannity, the former president was asked to deny that he would use ‘power as retribution.’ The Guardian, Chris Michael and agencies, published on Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “Former president Donald Trump declined to rule out abusing power if he returns to the White House, after being asked to respond to growing criticism of his authoritarian rhetoric. The Republican presidential frontrunner has talked about targeting his rivals – referring to them as ‘vermin’ – and vowed to seek retribution if he wins a second term for what he argues are politically motivated prosecutions against him. Trump had to be asked twice during a televised town hall event in Iowa hosted by Sean Hannity of Fox News to deny that he would abuse power to seek revenge on political opponents if re-elected to the White House.” See also, Trump says he wouldn’t be a dictator ‘except for Day One.’ When asked during a Fox News town hall if he would seek retribution upon returning to office, the former president largely sidestepped the question. The Washington Post, Mariana Alfaro, published on Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “Former president Donald Trump said Tuesday that he would not be a dictator upon returning to office ‘except for Day One,’ as he largely deflected questions at a televised town hall event about whether he would abuse his powers to seek retribution against his political adversaries. Fox News host Sean Hannity pressed Trump on two occasions during the event in Davenport, Iowa, on whether he would promise not to abuse his powers upon returning to the White House. In both occasions, Trump circumvented the question and did not outright deny the possibility. ‘Under no circumstances — you are promising America tonight — you would never abuse power as retribution against anybody?’ Hannity asked Trump during the latter exchange. ‘Except for Day One,’ Trump quickly replied….”
A New Trump Administration Will ‘Come After’ the Media, Says Kash Patel. Donald Trump, who has already promised to use the Justice Department to ‘go after’ his political adversaries, is expected to install Mr. Patel in a senior role if he returns to power. The New York Times, Jonathan Swan, Maggie Haberman, and Charlie Savage, Tuesday, 5 December 2023: “A confidant of Donald J. Trump who is likely to serve in a senior national security role in any new Trump administration threatened on Tuesday to target journalists for prosecution if the former president regains the White House. The confidant, Kash Patel, who served as Mr. Trump’s counterterrorism adviser on the National Security Council and also as chief of staff to the acting secretary of defense, made the remarks on a podcast hosted by Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s former strategist, during a discussion about a potential second Trump presidency beginning in 2025. ‘We will go out and find the conspirators, not just in government but in the media,’ Mr. Patel said. ‘Yes, we’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections — we’re going to come after you. Whether it’s criminally or civilly, we’ll figure that out.’ He added: ‘We’re actually going to use the Constitution to prosecute them for crimes they said we have always been guilty of but never have.'”
Donald Trump’s 2024 Campaign, in His Own Menacing Words. Trump’s language has become darker, harsher, and more threatening during his third run for the White House. The New York Times, Ian Prasad Philbrick and Lyna Bentahar, Tuesday, 5 December 2024: “As he campaigns for another term in the White House, Donald Trump sounds like no other presidential candidate in U.S. history. He has made baldly antidemocratic statements, praising autocratic leaders like China’s Xi Jinping and continuing to claim that the 2020 election was stolen. ‘I don’t consider us to have much of a democracy right now,’ Trump said. He has threatened to use the power of the presidency against his political opponents, including President Biden and Biden’s family. Trump frequently insults his opponents in personal terms, calling them ‘vermin,’ as well as ‘thugs, horrible people, fascists, Marxists, sick people.’ He has made dozens of false or misleading statements. He has advocated violence, suggesting that an Army general who clashed with him deserved the death penalty and that shoplifters should be shot. And he describes U.S. politics in apocalyptic terms, calling the 2024 election ‘our final battle’ and describing himself as his supporters’ ‘retribution.’ Many Americans have heard only snippets of these statements because Trump makes them on Truth Social, his niche social media platform, or at campaign events that receive less media coverage than when he first ran for president eight years ago. But his words offer a preview of what a second Trump term might look like.”
Wednesday, 6 December 2023:
Nevada Charges Republican Party Leaders in 2020 Fake Elector Scheme. The six Republicans charged on Wednesday included the state party’s chairman and vice chairman as well as the chairman of the Republican Party in Clark County. The New York Times, Chris Cameron, Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “A Nevada grand jury indicted top leaders of the state’s Republican Party on charges of forging and submitting fraudulent documents in the fake elector scheme to overturn Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory in the 2020 presidential election, the state’s attorney general announced on Wednesday. The six Republicans charged, who claimed to be electors for Donald J. Trump, included the chairman of the state party, Michael J. McDonald. Also included are Jim Hindle, the state party’s vice chairman; Jim DeGraffenreid, a national committeeman; Jesse Law, the chairman of the Republican Party in Clark County, home to Las Vegas; and Shawn Meehan and Eileen Rice, executive board members of the Republican Party in Douglas County. ‘When the efforts to undermine faith in our democracy began after the 2020 election, I made it clear that I would do everything in my power to defend the institutions of our nation and our state,’ Aaron D. Ford, Nevada’s attorney general and a Democrat, said in a statement. ‘We cannot allow attacks on democracy to go unchallenged. Today’s indictments are the product of a long and thorough investigation, and as we pursue this prosecution, I am confident that our judicial system will see justice done.’ The charges are the latest in a nationwide effort by officials to prosecute those who falsely portrayed themselves as state electors in an effort to overturn Mr. Trump’s defeat in 2020. Michigan’s attorney general charged 16 Republicans in July for a similar effort in the state. The plan involved creating false slates of electors pledged to Mr. Trump in seven swing states that were won by Mr. Biden in an effort to overturn the election.” See also, Nevada grand jury indicts six pro-Trump fake electors, CNN, Kyung Lah and Zachary Cohen, Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “A Nevada grand jury has indicted six individuals who acted as fake electors in a scheme intended to overturn Joe Biden’s 2020 election win, according to the state’s attorney general. The indictments make Nevada the third state – joining Michigan and Georgia – to bring charges against those who served as fake pro-Trump electors after the 2020 election. The six Nevadans charged are fake electors: Michael McDonald, Jesse Law, Jim DeGraffenreid, Durward James Hindle III, Shawn Meehan and Eileen Rice. They face felony charges of ‘offering a false instrument for filing’ and ‘uttering a forged instrument.'”
Fake Trump electors in Wisconsin Accept Biden’s 2020 Win in Settlement. The agreement bars the group of 10 Republicans from serving as electors in 2024 or any other election in which former President Donald J. Trump is on the ballot. The New York Times, Neil Vigdor, Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “A group of 10 bogus Republican electors who tried to overturn Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory in Wisconsin in the 2020 presidential election accepted as part of a lawsuit settlement on Wednesday that former President Donald J. Trump lost the election. The settlement was the first of its kind involving rogue actors in battleground states who, promoting conspiracy theories about election fraud out of loyalty to Mr. Trump, had filed paperwork claiming that he had won the election. It came on the same day that Nevada’s attorney general, Aaron D. Ford, a Democrat, announced that six people had been charged in connection with a similar scheme in that swing state in 2020. The defendants in the Wisconsin case, who were part of a slate of Mr. Trump’s allies, agreed that they would not serve as Electoral College delegates during the 2024 presidential race or in any other election in which the former president is on the ballot.” See also, Wisconsin Trump electors settle lawsuit and agree Biden won the 2020 presidential election, The Washington Post, Patrick Marley, Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “In a legal settlement Wednesday, the 10 Republicans who signed official-looking paperwork falsely purporting Donald Trump won Wisconsin in 2020 have agreed to withdraw their inaccurate filings, acknowledge Joe Biden won the presidency, and not serve as presidential electors in 2024 or in any election where Trump is on the ballot.”
Georgia’s Fulton County prosecutors list top Trump aides and Georgia officials as witnesses. Ex-Justice Department leaders, VP Mike Pence, and Georgia Governor Brian Kemp could be called. The Atlanta Journal Constitution, Tamar Hallerman, Bill Rankin, and Greg Bluestein, Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “Fulton County prosecutors could call several senior officials who served in the Trump administration and Georgia’s top elected leaders as witnesses during the trial for their election interference case, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has learned. Among the names prosecutors have included on their almost 200-person witness list: former Vice President Mike Pence; ex-Attorney General Bill Barr; onetime Justice Department officials Jeffrey Rosen and Richard Donoghue; U.S. Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania; and Steve Bannon, the conservative provocateur and former aide to former President Donald Trump. The District Attorney’s office could also call several of Georgia’s top Republican leaders, including Gov. Brian Kemp, Attorney General Chris Carr, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and former Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan. The names were provided to The AJC by several people who have reviewed the witness list, and confirmed by some who have been told they could be called to testify.”
Trump allies craft plans to give him unprecedented power if he wins the 2024 presidential election, NPR, Franco Ordoñez, Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “Former President Donald Trump and his allies are preparing for an aggressive expansion of his powers should he take back the White House. That includes more power to crack down on immigration and overhaul the Justice Department to punish opponents. Trump mocked fears about his authoritarianism tendencies at a Fox News town hall on Tuesday, stating he’d be a dictator only on ‘Day 1’ so that he could close the border and start drilling. ‘After that, I’m not a dictator, OK?’ Trump told host Sean Hannity to applause from the Iowa crowd. The fiery language is not new, but he and a group of Trump insiders are working behind the scenes on plans to amass his power so that he can carry out an unprecedented restructuring of the U.S. government.”
According to a Global Tipping Points report, the earth is on the verge of five catastrophic climate tipping points. Humanity faces ‘devastating domino effects’ including mass displacement and financial ruin as planet warms. The Guardian, Ajit Niranjan, Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “Many of the gravest threats to humanity are drawing closer, as carbon pollution heats the planet to ever more dangerous levels, scientists have warned. Five important natural thresholds already risk being crossed, according to the Global Tipping Points report, and three more may be reached in the 2030s if the world heats 1.5C (2.7F) above pre-industrial temperatures. Triggering these planetary shifts will not cause temperatures to spiral out of control in the coming centuries but will unleash dangerous and sweeping damage to people and nature that cannot be undone. ‘Tipping points in the Earth system pose threats of a magnitude never faced by humanity,’ said Tim Lenton, from the University of Exeter’s Global Systems Institute. ‘They can trigger devastating domino effects, including the loss of whole ecosystems and capacity to grow staple crops, with societal impacts including mass displacement, political instability and financial collapse.’ The tipping points at risk include the collapse of big ice sheets in Greenland and the West Antarctic, the widespread thawing of permafrost, the death of coral reefs in warm waters, and the collapse of one oceanic current in the North Atlantic. Unlike other changes to the climate such as hotter heatwaves and heavier rainfall, these systems do not slowly shift in line with greenhouse gas emissions but can instead flip from one state to an entirely different one. When a climatic system tips – sometimes with a sudden shock – it may permanently alter the way the planet works.”
Trump ‘dictator’ comment reignites criticism his camp has tried to curb, The Washington Post, Marianne LeVine, Isaac Arnsdorf, and Josh Dawsey, Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “Donald Trump’s campaign asked allies on Capitol Hill in recent days to publicly counter criticism that the former president would govern like a dictator in a second term, according to people familiar with the matter. Yet on Tuesday, Trump reignited that criticism. Pressed twice on the topic during a televised town hall with Fox News host Sean Hannity, including on whether he ‘would never abuse power as retribution against anybody,’ Trump replied: ‘Except for Day 1,’ before going on to talk about drilling for oil and closing the border. The conflicting messages underscored what some experts and lawmakers see as Trump’s continued embrace of authoritarian rhetoric and ideas, and his refusal to fully rebuke some dire warnings about how he’d govern in a second term, even as his campaign is anticipating more attacks on this theme. The Washington Post reported last month that Trump’s associates are drafting plans to invoke the Insurrection Act on his first day in office, which would allow him to deploy the military against civil demonstrations. Trump has repeatedly said he views his prosecutions as a license to turn the Justice Department and the FBI against his opponents and has identified some targets by name. He also continues to falsely claim that the 2020 election was stolen.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson Compares Himself to Moses at Christian Nationalist Gala. Johnson alleges God directed his path to power through the ‘roiling sea.’ Rolling Stone, Tim Dickinson, Wednesday, 6 December 2023: “In a keynote speech to a gathering of Christian nationalist lawmakers Tuesday night, House Speaker Mike Johnson compared himself to Moses, leading the GOP conference — and America — through the parted waters of the Red Sea. Johnson addressed the National Association of Christian Lawmakers at the group’s award gala at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C. Perhaps unaware that the event was being recorded for the NACL Facebook page, Johnson told the crowd: ‘I’ll tell you a secret, since media is not here.’ (‘Thank you for not allowing the media in,’ Johnson added, alleging that journalists have been taking his comments ‘out of context’ with ‘great joy for the last few weeks.’) Johnson then revealed that — in the lead up to the ‘tumult’ of Kevin McCarthy losing his gavel and the chaotic GOP process of selecting new Speaker — he had been speaking directly to God. ‘Look, I’m a Southern Baptist, I don’t wanna get too spooky on you,’ he said, provoking some laughter from the attendees. ‘But, you know, the Lord speaks to your heart.’ The message he received from God, Johnson said, was to prepare for a ‘Red Sea moment’ — both for the Republican conference ‘and in the country at large.’ Johnson said found the directive confusing but he continued to seek the counsel of God. ‘The Lord began to wake me up, through this three-week process, in the middle of night to speak to me,’ Johnson insisted. ‘Now at the time,’ he continued, ‘I assumed the Lord is going to choose a new Moses.’ But because of his own lesser rank among the GOP’s leadership, Johnson said, he believed the heavenly message to be: ‘You’re gonna allow me to be Aaron to Moses,’ citing the role of the Old Testament prophet’s brother and biblical sidekick. But then Johnson watched as candidate after candidate failed to generate the necessary Republican support to win the Speakership. ‘Ultimately 13 people ran for the post. And the Lord kept telling me to, Wait, wait, wait,’ Johnson recalled. ‘So I waited, I waited. And then at the end … the Lord said, Now step forward.’ Johnson regaled the audience with his surprise to be tapped as the Moses figure: ‘Me?’ Johnson said. ‘I’m supposed to be Aaron.’ But that was not the message, Johnson insisted, recalling: ‘No, the Lord said, Step forward.’”
