#Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Mike Luckovich

* * * *

A big week!  ::  April 17, 2023

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

APR 17, 2023

         The week beginning Monday, April 17, 2023, will be filled with important stories competing for our attention. Tonight, I will attempt to frame those stories in a way to bring some order out of seeming chaos. Which, by the way, is the point of MAGA extremists who are pushing culture war issues across multiple fronts in a deliberate effort to exhaust us. Don’t let them.

         Their façade is cracking, and MAGA extremists are turning on one another over strategy, tactics, money, and power. It is an inevitable turn of events for the reactionary wing of American politics. When nothing matters except power, it is every person for themselves in MAGA-land. Sadly, innocent Americans are collateral damage in MAGA’s race to the bottom. Signs abound that most Americans are tiring of the MAGA cult of death and spectacle of hate—as should be expected in a rational world where most people want only to raise their families in peace, security, and freedom. Let’s take a look.

Mass shooting in Alabama.

         Like a weekly ritual, we begin the new week with news of another mass shooting. Details are scarce—possibly deliberately so—as local officials appear to treat the most recent mass shooting as a public relations problem. They have been charitably described as “tight-lipped,” refusing to provide key details as of late Sunday afternoon. See Washington Post, Dadeville shooting: 4 dead at Alabama teen’s birthday party. At least four were killed and two dozen injured. There was so much blood at the scene that a fire tanker was enlisted to wash the blood off the sidewalks with firehoses on Sunday morning. Such was the tragic ending to a Sweet 16 birthday party.

         Alabama was the first state to pass “permitless carry” of concealed firearms (in March 2022). Since then, twenty-four more states have passed similar legislation, meaning that in half the states in America, you should assume everyone you are speaking to is carrying a concealed weapon. It would be foolish not to.

         The legislators in those twenty-five states are morally responsible for the deaths of innocent children, workers, and bystanders. They have bidden a world in which gun ownership is easier than applying for a job, obtaining a driver’s license, or using a credit card. There is blood on their hands, and no amount of power washing the blood from sidewalks will remove the stain.

         The most dangerous cities in America overlap almost entirely with the map of permitless carry (although there are outliers: e.g., Oakland, Philadelphia). Alabama lays claim to two of the most dangerous cities in America. The Safest Cities in America | MoneyGeek.com More guns have made citizens of Alabama less safe, not more so.

         Americans are fed up. A recent survey by the Navigator Group finds a dramatic increase in the number of Americans who believe gun violence is a top national priority. For tragic reasons, concern over guns is now the third-ranking priority among Americans—behind only inflation and jobs. Strong majorities of Democrats and Independents believe that gun laws should be strengthened—as do 38% of Republicans.

         The numbers are turning against Republicans on the gun issue. Combined with reproductive liberty, the climate crisis, and attacks on LGBTQ rights, MAGA extremists have picked the wrong side of nearly every major social and political issue challenging America. Although they can control legislation through gerrymandered legislatures, that is a losing game over time. Democrats can win at the statewide and national level—where they can block G.O.P. lawlessness and enact gun reform.

         We have a path forward—through grass-roots politics. It will be long and arduous, but we have a path forward. Let’s take it.

The Supreme Court will issue a ruling on mifepristone withdrawal on Wednesday.

         Barring an unforeseen development, the U.S. Supreme Court will issue a ruling by 11:59 PM on Wednesday. The Court’s ruling will signal just how far the Court is willing to extend the constitutional injury inflicted in Dobbs. Any reasonable Court would dismiss the case for lack of standing or, at the very least, stay the order revoking the F.D.A.’s approval of mifepristone until the Fifth Circuit and Supreme Court can hear the appeal from Judge Kacsmaryk’s order on full briefing.

         But . . .if the Court allows any part of Judge Kacsmaryk’s order to remain in place, it will have facilitated a judicial revolution of staggering proportions. Though conservatives routinely rail against “judicial activism,” Judge Kacsmaryk’s order is judicial activism on jet fuel. He presumes to himself the scientific knowledge to second-guess a congressionally mandated arbiter of drug safety and efficacy. The F.D.A. has thousands of scientists with thousands of years of combined experience testing drugs, but Judge Kacsmaryk believes that his religious principles are sufficient to overcome that experience.