Thursday, 7 December 2023:
Trump Seeks Freeze of Election Case as He Appeals Immunity Ruling. In an effort to delay the former president’s federal trial on charges of trying to overturn the election, his lawyers asked for a pause while they challenge the ruling that he is not immune from prosecution. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Thursday, 7 December 2023: “Lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump asked a federal judge on Wednesday to put the proceedings on hold in the case charging him with seeking to overturn the 2020 election as they appeal her recent ruling that he is not immune from prosecution. The request to freeze the case as the appeal goes forward was part of a long-planned strategy to delay any trial on the election interference charges from starting on schedule, in March. Mr. Trump’s legal team is hoping that a protracted appeal of the immunity issue, potentially to the Supreme Court, could result in the trial being pushed off until after the 2024 election is decided. Barring that, his lawyers hope to postpone the trial at least until after the Republican Party holds its nominating convention in Milwaukee in July. The way in which appealing the judge’s ruling has become entangled with Mr. Trump’s political calendar is typical of the way he has handled all four of the criminal cases he is facing as he mounts his third bid for the White House. He and his aides have made no secret that they believe his best shot at disposing of the four indictments against him is to be re-elected. While Mr. Trump has sought to slow down all of his cases, he has pursued the strategy most vigorously in the election case in Federal District Court in Washington, if only because it is likely to be the first to go before a jury.” See also, Trump appeals January 6 immunity ruling, launching process that may delay trial. Both appeals court and supreme Court would have to rule on appeals quickly for trial to begin before 2024 election, experts say. The Washington Post, Washington Post Staff, Thursday, 7 December 2023: “Donald Trump filed notice on Thursday saying he will appeal a D.C. judge’s ruling that he was not immune from being charged with federal crimes for his efforts to undo the outcome of the 2020 election, either by his former role as president or the Constitution’s rules for impeachment. The notice is a minor procedural step. But it sets in motion one of the most potentially consequential parts of Trump’s legal saga as the first former president to be charged with crimes. How and when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and the Supreme Court handle his appeal could have a huge impact on whether Trump — who is again running for president — goes on trial before voters go to the polls in 2024, or ever.” See also, Trump appeals ruling rejecting immunity claim as window narrows to derail federal election case, Associated Press, Alanna Durkin Richer and Eric Tucker, Thursday, 7 December 2023: “Former President Donald Trump is appealing a ruling that found he is not immune from criminal prosecution as he runs out of opportunities to delay or even derail an upcoming trial on charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Lawyers for the 2024 Republican presidential primary frontrunner filed a notice of appeal Thursday indicating that they will challenge U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s decision rejecting Trump’s bid to dismiss the case headed to trial in Washington, D.C., in March. The one-page filing, the first step in a process that could potentially reach the Supreme Court in the months ahead, was accompanied by a request from the Trump team to freeze deadlines in the case while the appeals court considers the matter.”
Friday, 8 December 2023:
Appeals Court Upholds, but Narrows, Gag Order on Trump in Election Case. The decision largely left in place an order limiting what the former president can say about his upcoming federal trial but allowed him more leeway to criticize Jack Smith, the special counsel. The New York Times, Alan Feuer and Charlie Savage, Friday, 8 December 2023: “A federal appeals court on Friday upheld the gag order imposed two months ago on former President Donald J. Trump in the criminal case accusing him of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, but narrowed its terms to allow him to keep attacking one of his main targets: Jack Smith, the special counsel overseeing his federal prosecutions. The fight over the gag order has pitted the First Amendment rights of a presidential candidate against fears that his vitriolic language could spur his supporters to violence against participants in the case. While the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit agreed that a gag order was justified, its adjustments gave Mr. Trump broader latitude to lash out at some of the people he has been targeting for months. In its ruling, a three-judge panel sought to strike a cautious balance between what it called ‘two foundational constitutional values’: the integrity of the judicial system and Mr. Trump’s right to speak his mind. To that end, the panel kept in place the gag order’s original measures restricting Mr. Trump from attacking any members of Mr. Smith’s staff or the court staff involved in the case. It also preserved provisions that allowed Mr. Trump to portray the prosecution as a political vendetta and to directly criticize the Biden administration and the Justice Department. And in one respect, the court expanded the restrictions, adding a measure barring Mr. Trump from commenting on the relatives of lawyers or court staff members involved in the case if the remarks were intended to interfere with how the trial participants were doing their jobs.” See also, Trump gag order reinstated but narrowed in January 6 case. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said Trump cannot comment on the testimony of likely witnesses, but he can single out Special Counsel Jack Smith. The Washington Post, Rachel Weiner, Friday, 8 December 2023: “A federal appeals court narrowed an order limiting what former president Donald Trump can say about people involved in the criminal case alleging that he tried to subvert the 2020 election results, saying he cannot talk about witnesses’ involvement or single out other individuals in ways likely to interfere with the case. ‘We do not allow such an order lightly. Mr. Trump is a former President and current candidate for the presidency, and there is a strong public interest in what he has to say,’ Judge Patricia Millett wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. ‘But Mr. Trump is also an indicted criminal defendant, and he must stand trial in a courtroom under the same procedures that govern all other criminal defendants. That is what the rule of law means.’ The ruling upholds a ban on Trump speaking about witnesses’ participation in the investigation and likely testimony but allows other attacks on those figures. Commentary on other lawyers involved in the case, as well as court staff and both groups’ family members, are barred ‘if those statements are made with the intent to materially interfere with, or to cause others to materially interfere with, counsel’s or staff’s work in this criminal case, or with the knowledge that such interference is highly likely to result.’ And all statements about special counsel Jack Smith are now allowed.”
Saturday, 9 December 2023:
Talk of a Trump Dictatorship Charges the U.S. Political Debate. Former President Donald Trump and his allies are not doing much to reassure those worried about his autocratic instincts. If anything, they seem to be leaning into the predictions. The New York Times, Peter Baker, Saturday, 9 December 2023: “When a historian wrote an essay the other day warning that the election of former President Donald J. Trump next year could lead to dictatorship, one of Mr. Trump’s allies quickly responded by calling for the historian to be sent to prison. It almost sounds like a parody: The response to concerns about dictatorship is to prosecute the author. But Mr. Trump and his allies are not going out of their way to reassure those worried about what a new term would bring by firmly rejecting the dictatorship charge. If anything, they seem to be leaning into it. If Mr. Trump is returned to office, people close to him have vowed to ‘come after’ the news media, open criminal investigations into onetime aides who broke with the former president and purge the government of civil servants deemed disloyal. When critics said Mr. Trump’s language about ridding Washington of ‘vermin’ echoed that of Adolf Hitler, the former president’s spokesman said the critics’ ‘sad, miserable existence will be crushed’ under a new Trump administration. Mr. Trump himself did little to assuage Americans when his friend Sean Hannity tried to help him out on Fox News this past week. During a town hall-style meeting, Mr. Hannity tossed a seeming softball by asking Mr. Trump to reaffirm that of course he did not intend to abuse his power and use the government to punish enemies. Instead of simply agreeing, Mr. Trump said he would only be a dictator on ‘Day 1’ of a new term. ‘Trump has made it crystal clear through all his actions and rhetoric that he admires leaders who have forms of authoritarian power, from Putin to Orban to Xi, and that he wants to exercise that kind of power at home,’ said Ruth Ben-Ghiat, author of ‘Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present,’ referring to Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, Viktor Orban of Hungary and Xi Jinping of China. ‘History shows that autocrats always tell you who they are and what they are going to do,’ she added. ‘We just don’t listen until it is too late.'”
Jack Smith reveals sweeping scope of bid to debunk Trump election machine claims. In a new filing, his team described interviewing more than a dozen of the top intelligence officials in Trump’s administration. Politico, Kyle Cheney, Saturday, 9 December 2023: “Special counsel Jack Smith on Saturday sharply rejected former President Donald Trump’s contention that foreign governments may have changed votes in the 2020 election, laying bare new details about his team’s extensive probe of the matter and its access to a vast array of senior intelligence officials in Trump’s administration. In a 45-page filing, Smith’s team describes interviewing more than a dozen of the top intelligence officials in Trump’s administration — from his director of national intelligence to the administrator of the NSA to Trump’s personal intelligence briefer — about any evidence that foreign governments had penetrated systems that counted votes in 2020. ‘The answer from every single official was no,’ senior assistant special counsel Thomas Windom writes in the filing. The filing was part of the special counsel’s opposition to a bid by Trump to access a broad swath of classified intelligence as part of his defense against charges that he conspired to subvert the 2020 election and disenfranchise millions of voters, culminating in the violent Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Trump has argued that foreign governments fueled his supporters’ concerns about election integrity and that some classified evidence revealed potential meddling that justified his own professed fears about fraud. But prosecutors say Trump’s new legal effort is just an extension of his election lies — and that, in fact, intelligence officials unanimously rejected the idea that foreign governments penetrated any systems that counted votes or could have altered the election tally itself.”
Fears of a NATO Withdrawal Rise as Trump Seeks a Return to Power. Current and former European diplomats said there was growing concern a second Trump presidency could mean an American retreat from the continent and a gutting of NATO. The New York Times, Jonathan Swan, Charlie Savage, and Maggie Haberman, Saturday, 9 December 2023: “For 74 years, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has been America’s most important military alliance. Presidents of both parties have seen NATO as a force multiplier enhancing the influence of the United States by uniting countries on both sides of the Atlantic in a vow to defend one another. Donald J. Trump has made it clear that he sees NATO as a drain on American resources by freeloaders. He has held that view for at least a quarter of a century. In his 2000 book, ‘The America We Deserve,’ Mr. Trump wrote that ‘pulling back from Europe would save this country millions of dollars annually.’ As president, he repeatedly threatened a United States withdrawal from the alliance. Yet as he runs to regain the White House, Mr. Trump has said precious little about his intentions. His campaign website contains a single cryptic sentence: ‘We have to finish the process we began under my administration of fundamentally re-evaluating NATO’s purpose and NATO’s mission.’ He and his team refuse to elaborate. That vague line has generated enormous uncertainty and anxiety among European allies and American supporters of the country’s traditional foreign-policy role.”
Sunday, 10 December 2023:
Trump Will Not Testify as Scheduled in New York Civil Fraud Trial. Donald Trump has changed his mind about returning to the witness stand on Monday to testify in his own defense. The New York Times, Jonah E. Bromwich, Sunday, 10 December 2023: “Donald J. Trump has decided not to return to the witness stand to testify on Monday as he had planned, setting up an abrupt and anticlimactic ending to the defense’s case in his civil fraud trial in Manhattan. As recently as Sunday morning, Mr. Trump had been expected to testify in his own defense in the case, in which the New York attorney general has accused him of fraudulently inflating his net worth. But just before 3:30 in the afternoon, Mr. Trump announced on his social media platform in two all-caps messages that he had already testified ‘very successfully and conclusively’ and that ‘I will not be testifying on Monday.’ His about-face all but ends the lengthy and chaotic proceedings in the fraud trial, which began in early October. A defense witness, Eli Bartov, an accounting professor at New York University, is instead expected to conclude the defense’s case, to be followed by several rebuttal witnesses called by the attorney general’s lawyers. In January, both parties are expected to file final briefs, after which, the trial judge, Arthur F. Engoron, is expected to deliver his ruling. The attorney general, Letitia James, has asked that Mr. Trump be fined $250 million and be permanently barred from running a business in New York. Even before the trial, Justice Engoron concluded that the former president had committed fraud by inflating the values of his assets on annual financial statements, which he then shared with banks and insurers to receive preferential treatment.”
Are We Sleepwalking Into Dictatorship? Liz Cheney has not ceased ringing the alarm. She now contends that, if Trump wins back the White House in November, his election could be our last election. The New Yorker, David Remnick, Sunday, 10 December 2023: “Liz Cheney, the former Republican congresswoman from Wyoming and an ardent conservative, is an apostate for modern times. In a political party that has evolved into a personality cult, her apostasy resides in her refusal to worship its leader and in her defense of the Constitution. For such impudence, she was banished. She was thrown out of the Wyoming Republican Party, censured by the Republican National Committee, and voted out of Congress simply for insisting on the facts: that Donald Trump incited a violent insurrection on Capitol Hill as part of an elaborate attempt to steal the 2020 Presidential election. Cheney did not merely withdraw her support for Trump. She helped lead the congressional select committee investigating the January 6th uprising, which assembled so much of the evidence that informs the federal criminal case against Trump. Cheney has not ceased ringing the alarm. She now contends that, if Trump wins back the White House in November, his election could be our last election. Mainstream media outlets, including this one, are filled with detailed descriptions of an incipient Trump autocracy, a second term in which he is no longer restrained by conscience-stricken counsellors. Yet tens of millions of Americans seem undeterred by the prospect of absolutism, cruelty, and corruption on the horizon. The caucuses and the primaries begin next month, and Trump not only dominates his party—he leads in some national polls against the sitting President, Joe Biden. The country, as Cheney puts it, is ‘sleepwalking into dictatorship.’ There are many reasons for Democrats and Independents to be, at best, skeptical of Liz Cheney. Her hairpin turn to Damascus came late. She voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020. As a member of the House of Representatives, she voted with him ninety-three per cent of the time. During the war in Iraq, a catastrophe designed in no small measure by her father, Dick Cheney, she defended the use of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques.’ When asked about the conspiracy theory that Barack Obama had not been born in the United States, she delivered the squirrelly reply that people believed it because they were ‘uncomfortable with an American President who seems to be afraid to defend America.'”
Monday, 11 December 2023:
Special Counsel Jack Smith Asks Supreme Court to Decide if Trump Is Immune From Prosecution. Smith urged the justices to move with exceptional speed, and they quickly agreed to fast-track the first phase of the case. The New York Times, Adam Liptak and Alan Feuer, Monday, 11 December 2023: “Jack Smith, the special counsel prosecuting former President Donald J. Trump on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, asked the Supreme Court on Monday to rule on Mr. Trump’s argument that he is immune from prosecution. The justices quickly agreed to fast-track the first phase of the case. Mr. Smith’s request was unusual in two ways: He asked the justices to rule before an appeals court acted, and he urged them to move with exceptional speed. ‘This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former president is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin,’ Mr. Smith wrote. On Monday evening, just hours after Mr. Smith filed papers in the Supreme Court, the justices granted his initial request: to put their consideration of whether to hear the case on a fast track. The court ordered Mr. Trump’s lawyers to file their response to the petition seeking review on an abbreviated schedule, by Dec. 20. Mr. Smith’s filings represented a vigorous plea to keep the trial on track by cutting off an avenue by which Mr. Trump could cause delays. A speedy decision by the justices is of the essence, Mr. Smith wrote, because Mr. Trump’s appeal of a trial judge’s ruling rejecting his claim of immunity suspends the criminal trial. The proceeding is scheduled to begin on March 4 in Federal District Court in Washington. Any significant delays could plunge the trial into the heart of the 2024 campaign season or push it past the election, when Mr. Trump could order the charges be dropped if he wins the presidency.” See also, Supreme Court will consider fast-tracking Trump appeal in D.C. trial. ‘The United States recognizes that this is an extraordinary request,’ special counsel Jack Smith wrote, calling it ‘an extraordinary case,’ The Washington Post, Devlin Barrett, Perry Stein, Robert Barnes, and Rachel Weiner, Monday, 11 December 2023: “The Supreme Court said Monday it will consider special counsel Jack Smith’s request to fast-track consideration of Donald Trump’s claim he is immune from prosecution for alleged election obstruction in 2020 — intensifying the legal jockeying over whether Trump’s criminal trial in D.C. will stay on schedule for early next year. The decision by the nation’s highest court doesn’t mean that the justices will definitely short-circuit the typical appeals process, but it means they are going to hear arguments from both sides about whether they should act quickly. Trump’s lawyers were told to file briefs on the issue by Dec. 20. The quick response by the Supreme Court came hours after Smith’s office filed its request seeking to essentially leapfrog an appeals court process that Trump has already started but which could take months to resolve. A lengthy appeal could slow the Justice Department’s push for a March trial for Trump, the front-runner for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination.” See also, Special counsel Jack Smith asks the Supreme Court to rule quickly on whether Trump can be prosecuted, Associated Press, Mark Sherman and Eric Tucker, Monday, 11 December 2023: “Special counsel Jack Smith on Monday asked the Supreme Court to take up and rule quickly on whether former President Donald Trump can be prosecuted on charges he plotted to overturn the 2020 election results. Smith made his request for the court to act with unusual speed to prevent any delays that could push back the trial of the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner, currently set to begin March 4, until after next year’s presidential election. Later Monday, the justices indicated they would decide quickly whether to hear the case, ordering Trump’s lawyers to respond by Dec. 20. The court’s brief order did not signal what it ultimately would do.”
Special counsel Jack Smith reveals plans to use Trump’s phone data at trial. Smith indicated that he plans to call an expert witness who extracted and reviewed data copied from Trump’s phone. Politico, Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein, Monday, 11 December 2023: “Special counsel Jack Smith has extracted data from the cell phone Donald Trump used while in the White House and plans to present evidence of his findings to a Washington, D.C. jury to demonstrate how Trump used the phone in the weeks during which he attempted to subvert the 2020 election. In a court filing Monday, Smith indicated that he plans to call an expert witness who extracted and reviewed data copied from Trump’s phone, as well as a phone used by another unidentified individual in Trump’s orbit. The data from Trump’s phone could reveal day-to-day details of his final weeks in office, including his daily movements, his Twitter habits and any other aides who had access to his accounts and devices. The data, for example, could help show whether Trump personally approved or sent a fateful tweet attacking his vice president, Mike Pence, during the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol.”
Tuesday, 12 December 2023:
Why Special Counsel Jack Smith Is Taking Trump’s Immunity Claim Straight to the Supreme Court. Smith has substantive and procedural reasons for wanting a quick ruling on whether Donald Trump can be prosecuted for his actions as president. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Tuesday, 12 December 2023: “Jack Smith, the special counsel who has brought two cases against former President Donald J. Trump, made a bold move this week designed to undercut one of Mr. Trump’s chief defenses against accusations of plotting to overturn the 2020 election. Mr. Smith asked the Supreme Court to rule on Mr. Trump’s attempts to have the election subversion charges dismissed on a sweeping claim of executive immunity before a lower appeals court even has the chance to consider the issue. Mr. Smith also asked the justices to make their decision quickly. ‘The United States recognizes that this is an extraordinary request,’ he told the Supreme Court in a petition filed on Monday. But there was a reason it was needed. ‘This is an extraordinary case,’ he wrote. Here is a look at the intersecting legal and political issues surrounding the special counsel’s move.”
Wednesday, 13 December 2023:
Supreme Court to Decide Scope of Obstruction charge Central to Trump’s January 6 Case. A ruling by the Supreme court could affect the cases of hundreds of people charged in connection with the Capitol attack–and potentially the prosecution of Donald Trump. The New York Times, Alan Feuer and Adam Liptak, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “The Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday to hear a case that could upend the prosecutions of hundreds of rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and delay — or limit the scope of — former President Donald J. Trump’s trial on federal charges of trying to overturn his election defeat. At issue is whether the government can charge defendants in the cases under a federal law that makes it a crime to corruptly obstruct an official proceeding. The law is at the heart of the prosecutions of many members of the pro-Trump mob that sought to block the congressional certification of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory in 2020. It is also a key part of the federal indictment accusing Mr. Trump of plotting to remain in power despite the will of the voters. The decision to hear the case will complicate and perhaps delay the start of Mr. Trump’s trial, now scheduled to take place in Washington in March. The Supreme Court’s ultimate ruling, which may not arrive until June, is likely to address the viability of two of the main counts against Mr. Trump. And it could severely hamper efforts by the special counsel, Jack Smith, to hold the former president accountable for the violence of his supporters at the Capitol. The court’s eventual decision could also invalidate convictions that have already been secured against scores of Mr. Trump’s followers who took part in the assault. That would be an enormous blow to the government’s prosecutions of the Jan. 6 riot cases.” See also, Supreme Court accepts January 6 case that could affect or delay Trump trial. Trump would like to push back the election obstruction trial in D.C. as he seeks another term in the White House. The Washington Post, Robert Barnes Rachel Weiner, and Devlin Barrett, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “The Supreme Court on Wednesday took up a challenge to a law used to charge hundreds of people in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, and which also has been levied against former president Donald Trump in his federal election obstruction case. The decision came as the D.C. federal judge overseeing Trump’s trial said she would freeze those proceedings while a different issue is reviewed by higher courts. The twin developments cast fresh uncertainty over special counsel Jack Smith’s efforts to bring Trump to trial in early March. Delaying the case has been a key part of the former president’s legal strategy as he seeks a second term in the White House. The justices will examine an appeals court ruling that said the government could prosecute Jan. 6 riot defendants charged under a federal law that makes it a crime to obstruct or impede an official proceeding — in this case, disruption of Congress’s formal certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential victory. Scores of defendants already have been sentenced under the law. Obstruction is also one of the four counts brought against Trump by Smith in connection with the former president’s attempts to block Biden’s win. The Supreme Court’s decision to review the law could provide another avenue for Trump to attack the federal case against him. Simply accepting the case does not necessarily delay or hamper Trump’s prosecution. But if the Supreme Court rules the law does not apply to efforts to block the election results, that probably would invalidate at least one of the charges Trump faces. And a lower court could also decide to postpone Trump’s D.C. trial — scheduled to start March 4 — until the Supreme Court decides the challenge to the law. The high court is unlikely to hear oral arguments in the case of the Jan. 6 riot defendant for months, and a decision might not come before late June, when the justices finish the work of their term.” See also, Supreme Court will hear a case that could undo Capitol riot charge against hundreds, including Trump, Associated Press, Mark Sherman, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it will hear an appeal that could upend hundreds of charges stemming from the Capitol riot, including against former President Donald Trump. The justices will review a charge of obstruction of an official proceeding that has been brought against more than 300 people. The charge refers to the disruption of Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory over Trump. That’s among four counts brought against Trump in special counsel Jack Smith’s case that accuses the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner of conspiring to overturn the results of his election loss. Trump is also charged with conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. The court’s decision to weigh in on the obstruction charge could threaten the start of Trump’s trial, currently scheduled for March 4. The justices separately are considering whether to rule quickly on Trump’s claim that he can’t be prosecuted for actions taken within his role as president. A federal judge already has rejected that argument.”
Judge Tanya Chutkan Pauses Trump election Case Amid Appeal of Immunity Issue. the decision by the judge to freeze the case came as an appeals court agreed to move quickly in considering the former president’s claims that he is immune from prosecution. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “A federal judge on Wednesday put on hold all of the proceedings in former President Donald J. Trump’s trial on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election as an appeals court in Washington agreed to move quickly in considering Mr. Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution in the case. The decision by the appeals court to expedite its hearing of the immunity issue capped an all-day flurry of back-and-forth moves by Mr. Trump’s legal team and prosecutors working for the special counsel, Jack Smith, over the critical question of when the election trial will actually be held. It is now set to begin in Washington in March. Under the aggressive schedule laid out by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, all written filings in the immunity case would have to be submitted by Jan. 2. The court could the hear oral arguments and render a decision.” See also, Judge Tanya Chutkan pauses Trump’s 2020 election interference case while he appeals his immunity claim, Associated Press, Eric Tucker and Alanna Durkin Richer, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “Donald Trump’s election interference case in Washington will be put on hold while the former president further pursues his claims that he is immune from prosecution, a judge ruled Wednesday. The decision from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan raises the likelihood that Trump’s trial on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, currently scheduled for March 4, will be postponed as the appeal of a legally untested argument winds through the courts. Shortly after Chutkan’s ruling, the federal appeals court in Washington granted prosecutors’ request to expedite consideration of Trump’s appeal. The appeals court set deadlines for briefs to be filed between Dec. 23 and Jan. 2, but has not yet scheduled a date for arguments. The issue is of paramount significance to both sides given that a court ruling in Trump’s favor would presumably derail the case and because a protracted appeal could result in a significant postponement of the proceedings, including until potentially after next year’s election, that would benefit the ex-president as he seeks to reclaim the White House.” See also, Judge Tanya Chutkan pauses Trump election interference case in an order that could delay March trial, CNN Politics, Hannah Rabinowitz and Katelyn Polantz, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “The federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s 2020 election interference case has temporarily paused all procedural deadlines while appeals over a major issue play out – which could lead to his March 2024 trial date being pushed back. The order from Judge Tanya Chutkan acknowledged that she no longer has jurisdiction over aspects of the criminal case while the DC Circuit Court of Appeals considers whether Trump is immune and can be tried. In a bid to speed that appeals process, special counsel Jack Smith has asked the Supreme Court to step in. Chutkan said in her order that the trial date of March 4, 2024, could be affected, and that she would reconsider that date when the appeals process has concluded.”