         If the Supreme Court fails to block Judge Kacsmaryk’s order in its entirety, we are entering a new era of jurisprudence in which the federal judiciary will become the “super-regulator” of medicines, products, and services currently regulated by agencies created by Congress. That would be an astonishing result, but we cannot underestimate the religious fervor motivating justices Alito, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Thomas, and Gorsuch—all Catholics who have allowed their faith to overrule their loyalty to the Constitution. (Yes, I know that Gorsuch has joined his wife’s Episcopalian congregation where his children attend school.)

         Republicans are not happy about Kacsmaryk’s ruling—because they are not talking about it. See HuffPo, Republicans Are Silent On The Abortion Pill Ruling, Despite Confirming The Judge Behind It. Or rather, those Republicans who are talking about it are telling the anti-choice extremists in their ranks to “knock it off” and “quit while you are ahead.” Even Senators who are usually willing to back extreme positions (Cruz, Hawley) have declined comment.

         Another signal that Republican extremism on reproductive liberty has offended conservative Republicans was the announcement by a prominent DeSantis backer that he was “pausing” his support for DeSantis because the governor signed a six-week abortion ban. When Republican megadonors begin to flee leading Republican candidates for the 2024 nomination, you know that the G.O.P. has lost touch with the American people.

         I cannot leave this topic without noting the corruption that surrounded Judge Kacsmaryk’s confirmation hearing. Like all nominees, he was required to advise the Senate of all publications. When he was nominated, an article he authored had been accepted for publication by The Texas Review of Law and Politics. Rather than disclose the article to the Senate as required, he called the law journal and asked that the journal remove his name—as sole author—and substitute two different people as authors.

There is no other word to describe Kacsmaryk’s action except “fraud.” An article written by Kacsmaryk and accepted for publication was published under another person’s name for the purpose of concealing Kacsmaryk’s authorship. See WaPo, The controversial article Matthew Kacsmaryk did not disclose to the Senate. When Democrats again control the House, they should consider impeaching Kacsmaryk for lying to the Senate.

More on Justice Thomas’s corruption.

         Like clockwork, we have learned of another misrepresentation in Justice Thomas’s financial disclosure forms. It turns out that Thomas has been reporting income from a defunct entity for nearly a decade. See Bloomberg, Justice Thomas Reported Income From Defunct Firm (reporting on a WaPo story). While the error may have been inadvertent, the oversight is reckless. By attributing income to a non-existent entity, Thomas could have concealed the true source of his income. Whether he did deserves to be investigated.

         There is no doubt that Justice Thomas violated the statute that governs his disclosure obligations (5 U.S.C. app. 104), which imposes civil and criminal liability for omitting required information or misstating included information. (Section 104 applies to the Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court. See 5a U.S. Code § 109.) Thomas has both omitted required information and misstated included information. It is up to Merrick Garland and John Roberts to investigate. See Chris Geidner, Clarence Thomas's problems are also a John Roberts problem (lawdork.com)

[MORE]

Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter

#News #political #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Robert B. Hubbell #Justice Thomas #Corrupt SCOTUS #Judge Kacsmaryk #women's rights #abortion rights #reproductive rights #gun violence #gun control #ban assault weapons

[tinydick2]

Your mother has a tiny dick asshole

#Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter

[misfitwashere]

Elect Democrats. Reform the Court. Defend the Constitution. Preserve Democracy.

March 5, 2024

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

MAR 5 READ IN APP LISTEN TO POST · 18:32

The most important lesson from Monday’s disqualification ruling is that the Supreme Court is broken beyond repair. The reactionary majority made that fact abundantly clear by unilaterally amending the Constitution to remove the Insurrection Clause from the 14th Amendment. 