Appeals court denies Trump’s ‘presidential immunity’ argument in E. Jean Carroll defamation lawsuit, Associated Press, Philip Marcelo, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “A federal appeals court has ruled that former President Donald Trump gave up his right to argue that presidential immunity protects him from being held liable for statements he made in 2019 when he denied that he raped advice columnist E. Jean Carroll. A three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan on Wednesday upheld a lower court’s ruling that Trump had effectively waived the immunity defense by not raising it when Carroll first filed a defamation lawsuit against him four years ago. Alina Habba, a lawyer for Trump, said in an emailed statement that the ruling was ‘fundamentally flawed’ and that the former president’s legal team would be immediately appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
In a First, Nations at Climate Summit in Dubai Agree to Move Away From Fossil Fuels. Nearly 200 countries convened by the United Nations approved a milestone plan to ramp up renewable energy and transition away from coal, oil, and gas. The New York Times, Brad Plumer and Max Bearak, Wednesday, 12 December 2023: “For the first time since nations began meeting three decades ago to confront climate change, diplomats from nearly 200 countries approved a global pact that explicitly calls for ‘transitioning away from fossil fuels’ like oil, gas and coal that are dangerously heating the planet. The sweeping agreement, which comes during the hottest year in recorded history, was reached on Wednesday after two weeks of furious debate at the United Nations climate summit in Dubai. European leaders and many of the nations most vulnerable to climate-fueled disasters were urging language that called for a complete ‘phaseout’ of fossil fuels. But that proposal faced intense pushback from major oil exporters like Saudi Arabia and Iraq, as well as fast-growing countries like India and Nigeria. In the end, negotiators struck a compromise: The new deal calls on countries to accelerate a global shift away from fossil fuels this decade in a ‘just, orderly and equitable manner,’ and to quit adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere entirely by midcentury. It also calls on nations to triple the amount of renewable energy, like wind and solar power, installed around the world by 2030 and to slash emissions of methane, a greenhouse gas that is more potent than carbon dioxide in the short term. While past U.N. climate deals have urged countries to reduce emissions, they have shied away from explicitly mentioning the words ‘fossil fuels,’ even though the burning of oil, gas and coal is the primary cause of global warming.” See also, Two Words That Could Change the World. An unlikely breakthrough on fossil fuels at COP28 (Conference of Parties). The New York Times, David Gelles, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “They are just two little words. They appear on just one page of an 11,000 word document. But the inclusion of the phrase ‘fossil fuels’ in the final agreement from COP28 marks a potentially trajectory-altering moment in the fight against climate change. The global pact calls for ‘transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner.’ For almost 30 years, negotiators representing nations from around the world had struggled and failed to reach an obvious consensus: that the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas should be wound down to avoid further catastrophic global warming. But overnight, representatives from more than 170 countries arrived at a surprising deal, in Dubai of all places. The text is not as clear as many leaders, activists and scientists had hoped. It includes caveats and wiggle room, and is nonbinding. Nevertheless, the inclusion of explicit language calling for a move away from coal, oil and gas is being hailed as a major breakthrough.” See also, The world just made it clear the fossil fuel era is ending–with some wiggle room. Island nations say COP28 (Conference of Parties) agreement has a ‘litany of loopholes,’ but it marks the first time nations have signaled the end of oil, gas, and coal. The Washington Post, Chico Harlan, Maxine Joselow, and Timothy Puko, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “Breaking a deadlock that had hindered climate talks for three decades, nations Wednesday struck a deal that calls for tackling the root cause of the climate crisis: fossil fuels. The final agreement at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Dubai, known as COP28, explicitly recommends ‘transitioning away from fossil fuels’ such as oil, gas and coal that are dangerously heating Earth. That pledge — an obvious step, given the science — is nonetheless a breakthrough for the U.N. climate talks, which require consensus on final agreement. It also comes after several major countries fought furiously to preserve their right to extract wealth from under layers of earth. Not even the landmark 2015 Paris agreement had specifically mentioned fossil fuel use, instead focusing on the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. More than any climate deal before it, the new pact reflects a recognition that the world is doing more harm than good by prolonging the era of coal, oil and gas — a roughly 200-year period of unprecedented development in which the life span expectancy soared and the global population grew eightfold.” See also, Climate talks end on a first-ever call for the world to move away from fossil fuels, NPR, Nathan Rott, Rebecca Hersher, Jeff Brady, Lauren Sommer, Alejandra Borunda, and Julia Simon, Wednesday, 13 December 2023: “In the final weeks of the hottest year in recorded history, the international body responsible for limiting global warming and its disastrous effects called on countries to transition away from the chief cause of climate change – fossil fuels – for the first time…. The agreement at the United Nations climate conference, known as COP28, comes after more than two weeks of contentious negotiations. But not all of the nearly 200 countries present – particularly those at the greatest risk from the rapidly warming world – were satisfied with the decision, which ended more than 24 hours after the summit’s scheduled close. Amidst the congratulations and speeches, some countries expressed their outrage at not being allowed to comment on a final text they felt did not go far enough to address the threats from global warming, especially to developing nations. The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), which represents countries that have contributed little to global climate change but are already being overrun by sea-level rise, said it saw a ‘litany of loopholes,’ in the final text. Members of the alliance and climate activists at COP28 had called for a clear path towards phasing out fossil fuels, which are responsible for 75% of global warming.” See also, What Did COP28 (Conference of Parties) Really Accomplish? At the end of the day–or record-hot year–what matters is not what language countries agree to but what they actually do. The New Yorker, Elizabeth Kolbert, Wednesday, 13 December 2023. “Three decades after agreeing to avoid ‘dangerous’ warming, the nations of the world today acknowledged that this would involve ‘transitioning away from fossil fuels.’ This can be found on page 5 of the final document that emerged from the latest round of climate negotiations—cop28—which just ended, in Dubai. Depending on how you look at things, the statement represents either a genuine breakthrough that will allow the globe to avert catastrophe or a point so obvious that what it really reveals is how far offtrack things have veered.” See also, This Year’s Climate Summit Ended on a Hopeful Note, Jacobin, Bill McKibben, published on Thursday, 14 December 2023: “On Tuesday, as North America slept, delegates from around the world concluded the global climate conference in Dubai, when the chair — local oilman Sultan al-Jaber — quick-gaveled through an agreement that included a sentence calling for ‘transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems in a just, orderly, and equitable manner.’ That may not seem like much — it is, after all, the single most obvious thing one could possibly say about climate change, akin to: ‘In an effort to reduce my headache, I am transitioning away from hitting myself in the forehead with a hammer.’ And by itself it will accomplish nothing. As Samoa, speaking on behalf of the Small Island Nations, said a few minutes later, ‘We have come to the conclusion that the course correction that is needed has not been secured.’ But it is — and this is important — a tool for activists to use henceforth. The world’s nations have now publicly agreed that they need to transition off fossil fuels, and that sentence will hang over every discussion from now on — especially the discussions about any further expansion of fossil fuel energy. There may be barriers to shutting down operations (what the text of the agreement obliquely refers to as ‘national circumstances, pathways, and approaches.’) But surely, if the language means anything at all, it means no opening more new oil fields, no more new pipelines, and no more new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals.”
Friday, 15 December 2023:
The mystery of the missing binder: How a collection of raw Russian intelligence disappeared under Trump, CNN Politics, Jeremy Herb, Katie Bo Lillis, Natasha Bertrand, Evan Perez, and Zachary Cohen, Friday, 15 December 2023: “A binder containing highly classified information related to Russian election interference went missing at the end of Donald Trump’s presidency, raising alarms among intelligence officials that some of the most closely guarded national security secrets from the US and its allies could be exposed, sources familiar with the matter told CNN. Its disappearance, which has not been previously reported, was so concerning that intelligence officials briefed Senate Intelligence Committee leaders last year about the missing materials and the government’s efforts to retrieve them, the sources said. In the two-plus years since Trump left office, the missing intelligence does not appear to have been found. The binder contained raw intelligence the US and its NATO allies collected on Russians and Russian agents, including sources and methods that informed the US government’s assessment that Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help Trump win the 2016 election, sources tell CNN. The intelligence was so sensitive that lawmakers and congressional aides with top secret security clearances were able to review the material only at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where their work scrutinizing it was itself kept in a locked safe.” See also, Material From Russia Investigation Went Missing as Trump Left Office. A binder given to the Trump White House contained details that intelligence agencies believe could reveal secret sources and methods. The New York Times, Maggie Haberman, Julian E. Barnes, Charlie Savage, and Jonathan Swan, Friday, 15 December 2023: “Material from a binder with highly classified information connected to the investigation into Russian efforts to meddle in the 2016 election disappeared in the final days of Donald J. Trump’s presidency, two people familiar with the matter said. The disappearance of the material, known as the “Crossfire Hurricane” binder for the name given to the investigation by the F.B.I., vexed national security officials and set off concerns that sensitive information could be inappropriately shared, one of the people said. The material’s disappearance was reported earlier Friday by CNN. The matter was so concerning to officials that the Senate Intelligence Committee was briefed about it last year, a U.S. official said.”
Jury Orders Rudolph Giuliani to Pay $148 Million to Georgia Election Workers He Defamed. Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, wrongfully accused by Giuliani of having tried to steal votes from Donald Trump in Georgia, were awarded the damages by a federal court in Washington. The New York Times, Eileen Sullivan, Friday, 15 December 2023: “A jury on Friday ordered Rudolph W. Giuliani to pay $148 million to two former Georgia election workers who said he had destroyed their reputations with lies that they tried to steal the 2020 election from Donald J. Trump. Judge Beryl A. Howell of the Federal District Court in Washington had already ruled that Mr. Giuliani had defamed the two workers, Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. The jury had been asked to decide only on the amount of the damages. The jury awarded Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss a combined $75 million in punitive damages. It also ordered Mr. Giuliani to pay compensatory damages of $16.2 million to Ms. Freeman and $16.9 million to Ms. Moss, as well as $20 million to each of them for emotional suffering. ‘Today’s a good day,’ Ms. Freeman told reporters after the jury delivered its determination. But she added that no amount of money would give her and her daughter back what they lost in the abuse they suffered after Mr. Giuliani falsely accused them of manipulating the vote count. Mr. Giuliani, who helped lead Mr. Trump’s effort to remain in office after his defeat in the 2020 election but has endured a string of legal and financial setbacks since then, was defiant after the proceeding.” See also, Rudy Giuliani ordered to pay $148M to Georgia poll workers, The Washington Post, Friday, 15 December 2023: “Rudy Giuliani must pay two Georgia poll workers who sued him for defamation $148 million after he falsely accused them of helping to steal the 2020 presidential election from Donald Trump. The former New York mayor and ex-Trump lawyer has been on trial since Monday in federal court in Washington, where Ruby Freeman and Wandrea ArShaye ‘Shaye’ Moss filed a lawsuit against him asserting that his baseless claims in December 2020 destroyed their reputations and exposed them to a torrent of vicious threats and insults. The eight-person jury was only required to weigh how much Giuliani should pay the women in damages after the federal judge in the case issued a default judgment against Giuliani in August based on his admissions and failure to turn over evidence in the case. Moss and Freeman had sought up to $47 million in damages.”
Saturday, 16 December 2023:
At a presidential campaign rally in New Hampshire, Trump quotes Putin condemning U.S. democracy and praises Hungarian autocrat Orban. Trump also called January 6 defendants ‘hostages’ and again demonized immigrants as ‘poisoning the blood of our country.’ The Washington Post, Isaac Arnsdorf, Saturday, 16 December 2023: “Republican polling leader Donald Trump approvingly quoted autocrats Vladimir Putin of Russia and Viktor Orban of Hungary, part of an ongoing effort to deflect from his criminal prosecutions and spin alarms about eroding democracy against President Biden. His speech at a presidential campaign rally here on Saturday also reprised dehumanizing language targeting immigrants that historians have likened to past authoritarians, including a reference that some civil rights advocates and experts in extremism have compared to Adolf Hitler’s fixation on blood purity. And he used the term ‘hostages’ to describe people charged with violent crimes in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack at the U.S. Capitol. The comments came as experts, historians and political opponents have voiced growing alarm about Trump’s rhetoric, ideas and emerging plans for a second term, pointing to parallels to past and present authoritarian leaders.” See also, White House calls out Trump’s immigrant comments as ‘fascist.’ It comes after the campaign said Trump’s inflammatory comments about immigrants ‘parroted Adolf Hitler.’ Politico, Craig Howie and Eugene Daniels, Saturday, 16 December and updated on Sunday, 17 December 2023: “The White House condemned former President Donald Trump for trying to ‘tear Americans apart with hate and cruelty’ by saying immigrants were ‘poisoning the blood of our country.’ ‘Echoing the grotesque rhetoric of fascists and violent white supremacists and threatening to oppress those who disagree with the government are dangerous attacks on the dignity and rights of all Americans, on our democracy, and on public safety,’ White House deputy press secretary Andrew Bates said Sunday. ‘It’s the opposite of everything we stand for as Americans.’ The statement came a day after the Biden campaign also took aim at Trump and compared his caustic remarks — made during a campaign rally — to those of Adolf Hitler. ‘Tonight Donald Trump channeled his role models as he parroted Adolf Hitler, praised Kim Jong Un, and quoted Vladimir Putin while running for president on a promise to rule as a dictator and threaten American democracy,’ Biden-Harris 2024 spokesperson Ammar Moussa said Saturday evening. Earlier, Trump had ratcheted up his already inflammatory rhetoric on immigrants at a rally in New Hampshire. ‘They’re poisoning the blood of our country,’ the former president said. ‘They’ve poisoned mental institutions and prisons all over the world. Not just in South America, not just the three or four countries that we think about, but all over the world they’re coming into our country from Africa, from Asia.'” See also, Trump reiterates anti-immigrant rhetoric at New Hampshire rally, CNN Politics, Aaron Pellish and Steve Contorno, Saturday, 16 December 2023: “Former President Donald Trump doubled down on language condemned for its ties to White supremacist rhetoric, saying at a campaign event in New Hampshire on Saturday that immigrants are ‘poisoning the blood of our country.’ The comments mark another instance of Trump using increasingly violent rhetoric in his campaign messaging. At his most recent campaign event in New Hampshire prior to his appearance Saturday, Trump used the word ‘vermin’ to describe his political rivals, drawing broad condemnation, including from President Joe Biden, who likened his comments to ‘language you heard in Nazi Germany.’ Trump told a crowd gathered in Durham, New Hampshire, on Saturday that immigrants ‘from all over the world’ are ‘pouring into the country,’ reiterating a phrase he used previously that sparked outcry from the Anti-Defamation League.” See also, Trump, Quoting Putin, Declares Indictments ‘Politically Motivated Persecution.’ The former president cited comments by the Russian leader to argue the 91 felony charges he is facing undermine the United States’ claim to be the world leader on democracy. The New York Times, Maggie Haberman and Michael Gold, Saturday, 16 December 2023: “Former President Donald J. Trump on Saturday invoked Vladimir V. Putin to support his case that the four criminal indictments he is facing are political payback, quoting the Russian president saying that the charges undercut the argument that the United States is an example of democracy for the world. Mr. Trump made the comment during a campaign speech in Durham, N.H., in which he focused on pocketbook concerns of voters, hammered the state’s Republican governor, who endorsed one of his rivals, mocked his lower-polling competitors for not performing better and painted a dystopian vision of a country in ‘hell’ under his successor, President Biden. ‘Even Vladimir Putin says that Biden’s — and this is a quote — politically motivated persecution of his political rival is very good for Russia, because it shows the rottenness of the American political system, which cannot pretend to teach others about democracy,’ Mr. Trump said as he railed against the 91 criminal charges he is facing, citing Mr. Putin speaking in September. Mr. Trump added: ‘So, you know, we talk about democracy, but the whole world is watching the persecution of a political opponent that’s kicking his ass. It’s an amazing thing. And they’re all laughing at us.’ There is no evidence that Mr. Biden has meddled in the prosecutions of Mr. Trump, which are taking place in four different federal and state courts and cover a range of issues, including his possession of reams of classified material after he left office and his efforts to overturn his loss in the 2020 election…. In his speech, Mr. Trump criticized Mr. Biden’s economic policies, and then broadly said the president had contributed to the degradation of Americans’ everyday lives. ‘We’re going to bring our country back from hell. It’s in hell,’ Mr. Trump said. He cited statistics like mortgage rates and attacked Mr. Biden’s energy policies. He also revived a widely condemned comment about immigrants ‘poisoning the blood of our country,’ noting that immigrants are coming not just from South America but also Africa and Asia. He did not mention Europe.”
Monday, 18 December 2023:
A ‘Delicate Matter’: Clarence Thomas’ Private Complaints About Money Sparked Fears He Would Resign, ProPublica, Justin Elliott, Joshua Kaplan, Alex Mierjeski, and Brett Murphy, Monday, 18 December 2023: “In early January 2000, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was at a five-star beach resort in Sea Island, Georgia, hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. After almost a decade on the court, Thomas had grown frustrated with his financial situation, according to friends. He had recently started raising his young grandnephew, and Thomas’ wife was soliciting advice on how to handle the new expenses. The month before, the justice had borrowed $267,000 from a friend to buy a high-end RV. At the resort, Thomas gave a speech at an off-the-record conservative conference. He found himself seated next to a Republican member of Congress on the flight home. The two men talked, and the lawmaker left the conversation worried that Thomas might resign. Congress should give Supreme Court justices a pay raise, Thomas told him. If lawmakers didn’t act, ‘one or more justices will leave soon’ — maybe in the next year. At the time, Thomas’ salary was $173,600, equivalent to over $300,000 today. But he was one of the least wealthy members of the court, and on multiple occasions in that period, he pushed for ways to make more money. In other private conversations, Thomas repeatedly talked about removing a ban on justices giving paid speeches. Thomas’ efforts were described in records from the time obtained by ProPublica, including a confidential memo to Chief Justice William Rehnquist from a top judiciary official seeking guidance on what he termed a ‘delicate matter.’ The documents, as well as interviews, offer insight into how Thomas was talking about his finances in a crucial period in his tenure, just as he was developing his relationships with a set of wealthy benefactors. Congress never lifted the ban on speaking fees or gave the justices a major raise. But in the years that followed, as ProPublica has reported, Thomas accepted a stream of gifts from friends and acquaintances that appears to be unparalleled in the modern history of the Supreme Court. Some defrayed living expenses large and small — private school tuition, vehicle batteries, tires. Other gifts from a coterie of ultrarich men supplemented his lifestyle, such as free international vacations on the private jet and superyacht of Dallas real estate billionaire Harlan Crow.” See also, Clarence Thomas Threatened to Resign Over Salary Concerns in 2000. The justice set off a scramble by a lawmaker to find a way to raise his pay. The New York Times, Zach Montabue published on Wednesday, 20 December 2023: “Justice Clarence Thomas pressed congressional lawmakers for a higher salary early in his tenure on the Supreme Court, threatening to resign and inspiring a campaign by Republican backers to meet his demands, according to a memo addressed to the chief justice in June 2000. The memo, reported earlier by ProPublica and obtained by The New York Times, underscores the financial pressures Justice Thomas may have faced at the time and laid bare some of the accompanying political risks were Congress to increase the pay of the justices. The memo was contained in Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist’s papers held at the Hoover Institution at Stanford. According to the memo, written by a top official of the federal courts system, L. Ralph Mecham, Justice Thomas broached the issue of pay with Representative Cliff Stearns, Republican of Florida. Salaries at the Supreme Court were unsatisfactory, the justice said, and “one or more justices will soon leave” if compensation were not increased.”
Democrats ramp up pressure on Clarence Thomas to recuse himself in Trump case, The Washington Post, Tobi Raji and Maegan Vazquez, Monday, 18 December 2023: “Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is facing calls from a growing number of Democrats who say he should recuse himself from a case examining former president Donald Trump’s presidential immunity, with more members of Congress raising concerns about the justice’s ability to remain impartial given his wife’s involvement in the movement to overturn the 2020 election results. The immunity case is the latest test of the court’s recently released code of conduct. Last month, all nine justices, including Thomas, signed onto the 14-page document outlining how they should behave and perform their official duties.” See also, House Democrats call on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from Trump 2020 election case, CBS News, Melissa Quinn, Monday, 18 December 2023: “A group of House Democrats is calling on Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from the case pending before the Supreme Court involving whether former President Donald Trump is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for alleged crimes committed while in office. Led by Georgia Rep. Hank Johnson, the group of eight Democrats told Thomas in a letter dated Dec. 15 that the activities of his wife, Ginni Thomas, after the 2020 election raise ‘serious questions’ about his ability to remain impartial in cases before the high court that involve the last presidential election and the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. The Democrats pointed to the new code of conduct adopted by the Supreme Court last month, which encourages a justice to step aside in a proceeding in which their impartiality may be questioned. Among those instances are when a justice’s spouse has an ‘interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding.’ The new ethics rules, however, do not include an enforcement mechanism. Recusal decisions are made by each justice, and they are not required to provide an explanation for why they decided not to participate in a case.”
Trump Asks Full D.C. Appeals Court to Review Gag Order in Election Case. The former president is seeking the full court’s review after a three-judge panel upheld a gag order imposed by the trial court but narrowed its scope. The New York Times, Alan Aeuer, Monday, 18 December 2023: “Lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump asked the full federal appeals court in Washington on Monday to consider whether a gag order in the criminal case in which he stands accused of plotting to overturn the 2020 election should be further narrowed or thrown out. The request for a hearing in front of the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was Mr. Trump’s latest attempt to challenge the order, which was imposed on him in October by the trial judge handling the case in Federal District Court in Washington. Mr. Trump’s lawyers asked the full court to put the gag order on hold as it decided whether to hear his appeal. Two weeks ago, a three-judge panel of the appeals court upheld the basic idea of restricting Mr. Trump’s public statements about the case but narrowed the terms of the order in a handful of important ways. As part of its revisions, the panel gave the former president wider latitude to make comments about potential witnesses in the proceeding and to attack Jack Smith, the special counsel overseeing the prosecution. In its decision, the panel made an important finding: that Mr. Trump’s remarks did not have to present a ‘clear and present danger’ to anyone involved in the case and the gag order could be used as a pre-emptive measure to prevent people from suffering harm.”
Trump reprises dehumanizing language on undocumented immigrants and warns of an ‘invasion,’ The Washington Post, Marianne LeVine and Maria Sacchetti, Monday, 18 December 2023: “Former president Donald Trump on Sunday accused undocumented immigrants of waging an ‘invasion’ of the United States, in a speech that highlighted his frequent use of dehumanizing language and exaggerated terms to describe many foreigners seeking to enter the country. During a campaign event in Reno, Nev., the clear polling leader in the Republican race blamed President Biden for what he portrayed as a dangerous incursion on the homeland — although many migrants detained at the southern border are parents and children seeking protection, and studies show that undocumented immigrants are less likely than U.S. citizens to commit crimes. ‘This is an invasion. This is like a military invasion,’ Trump said. ‘Drugs, criminals, gang members and terrorists are pouring into our country at record levels. We’ve never seen anything like it. They’re taking over our cities.”
Appeals Panel Rejects Mark Meadows’s Request to Move Georgia Case to Federal Court. The judges unanimously ruled against Mark Meadows, a former White House chief of staff and a co-defendant of Donald J. Trump in the state election interference case. The New York Times, Danny Hakim and Richard Fausset, Monday, 18 December 2023: “A federal appeals court panel on Monday rejected an effort by Mark Meadows, a White House chief of staff under former President Donald J. Trump, to move a Georgia election interference case against him to federal court. The decision was made by judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta. Mr. Meadows and Mr. Trump were among 19 defendants charged in August with racketeering and other crimes related to their efforts to reverse the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. Mr. Meadows has sought from the beginning to move his case out of state court, which would widen the jury pool to a geographic area with somewhat more support for Mr. Trump. He claimed that the allegations against him concerned actions he took as a federal officer, and thus should be dealt with in federal court. But in September, a federal judge sided with Atlanta prosecutors, writing that Mr. Meadows’s conduct, as outlined in the indictment, was ‘not related to his role as White House chief of staff or his executive branch authority.’ The appellate judges who heard the case, two Democratic appointees and one Republican, unanimously backed that ruling.” See also, Appeals court rejects Mark Meadows’ bid to move his Georgia case out of state court. Meadows, who served as White House chief of staff under President Donald Trump, was previously denied a request to move his Georgia election interference case to federal court. NBC News, Zoë Richards and Charlie Gile, Monday, 18 December 2023: “A federal appeals court on Monday rejected an effort by former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to move his Georgia election interference case out of state court. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a judge’s ruling from September that said Meadows had not demonstrated that the alleged conduct that prompted his prosecution was related to his official duties in the Trump administration.”
Report Finds January 6 Rally Organizers Lied About Plan to March to the Capitol. Women for America First, which planned the rally on the Ellipse, knew of President Donald Trump’s plans to have his supporters march to the Capitol but repeatedly denied it to federal permitting officials. The New York Times, Luke Broadwater, Monday, 18 December 2023: “A pro-Trump group that organized the ‘Save America’ rally in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, lied to federal officials about President Donald J. Trump’s plans to call on the crowd to march to the Capitol, where the protest over his election loss turned into a violent riot, according to a new inspector general investigation. Nearly three years after the mob laid siege to Congress, halting the certification of Mr. Trump’s electoral defeat and injuring more than 150 police officers, the Interior Department’s inspector general on Monday released a 47-page report examining the permitting process that allowed tens of thousands of Trump supporters to gather in Washington before the violence. The report found that Women for America First, which organized a rally at the Ellipse about two miles from the Capitol on Jan. 6, ‘intentionally failed to disclose information’ to the National Park Service ‘during the permitting process regarding a march to the U.S. Capitol.'”
Texas Governor Greg Abbott Signs Law Allowing Texas to Arrest Migrants, Setting Up Federal Showdown. The new law, which takes effect in March, could bring in mass arrests and a court fight between Texas and the federal government over immigration powers. The New York Times, J. David Goodman, Monday, 18 December 2023: “Gov. Greg Abbott on Monday escalated his challenge of President Biden’s border policies by signing a measure that allows Texas law enforcement officials to arrest migrants who enter the state from Mexico without legal authorization, setting the stage for a showdown with the federal government. Mr. Abbott pushed for the legislation, which passed in a special session of the Republican-dominated State Legislature last month over the strong objections of Democrats, immigrant-rights groups and Hispanic organizations who argued that the measure violated the U.S. Constitution and would encourage racial profiling. Some border sheriffs have also opposed the legislation, expressing concern that it could rapidly overwhelm the local jails and courts if even a fraction of those who come over the border every day were arrested. In just one section of the 1,254-mile Texas border with Mexico, around the cities of Eagle Pass and Del Rio, federal agents encountered 38,000 migrants in October.”
Tuesday, 19 December 2023:
Colorado Supreme Court Says in Explosive Ruling That Trump Is Disqualified From 2024 Republican Primary Ballot. The decision, the first by a court to find that Donald Trump is ineligible to hold office again because he engaged in insurrection, is likely to put a monumental case before the U.S. Supreme Court. The New York Times, Maggie Astor, Tuesday, 19 December 2023: “Colorado’s top court ruled on Tuesday that former President Donald J. Trump is disqualified from holding office again because he engaged in insurrection with his actions leading up to the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol, an explosive ruling that is likely to put the basic contours of the 2024 election in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. The Colorado Supreme Court was the first in the nation to find that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment — which disqualifies people who engage in insurrection against the Constitution after taking an oath to support it — applies to Mr. Trump, an argument that his opponents have been making around the country. The ruling directs the Colorado secretary of state to exclude Mr. Trump’s name from the state’s Republican primary ballot. It does not address the general election. ‘We do not reach these conclusions lightly,’ a four-justice majority wrote, with three justices dissenting. ‘We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.’ Mr. Trump’s campaign said immediately that it would appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Colorado justices anticipated that likelihood by putting their ruling on hold at least until Jan. 4; if Mr. Trump appeals before then, the hold will continue until the Supreme Court rules. And while Tuesday’s ruling applies only to one state, it could all but force the nation’s highest court to decide the question for all 50.” See also, Read the Colorado Supreme Court’s Decision Disqualifying Trump From the Ballot, The New York Times, Tuesday, 19 December 2023: “Colorado’s top court ruled on Tuesday that former President Donald J. Trump is disqualified from holding office again because he engaged in insurrection leading up to the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol. Here is the full ruling.” See also, Colorado Ruling Knocks Trump Off the Ballot: What It Means, What Happens Next. The challengers who sought to disqualify Donald Trump prevailed on every legal issue, but the case is almost certainly headed for the Supreme Court, where they would have to do so again. The New York Times, Adam Liptak, Tuesday, 19 December 2023: “The Colorado voters who sought to disqualify Donald J. Trump from the state’s 2024 Republican primary ballot ran the table on eight distinct legal issues on Tuesday night. To ultimately keep him off the ballot, though, they almost certainly will have to do so again — in the U.S. Supreme Court. In a 4-to-3 decision that set off a political and legal earthquake, the Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday said that Mr. Trump had engaged in insurrection and therefore was barred by the 14th Amendment from holding federal office. ‘This is a major and extraordinary holding from a state supreme court,’ Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, wrote on the Election Law Blog. ‘Never in history has a presidential candidate been excluded from the ballot under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. United States Supreme Court review seems inevitable, and it exerts major pressure on the court.’ The majority on Tuesday said every key legal issue came out against Mr. Trump. ‘The sum of these parts is this: President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president,’ the majority said in an unsigned opinion, saying that his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results amounted to engaging in an insurrection and that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, ratified after the Civil War, bars insurrectionists from federal office, including the presidency…. But the court gave Mr. Trump a provisional escape route. It put its ruling on hold through Jan. 4, and if he seeks review in the U.S. Supreme Court, as he said he will, the state court said his name would remain on the primary ballot.” See also, Colorado Supreme Court says Trump is disqualified from Colorado’s 2024 primary ballot. The decision is certain to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it will be up to the justices to decide whether to take the case. The Washington Post, Patrick Marley and Azi Paybarah, Tuesday, 19 December 2023: “In a historic decision Tuesday, the Colorado Supreme Court barred Donald Trump from running in the state’s presidential primary after determining that he had engaged in insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021. The 4-3 ruling marked the first time a court has kept a presidential candidate off the ballot under an 1868 provision of the Constitution that prevents insurrectionists from holding office. The ruling comes as courts consider similar cases in other states. If other states reach the same conclusion, Trump would have a difficult — if not impossible — time securing the Republican nomination and winning in November. The decision is certain to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it will be up to the justices to decide whether to take the case. Scholars have said only the nation’s high court can settle for all states whether the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol constituted an insurrection and whether Trump is banned from running.” See also, 4 takeaways from the Colorado Supreme Court’s disqualifying Trump, The Washington Post, Aaron Blake, Tuesday, 19 December 2023. See also, Donald Trump banned from Colorado ballot in historic ruling by state’s Supreme Court, Associated Press, Nicholas Riccardi, Monday, 19 December 2023: “A divided Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday declared former President Donald Trump ineligible for the White House under the U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause and removed him from the state’s presidential primary ballot, setting up a likely showdown in the nation’s highest court to decide whether the front-runner for the GOP nomination can remain in the race. The decision from a court whose justices were all appointed by Democratic governors marks the first time in history that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has been used to disqualify a presidential candidate. ‘A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,’ the court wrote in its 4-3 decision. Colorado’s highest court overturned a ruling from a district court judge who found that Trump incited an insurrection for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, but said he could not be barred from the ballot because it was unclear that the provision was intended to cover the presidency. The court stayed its decision until Jan. 4, or until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the case. Colorado officials say the issue must be settled by Jan. 5, the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballots.” See also, Colorado Supreme Court removes Trump from 2024 Republican primary ballot in Colorado, CNN Politics, Dan Berman, Maureen Chowdhury, Tori B. Powell, and Elise Hammond, Marshall Cohen, Tuesday, 19 December 2023: “The Colorado Supreme Court made history Tuesday with an unprecedented, freeze-in-your-tracks ruling that former President Donald Trump is constitutionally ineligible to run in 2024 because the 14th Amendment’s ban on insurrectionists holding public office covers his conduct on January 6, 2021. The 4-3 decision removes Trump from the Republican primary ballot in Colorado, which is scheduled for Super Tuesday in early March. However, the Colorado justices paused their ruling so Trump can appeal to the US Supreme Court, which could even preserve his spot on the state’s primary ballot if the appeal isn’t settled quickly. In many ways, the landmark ruling holds Trump accountable for trying to overturn the 2020 election and provides a political punishment for his anti-democratic behavior. The ruling is also a massive vindication for the liberal groups and constitutional scholars of all stripes who championed such 14th Amendment lawsuits despite their long odds.” See also, Here Are the Other States Where Trump’s Ballot Eligibility Faces a Challenge. At least 16 states beyond Colorado currently have open legal challenges to the former president’s eligibility for office–but what happens next depends on the U.S. Supreme court. The New York Times, Nick Corasaniti, published on Wednesday, 20 December 2023: “This week’s decision by the Colorado Supreme Court to disqualify former President Donald J. Trump from holding office again was the first victory for a sprawling legal effort that is still unfolding across the country. At least 16 other states currently have pending legal challenges to Mr. Trump’s eligibility for office under the 14th Amendment, according to a database maintained by Lawfare, a nonpartisan site dedicated to national security issues. The lawsuits argue that he is barred because he engaged in an insurrection with his actions surrounding the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. Four of these lawsuits — in Michigan, Oregon, New Jersey and Wisconsin — have been filed in state courts. Eleven lawsuits — in Alaska, Arizona, Nevada, New York, New Mexico, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming — have been filed in federal district courts.”
Trump, Attacked for Echoing Hitler, Says He Never Read ‘Mein Kampf.’ The former president’s comments on migrants have been widely criticized as racist and xenophobic. The New York Times, Michael Gold, Tuesday, 19 December 2023: “Former President Donald J. Trump on Tuesday doubled down on his widely condemned comment that undocumented immigrants are ‘poisoning the blood of our country,’ rebuffing criticism that the language echoed Adolf Hitler by insisting that he had never read the Nazi dictator’s autobiographical manifesto. Mr. Trump did not repeat the exact phrase, which has drawn criticism since he first uttered it in an interview with a right-leaning website and then repeated it at a rally in New Hampshire on Saturday. But he said on Tuesday night in a speech in Iowa that undocumented immigrants from Africa, Asia and South America were ‘destroying the blood of our country,’ before alluding to his previous comments. ‘That’s what they’re doing. They’re destroying our country,’ Mr. Trump continued. ‘They don’t like it when I said that. And I never read Mein Kampf. They said, Oh, Hitler said that.’ He added that Hitler said it ‘in a much different way,’ without making his meaning clear.” See also, Trump defends controversial comments about immigrants poisoning the nation’s blood at Iowa rally, Associated Press, Hannah Fingerhut and Ali Swenson, Tuesday, 19 December 2023: “Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday defended his comments about migrants crossing the southern border ‘poisoning the blood’ of America, and he reinforced the message while denying any similarities to fascist writings others had noted. ‘I never read Mein Kampf,’ Trump said at a campaign rally in Waterloo, Iowa, referencing Adolf Hitler’s fascist manifesto. Immigrants in the U.S. illegally, Trump said Tuesday, are ‘destroying the blood of our country, they’re destroying the fabric of our country.’ In the speech to more than 1,000 supporters from a podium flanked by Christmas trees in red MAGA hats, Trump responded to mounting criticism about his anti-immigrant ‘blood’ purity rhetoric over the weekend. Several politicians and extremism experts have noted his language echoed writings from Hitler about the ‘purity’ of Aryan blood, which underpinned Nazi Germany’s systematic murder of millions of Jews and other ‘undesirables’ before and during World War II.”
Wednesday, 20 December 2023:
Trump Asks Supreme Court to Put Off Hearing Case on Immunity Claim. The former president urged the justices to move slowly in his federal election interference case, an apparent attempt to delay the trial, set for March. The New York Times, Adam Liptak, Wednesday, 20 December 2023: “Former President Donald J. Trump urged the Supreme Court on Wednesday to put off a decision on a crucial question in his federal prosecution on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election: whether he has ‘absolute immunity’ for actions he took as president. The question, Mr. Trump’s brief said, should be ‘resolved in a cautious, deliberative manner — not at breakneck speed.’ He urged the justices not to ‘rush to decide the issues with reckless abandon.’ The request appeared to be part of Mr. Trump’s general strategy of trying to delay the trial in the case, which is scheduled to start on March 4. That date, Mr. Trump’s lawyers wrote, ‘has no talismanic significance.’ Last week, Jack Smith, the special counsel, asked the Supreme Court to bypass a federal appeals court and agree to hear the immunity question on a quick schedule. Mr. Trump opposed that request on Wednesday, saying the importance of the matter warranted careful and unhurried deliberation by the appeals court before the justices decide whether to take it up…. Working on a parallel track, Mr. Smith has also asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to consider the issue at the same time. Last week, a three-judge panel of the court agreed with Mr. Smith’s request for an expedited schedule and laid out an aggressive timeline for all written filings to be submitted by Jan. 2. The court set oral arguments for Jan. 9. Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the Federal District Court in Washington has put the case on hold while the appeals court considers the immunity question — although prosecutors have tried to nudge it forward, angering Mr. Trump’s lawyers.” See also, Trump urges Supreme court not to intervene immediately on election interference immunity issue. the justices are weighing special counsel Jack Smith’s request to take up a key legal issue in Trump’s prosecution before an appeals court has weighed in. NBC News, Lawrence Hurley, Wednesday, 20 December 2023: “Lawyers for Donald Trump on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to avoid deciding, for now, the key issue of whether the former president has broad immunity for actions he took challenging the 2020 presidential elections result. The court filing was in response to special counsel Jack Smith’s request last week asking the justices to circumvent the normal appeals court process and quickly decide the legal question, which looms large in Trump’s criminal prosecution in Washington for election interference…. Now that the Supreme Court has Trump’s response, it could act within days on Smith’s request. In the meantime, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has scheduled oral arguments for Jan. 9 on the same question. The justices have to decide whether to jump in now, meaning the appeals court would not have a chance to weigh in, or wait to see how the lower court handles the issue.”
Federal Judge Gives Prosecutors Access to Republican Lawmaker Scott Perry’s Messages in January 6 Case. The roughly 1,700 messages are from Perry’s cellphone; he was involved in discussions with Trump administration officials about overturning the election. The New York Times, Luke Broadwater, Wednesday, 20 December 2023: “A federal judge has allowed the special counsel investigating former President Donald J. Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election access to about 1,700 messages from the seized phone of Representative Scott Perry of Pennsylvania. Mr. Perry, the chairman of the right-wing House Freedom Caucus who played a role in attempts to overturn the election, had sought to keep the messages from prosecutors. But in an order late Tuesday, James E. Boasberg, the chief judge of the Federal District Court in Washington, prohibited federal prosecutors from retrieving just 396 messages from more than 2,000. Judge Boasberg wrote that those messages were covered by the Constitution’s speech or debate clause, which provides protections for lawmakers’ legislative discussions, while also ordering that a majority be turned over. The messages could offer additional evidence for Jack Smith, the special counsel leading the federal election case against Mr. Trump. Judge Boasberg said they concerned Mr. Perry’s attempts to get information about possible voter fraud; influence people outside the federal government; discuss Vice President Mike Pence’s certification of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory; and communicate about the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.”
Thursday, 21 December 2023:
According to recordings reviewed by The Detroit News, Trump pressured Wayne County, Michigan, canvassers not to certify 2020 vote, The Detroit News, Craig Mauger, Thursday, 21 December 2023: “Then-President Donald Trump personally pressured two Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers not to sign the certification of the 2020 presidential election, according to recordings reviewed by The Detroit News and revealed publicly for the first time. On a Nov. 17, 2020, phone call, which also involved Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, Trump told Monica Palmer and William Hartmann, the two GOP Wayne County canvassers, they’d look ‘terrible’ if they signed the documents after they first voted in opposition and then later in the same meeting voted to approve certification of the county’s election results, according to the recordings. ‘We’ve got to fight for our country,’ said Trump on the recordings, made by a person who was present for the call with Palmer and Hartmann. ‘We can’t let these people take our country away from us.’ McDaniel, a Michigan native and the leader of the Republican Party nationally, said at another point in the call, ‘If you can go home tonight, do not sign it. … We will get you attorneys.’ To which Trump added: ‘We’ll take care of that.’ Palmer and Hartmann left the canvassers meeting without signing the official statement of votes for Wayne County, and the following day, they unsuccessfully attempted to rescind their votes in favor of certification, filing legal affidavits claiming they were pressured. The moves from Palmer, Hartmann and Trump, had they been successful, threatened to throw the statewide certification of Michigan’s 2020 election into doubt.”
US warns Hungary’s ‘draconian’ new law can be used to punish Orbán critics. State department says sovereignty protection office can be used to ‘intimidate and punish’ Hungarians critical of government. The Guardian, Lili Bayer, Thursday, 21 December 2023: “The US state department has warned that a new law in Hungary ‘can be used to intimidate and punish’ Hungarians who do not agree with the government, adding to concerns from Hungarian journalists and activists who have expressed worries the law is aimed at silencing critical voices. Hungary’s parliament approved legislation last week that creates a sovereignty protection office with broad powers to investigate Hungarians active in public life. The government of Hungary’s powerful prime minister, Viktor Orbán, has repeatedly accused its critics of working under the influence of western governments and entities. In a statement on Wednesday, the US state department spokesperson Matthew Miller said his country was ‘concerned by the Hungarian government’s decision today to enact a new law which equips the Hungarian government with draconian tools that can be used to intimidate and punish those with views not shared by the ruling party.’ The new sovereignty office, the spokesperson said, ‘could be used to subject Hungarian citizens, businesses, and organisations to intrusive investigations with no judicial oversight, even if they have had no contact with or support from a foreign government or foreign entity.’ ‘This new law is inconsistent with our shared values of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law,’ he added.”
Friday, 22 December 2023:
Supreme Court Won’t Hear Case on Trump’s immunity Defense for Now. The case will instead first be heard by a federal appeals court, which has put it on a fast track, scheduling arguments for January 9. The New York Times, Adam Liptak, Friday, 22 December 2023: “The Supreme Court declined on Friday to decide for now whether former President Donald J. Trump is immune from prosecution on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election. The decision to defer consideration of a central issue in the case was a major practical victory for Mr. Trump, whose lawyers have consistently sought to delay criminal cases against him around the country. It is unclear what the court’s order will mean for the timing of the trial, which is scheduled to start on March 4, though it makes postponement more likely. The case will now move forward in an appeals court, which has put it on a fast track, and most likely return to the Supreme Court in the coming weeks or months. In denying review, the justices gave no reasons, which is typical, and there were no noted dissents. Jack Smith, the special counsel prosecuting Mr. Trump, had asked the justices to move with extraordinary speed, bypassing the appeals court. Any significant delays could plunge the trial into the heart of the 2024 campaign season or push it past the election, when Mr. Trump could order the charges be dropped if he wins the presidency.” See also, Supreme Court won’t expedite ruling on Trump’s immunity claim. Special counsel Jack Smith sought to bypass appeals court, citing goal of sticking to March 4 start date for election obstruction trial. The Washington Post, Robert Barnes, Friday, 22 December 2023: “The Supreme Court on Friday said it will not fast-track consideration of Donald Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution for actions he took as president, a question crucial to whether he can be put on trial for plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The court’s one-sentence order offered no explanation for turning down special counsel Jack Smith’s request for an expedited review, which he said was needed to keep Trump’s election-obstruction trial on track for early March. The order can be seen as, at least, a limited and temporary win for Trump, who has actively worked to delay the legal proceedings against him as he campaigns again for the Republican presidential nomination. The issue of presidential immunity will likely return to the Supreme Court, but not before a federal appeals court in Washington reviews a district judge’s ruling earlier this month that flatly rejected Trump’s claims. That court has expedited its proceedings, and will hold arguments on Jan. 9.”
Justices in Wisconsin Order New Legislative Maps. The ruling, coming just months after liberals gained a 4-to-3 majority on the State Supreme court, could undo gerrymanders that have given Republicans lopsided control of the State Legislature. The New York Times, Julie Bosman, Friday, 22 December 2023: “The Wisconsin Supreme Court said on Friday that the state’s heavily gerrymandered legislative maps that favor Republicans were unconstitutional and ordered new maps before the 2024 election. The ruling has the potential to produce a seismic political shift in a crucial presidential swing state. Justice Jill J. Karofsky, writing for the majority, said that Wisconsin’s current maps violate a requirement in the State Constitution ‘that Wisconsin’s state legislative districts must be composed of physically adjoining territory.’ ‘Given the language in the Constitution, the question before us is straightforward,’ she wrote. ‘When legislative districts are composed of separate, detached parts, do they consist of ‘contiguous territory’? We conclude that they do not.’ The decision was widely expected from a court that flipped to a 4-to-3 liberal majority this year after the most expensive judicial election in U.S. history. The winner of that election, Justice Janet Protasiewicz, a former Milwaukee County judge, was openly critical of the current legislative maps, calling them ‘rigged’ and ‘unfair’ during her campaign.” See also, Wisconsin Supreme Court, now under liberal control, overturns Republican-favored legislative maps, CNN Politics, Andrew Menezes and Raja Rezek, Friday, 22 December 2023: “The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the state’s legislative maps, which give Republicans the advantage, are unconstitutional and ordered new lines drawn for the 2024 election. The 4-3 decision overturning the current maps in a key battleground state carries major implications for the 2024 election and comes after liberals won control of the court this spring. The Wisconsin case is among a slew of redistricting fights across the country that could determine control of governing bodies from local governing boards to state legislatures and the US House of Representatives.”
Saturday, 23 December 2023:
Trump Asks Appeals Court to Toss Election Case on Immunity Grounds. The court filing was the latest development in a battle between Mr. Trump and the special counsel, Jack Smith, over whether the former president can be prosecuted for his actions while in office. The New York Times, Alan Feuer, Saturday, 23 December 2023: “Lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump asked an appeals court in Washington on Saturday night to toss a federal indictment accusing him of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, arguing that he was immune to the charges because they arose from actions he had taken while he was in the White House. The weekend filing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was the latest salvo in a long-running and crucial battle between Mr. Trump and the special counsel, Jack Smith, over whether the former president enjoys immunity to the election interference charges. The fight over immunity has now touched all three levels of the federal court system, including the Supreme Court, which on Friday declined Mr. Smith’s request to intervene and hear the case before the appeals court. The ultimate resolution of the issue will have a significant effect not only on the overall viability of the election interference case, but also on whether a trial on the charges is postponed until the heart of the 2024 campaign — or even until after the election. At that point, if Mr. Trump wins the presidency, he could order the charges to be dropped.”
Sunday, 24 December 2023:
Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco says claims of politicization ‘a disservice’ to Justice Department personnel. There has been an ‘unprecedented rise in threats to public officials,’ she said. ABC News, Alexander Mallin, Pierre Thomas, Julia Cherner, and Jack Date, Sunday, 24 December 2023: “Republican accusations that the Justice Department has been politicized to target former President Donald Trump and others on the right are a ‘disservice’ to the DOJ’s employees and add fuel to a toxic environment that has helped drive a recent rise in threats against public officials, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco told ABC News’ ‘This Week’ in an exclusive interview. ‘Those claims bear no resemblance to the Justice Department that I know,’ Monaco told ABC News’ Chief Justice Correspondent Pierre Thomas. ‘The Justice Department that I know is filled with dedicated men and women, investigators, lawyers, prosecutors, analysts, professional staff who get up every day, Pierre, they get up every day without regard to who’s in the White House or who’s in Congress.'”
Monday, 25 December 2023:
Trump: ‘May they rot in Hell. Merry Christmas.’ The Hill, Ian Swanson, Monday, 25 December 2023: “Former President Trump in an unusual Christmas message on Truth Social called for various people he sees as ‘looking to destroy’ the nation to ‘rot in Hell.’ It was one of several Christmas messages on the former president’s preferred social media platform going after President Biden, special counsel Jack Smith and other political opponents throughout Monday. The opponents included world leaders and people in favor of the use of electric cars. ‘Merry Christmas to all, including Crooked Joe Biden’s ONLY HOPE, Deranged Jack Smith,’ Trump began in a Truth Social post at 2:38 p.m. EST. Trump frequently describes Smith, who is prosecuting the former president over his actions connected to the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, as deranged. The Supreme Court just Friday said it would not immediately consider a request by Smith to make a determination on Trump’s insistence he is immune from prosecution because he was taking presidential actions at the time. ‘Included also are World Leaders, both good and bad, but none of which are as evil and “sick” as the THUGS we have inside our Country who, with their Open Borders, INFLATION, Afghanistan Surrender, Green New Scam, High Taxes, No Energy Independence, Woke Military, Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Iran, All Electric Car Lunacy, and so much more, are looking to destroy our once great USA. MAY THEY ROT IN HELL. AGAIN, MERRY CHRISTMAS!’ the former president concluded. Trump remains the favorite to win the GOP presidential nomination. He has a 54 percent lead in the aggregation of polls kept by Decision Desk HQ and The Hill. Trump is also looking strong in a one-on-one match-up against Biden. The Decision Desk-The Hill aggregation of polls shows Trump with a 1.9 percent lead.”
Tuesday, 26 December 2023:
How Trump Plans to Wield Power in 2025: What We Know. Donald J. Trump and his allies are already laying the groundwork for a possible second Trump presidency, forging plans for an even more extreme agenda than his first term. The New York Times, Jonathan Swan, Maggie Haberman, and Charlie Savage, Tuesday, 26 December 2023: “Since beginning his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald J. Trump has said the ‘termination’ of the Constitution would have been justified to overturn the 2020 election, told followers ‘I am your retribution’ and vowed to use the Justice Department to prosecute his adversaries — starting with President Biden and his family. Beneath these public threats is a series of plans by Mr. Trump and his allies that would upend core elements of American governance, democracy, foreign policy and the rule of law if he regains the White House. Some of these themes trace back to the final period of Mr. Trump’s term in office. By that stage, his key advisers had learned how to more effectively wield power and Mr. Trump had fired officials who resisted some of his impulses and replaced them with loyalists. Then he lost the 2020 election and was cast out of power.”
A New Tax on Imports and a Split From China: Trump’s 2025 Trade Agenda. Donald Trump plans to sharply expand his use of tariffs if he returns to power, risking disruption to the economy in an attempt to transform it. The New York Times, Charlie Savage, Jonathan Swan, and Maggie Haberman, Tuesday, 26 December 2023: “Former President Donald J. Trump is planning an aggressive expansion of his first-term efforts to upend America’s trade policies if he returns to power in 2025 — including imposing a new tax on ‘most imported goods’ that would risk alienating allies and igniting a global trade war. While the Biden administration has kept tariffs that Mr. Trump imposed on China, Mr. Trump would go far beyond that and try to wrench apart the world’s two largest economies, which exchanged some $758 billion in goods and services last year. Mr. Trump has said he would ‘enact aggressive new restrictions on Chinese ownership’ of a broad range of assets in the United States, bar Americans from investing in China and phase in a complete ban on imports of key categories of Chinese-made goods like electronics, steel and pharmaceuticals.”
A Natural Gas Project in Louisiana Is Biden’s Next Big Climate Test. A proposed export terminal on the Louisiana coast highlights the tension between economic growth, geopolitics, and the environment. The New York Times, David Gelles, Clifford Krauss, and Coral Davenport, Tuesday, 26 December 2023: “On a marshy stretch of the Louisiana coastline, a little-known company wants to build a $10 billion facility that would allow the United States to export vast stores of liquefied natural gas…. [A] nationwide movement is working to stop the export terminal from ever being built. Opponents, including major environmental groups, scientists and activists, say that CP2 would lock in decades of additional greenhouse gas emissions, the main driver of climate change. They add that the project would be harmful to the people who live in the area, as well as the fragile ecosystem that supports aquatic life in the Gulf of Mexico. It will be up to the Biden administration to decide whether or not the project moves forward.”
Wednesday, 27 December 2023:
Michigan Supreme Court Decides Trump Can Stay on Ballot. After Colorado’s top court ruled that the former president was disqualified for engaging in insurrection, justices in Michigan considered a similar challenge. The New York Times, Julie Bosman, Ernesto Londoño, and Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs, Wednesday, 27 December 2023: “The Michigan Supreme Court on Wednesday gave Donald J. Trump an important victory in the legal battle over his eligibility to return to the White House by allowing the former president to appear on the state’s primary ballot in February. But in a narrow ruling, the court left the door open for a new challenge to bar Mr. Trump from the general election ballot in the key battleground state over his attempts to overturn the 2020 election. The decision was the latest in the high-stakes efforts to block Mr. Trump from returning to power. It follows the bombshell ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, which on Dec. 19 determined in a 4-to-3 opinion that Mr. Trump should be removed from the state’s 2024 Republican primary ballot for his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The Colorado Republican Party said it had asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to hear an appeal of the decision.” See also, Michigan Supreme Court allows Trump to appear on 2024 primary ballot, The Washington Post, Patrick Marley, Friday, 27 December 2023: “Former president Donald Trump’s name is set to appear on Michigan’s primary ballot after the state Supreme Court declined Wednesday to hear a challenge to his candidacy. The decision not to hear the case comes a week after the Colorado Supreme Court determined that Trump engaged in insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, and is barred from running under the Constitution. Trump plans to appeal that ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could determine for all states whether Trump can run again. The Michigan decision provides Trump with a new victory as he tries to get himself restored to the ballot in Colorado and avoid getting knocked off the ballot in other states.” See also, Michigan Supreme Court will keep Trump on 2024 primary ballot, Associated Press, Corey Williams and Nicholas Riccardi, Wednesday, 27 December 2023: “Michigan’s Supreme Court is keeping former President Donald Trump on the state’s primary election ballot. The court said Wednesday it will not hear an appeal of a lower court’s ruling from groups seeking to keep Trump from appearing on the ballot. It said in an order that the application by parties to appeal a Dec. 14 Michigan appeals court judgment was considered, but denied ‘because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this court.’ The ruling contrasts with Dec. 19 decision by a divided Colorado Supreme Court which found Trump ineligible to be president because of his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. That ruling was the first time in history that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has been used to disqualify a presidential candidate. The Michigan and Colorado cases are among dozens hoping to keep Trump’s name off state ballots. They all point to the so-called insurrection clause that prevents anyone from holding office who ‘engaged in insurrection or rebellion’ against the Constitution. Until the Colorado ruling, all had failed.” See also, Michigan Supreme Court rejects ‘insurrectionist ban’ case and keeps Trump on 2024 primary ballot, CNN Politics, Marshall Cohen, Wednesday, 27 December 2023: “The Michigan Supreme Court has rejected an attempt to remove former President Donald Trump from the 2024 primary ballot based on the US Constitution’s ‘insurrectionist ban.’ The outcome, which was generally expected, is a victory for the former president, though an effort to remove him could be renewed for the general election. Wednesday’s decision contrasts with the recent ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court, which kicked Trump off its primary ballot because of his role in the January 6 Capitol riot. That decision has been paused pending an appeal. With these dueling decisions, the expected appeals to the US Supreme Court become even more critical, especially as the nation races toward the start of the 2024 primaries. Unlike in Colorado, the Michigan lawsuit never reached a trial and was dismissed early on in the process. An intermediate appeals court upheld the decision to toss the case on procedural grounds.”
A Fake Trump elector in Michigan Told Prosecutors of Regret, Anger. The Trump supporter is the only one of the 16 fake Michigan electors who has agreed to cooperate with the authorities and had charges against him dropped. The New York Times, Danny Hakim, Wednesday, 27 December 2023: “One of the Republicans in Michigan who acted as a fake elector for Donald J. Trump expressed deep regret about his participation, according to a recording of his interview with the state attorney general’s office that was obtained by The New York Times. The elector, James Renner, is thus far the only Trump elector who has reached an agreement with the office of Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, which brought criminal charges in July against all 16 of the state’s fake Trump electors. In October, Ms. Nessel’s office dropped all charges against Mr. Renner after he agreed to cooperate. Mr. Renner, 77, was a late substitution to the roster of electors in December 2020 after two others dropped out. He told the attorney general’s office that he later realized, after reviewing testimony from the House investigation of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, that he and other electors had acted improperly. ‘I can’t overemphasize how once I read the information in the J6 transcripts how upset I was that the legitimate process had not been followed,’ he said in the interview. ‘I felt that I had been walked into a situation that I shouldn’t have ever been involved in.'”
Democratic lawmaker Debbie Dingell says Donald Trump’s Christmas message telling his rivals to ‘rot in hell’ is ‘pathetic,’ USA Today, Sudiksha Kochi, Wednesday, 27 December 2023: “Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., criticized former President Donald Trump’s Christmas message calling for President Joe Biden and others to ‘rot in hell,’ saying it is contributing to divisiveness across the country. ‘Quite frankly, I’m going to tell you that I think it was one of the most pathetic Christmas greetings I’ve heard when a former president of the United States who wants to return tells people on Christmas Day that they can rot in hell,’ Dingell told CNN. ‘He is contributing to the divisiveness and division in this country.’ Dingell also highlighted mounting threats against public officials, adding that ‘hate and division are creeping into our communities far too easily.'” See also, Trump Assails Congresswoman Debbie Dingell in His Latest Escalation on Social Media. The former president, who has stepped up his incendiary language on Truth Social, attacked Dingell, the widow of John D. Dingell Jr. The New York Times, Neil Vigdor, Wednesday, 27 December 2023: “Former President Donald J. Trump on Tuesday fired off a new attack against Representative Debbie Dingell, the widow of John D. Dingell Jr., the longest-serving member of Congress in American history, calling her a ‘loser’ and suggesting that she had not been grateful for funeral honors granted by Mr. Trump for her husband. The salvo from Mr. Trump, the Republican front-runner in the 2024 presidential race, followed an appearance by Ms. Dingell, a Democrat from Michigan, on CNN earlier on Tuesday in which she criticized Mr. Trump’s increasingly incendiary language on social media. Weeks before the first nominating contests are held in Iowa and New Hampshire, the former president has amplified his vitriol. He shared a word cloud this week that prominently featured the word ‘dictatorship’ and recently described people who entered the United States illegally as ‘poisoning the blood of our country,’ comments that were condemned for being similar to the words of Adolf Hitler. Ms. Dingell had been reacting to a grievance-filled Christmas message on Truth Social from Mr. Trump. Referring to his political opponents as ‘deranged’ and ‘thugs’ and accusing them of trying to destroy the country, he wrote, ‘MAY THEY ROT IN HELL. AGAIN, MERRY CHRISTMAS!'”
Thursday, 28 December 2023:
Maine Joins Colorado in Finding Trump Ineligible for Primary Ballot. Maine found Donald Trump ineligible to hold office because of his actions after the 2020 election. California said his name would remain on the ballot there. The New York Times, Jenna Russell, Ernesto Londoño, and Shawn Hubler, Thursday, 28 December 2023: “Maine on Thursday became the second state to bar Donald J. Trump from its primary election ballot after its top election official ruled that the former president’s efforts to remain in power after the 2020 election rendered him ineligible to hold office again. Hours later, her counterpart in California announced that Mr. Trump would remain on the ballot in the nation’s most populous state, where election officials have limited power to remove candidates. The official in Maine, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, wrote in her decision that Mr. Trump did not qualify for the ballot because of his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. A handful of citizens had challenged his eligibility by claiming that he had incited an insurrection and was thus barred from seeking the presidency again under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. ‘I am mindful that no secretary of state has ever deprived a presidential candidate of ballot access based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. I am also mindful, however, that no presidential candidate has ever before engaged in insurrection,’ Ms. Bellows, a Democrat, wrote.” See also, Maine Secretary of State removes Donald Trump from primary ballot, The Washington Post, Patrick Marley, Thursday, 28 December 2023: “Maine barred Donald Trump from the primary ballot Thursday, becoming the second state to block the former president from running again because of his actions before and during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. The decision by Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D) is sure to be appealed. The Colorado Supreme Court last week found Trump could not appear on the ballot in that state under a part of the U.S. Constitution that prevents insurrectionists from holding office. The Colorado Republican Party has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case, which could resolve for all states whether Trump can run again. Both states have temporarily put their decisions on hold so Trump can pursue appeals. In California, the nation’s most populous state, the secretary of state certified Trump’s name on Thursday, despite a request from the state’s lieutenant governor to consider excluding him on constitutional grounds. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) had pushed back on the idea, saying Trump should be defeated at the ballot box.” See also, Maine bars Trump from ballot as US Supreme Court weighs states’ authority to block former president, Associated Press, Nicholas Riccardi and David Sharp, published on Friday, 29 December 2023: “Maine’s Democratic secretary of state on Thursday removed former President Donald Trump from the state’s presidential primary ballot under the Constitution’s insurrection clause, becoming the first election official to take action unilaterally as the U.S. Supreme Court is poised to decide whether Trump remains eligible to return to the White House. The decision by Secretary of State Shenna Bellows follows a ruling earlier this month by the Colorado Supreme Court that booted Trump from the ballot there under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. That decision has been stayed until the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether Trump is barred by the Civil War-era provision, which prohibits those who ‘engaged in insurrection’ from holding office. The Trump campaign said it would appeal Bellows’ decision to Maine’s state courts, and Bellows suspended her ruling until that court system rules on the case. In the end, it is likely that the nation’s highest court will have the final say on whether Trump appears on the ballot in Maine and in the other states. Bellows found that Trump could no longer run for his prior job because his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol violated Section 3, which bans from office those who ‘engaged in insurrection.’ Bellows made the ruling after some state residents, including a bipartisan group of former lawmakers, challenged Trump’s position on the ballot.” See also, What to Know About the Efforts to Remove Trump From the 2024 Ballot. There are lawsuits pending in more than a dozen states seeking to have Donald Trump disqualified from appearing on primary ballots. The New York Times, Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs, published on Friday, 29 December 2023. See also, Here are the key states where Trump’s ballot status is being challenged, The Washington Post, Patrick Marley, Janice Kai Chen, and Anumita Kaur, Thursday, 28 December 2023.
Supreme Court Urged to Move Fast on Trump’s Ballot Eligibility. The Colorado Republican Party asked the justices to decide its appeal by Super Tuesday. The voters who won in the Colorado Supreme Court want to move even faster. The New York Times, Adam Liptak, Thursday, 28 December 2023: “The Supreme Court was asked on Thursday to fast-track its review of the stunning Colorado Supreme Court ruling that former President Donald J. Trump was ineligible to appear on the state’s primary ballot. The request was made by the six voters who won in the state court, which ruled that Mr. Trump was subject to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. That provision bars officials who promised to support the Constitution from holding office again after engaging in insurrection. The voters also told the justices that they would not oppose review of that decision. There are cases pending in several states challenging Mr. Trump’s eligibility on the same grounds. A definitive ruling by the Supreme Court would apply nationwide and settle the matter. The voters’ request to accelerate the case came the day after the Colorado Republican Party asked the justices to review the state court’s ruling. Mr. Trump has not filed a promised petition seeking review of the ruling, and his general practice has been to move as slowly as possible in the legal proceedings against him. But the Colorado Republican Party asked the justices on Wednesday to hear its own appeal of the decision.”
Exclusive: Recordings and emails show how Trump team flew fake elector ballots to DC in final push to overturn 2020 election, CNN Politics, Marshall Cohen, Zachary Cohen, Jeremy Herb, and Katelyn Polantz, Thursday, 28 December 2023: “Two days before the January 6 insurrection, the Trump campaign’s plan to use fake electors to block President-elect Joe Biden from taking office faced a potentially crippling hiccup: The fake elector certificates from two critical battleground states were stuck in the mail. So, Trump campaign operatives scrambled to fly copies of the phony certificates from Michigan and Wisconsin to the nation’s capital, relying on a haphazard chain of couriers, as well as help from two Republicans in Congress, to try to get the documents to then-Vice President Mike Pence while he presided over the Electoral College certification. The operatives even considered chartering a jet to ensure the files reached Washington, DC, in time for the January 6, 2021, proceeding, according to emails and recordings obtained by CNN. The new details provide a behind-the-scenes glimpse of the chaotic last-minute effort to keep Donald Trump in office. The fake electors scheme features prominently in special counsel Jack Smith’s criminal indictment against the former president, and some of the officials who were involved have spoken to Smith’s investigators. The emails and recordings also indicate that a top Trump campaign lawyer was part of 11th-hour discussions about delivering the fake elector certificates to Pence, potentially undercutting his testimony to the House select committee that investigated January 6 that he had passed off responsibility and didn’t want to put the former vice president in a difficult spot. These details largely come from pro-Trump attorney Kenneth Chesebro, who was an architect of the fake electors plot and is now a key cooperator in several state probes into the scheme. Chesebro pleaded guilty in October to a felony conspiracy charge in Georgia in connection with the electors’ plan, and has met with prosecutors in Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin, who are investigating the sham GOP electors in their own states.”
Even though the Trump administration is no longer in office, I am continuing to post summaries of the daily political news and major stories relating to this tragic and dangerous period in US history. I try to focus on the differences between the Trump administration and the Biden administration and on the ongoing toxic residual effects of the Trump administration and Republicans. I usually post throughout the day and let the news settle for a day or so before posting.
I created Muckraker Farm in 2014 as a place to post muckraking (investigative) journalism going back to the 19th century. I hope to return to this original project soon. You can find these muckraking pieces under the Home Page link at the top of this site. Thanks for reading!