Those sworn to protect the Constitution are dismantling it. The protectors of the Constitution have become its adversary in order to protect a failed insurrectionist who has promised a second effort to overthrow the Constitution. (“I said I want to be a dictator for one day.”)

#robert hubbell

[filosofablogger]

Committee Flops Like A Dead Fish

Robert Hubbell’s newsletter this morning covered a few important and encouraging topics, for those of us who are feeling a bit overwhelmed by the right-wing drama of late, both in the House of Representatives and in the State of Florida!  Here is just one of the topics he covered … Democrats Fight Back! Robert B. Hubbell 7 March 2023 Democrats have been frustrated by the asymmetry between GOP…

View On WordPress

#"Weaponization of Government" committee #Democratic prebuttal #GOP lies #Jim Jordan #Kash Patel #Robert Hubbell

[garudabluffs]

What happens now? Judge Dearie will continue his review of the non-classified documents. We should expect that process will turn out badly for Trump. And then . . . sometime in 2023, we should expect an indictment of Trump for espionage.

“A reader asked in the Comments section yesterday whether the crime of espionage requires an intent to share the defense secrets with another party. It does not. Under Subsection (d) of the 18 USC § 793 (Espionage Act), if a person lawfully obtains possession of information harmful to the security interests of the United States (if disclosed), the person is guilty of espionage if he “willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it."

Thus, under the Espionage Act, there is no requirement of an intent to share the information with anyone. Continued possession of defense secrets after a demand for their return is espionage. That is why the DOJ will indict Trump.”

READ MORE https://roberthubbell.substack.com/p/a-good-day

88 Comments “This was quite a masterpiece Mr. Hubbell.  I appreciate your excellent summary of events and the links to documents.  I would also like to add Mr. Raskin's diatribe against the Republicans in the House yesterday.  He gave them heck concerning the January 6 Select Committee.  Here is the link:https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/let-s-tell-some-truth-raskin-goes-scorched-earth-on-republicans-during-hearing-over-opposition-to-jan-6-committee/ar-AA126gqR#:~:text=View%20Profile-,%E2%80%98Let%E2%80%99s%20Tell%20Some%20Truth!%E2%80%99%20Raskin%20Goes%20Scorched%20Earth%20on%20Republicans%20During%20Hearing%20Over%20Opposition%20to%20Jan.%206%20Committee,-Michael%20Luciano%20%2D

Robert B. Hubbell  12 hr ago Author

“There is a DOJ rule against indicting within 69 days of an election. I suppose a November or December indictment is possible .”

“Is it possible for TFG to appeal the 11th Court's decion to the Supreme Court?” Robert B. Hubbell Author “Possible. Highly unlikely that the Court would grant review.”

“A terrific newsletter! To add frosting to the cake of Robert's excellent perspective, check out Lawrence Tribe's conversation Wednesday at the weekly Community Advocates/Jews United for Democracy and Justice. It's on YouTube at” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAg9rT2csgc.

COMMENTS “And may I quote constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe, who last night stated on a Zoom with Jews United for Democracy and Justice: "The recoking is coming for the president."  (Former president!) I slept well.”

Legal expert reacts to Trump's inaccurate claim about declassifying

https://youtu.be/wAkvJPd1uoI

Attorney who sued Trump over real estate properties speaks out

CNN's Jim Sciutto and Poppy Harlow discuss the New York attorney general's lawsuit against Trump accusing him of business fraud with New York real estate attorney Adam Leitman Bailey. Bailey has sued Trump in the past over his real estate properties.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H_HZlL8cJg

Trump Seems To Think His Presidential Powers Continue

“Former Chief of Staff at the Department of Homeland Security Miles Taylor, former FBI counterintelligence agent Pete Strzok, former U.S. attorney Harry Litman, and Wall Street Journal Justice Department reporter Sadie Gurman react to Trump’s claim that he declassified documents just by “thinking” about it “

364,376 views Sep 22, 2022 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDoIn23gyxg

3,612 Comments  

#A good day! September 22 2022. Robert B. Hubbell

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Dave Granlund

* * * * 

Keep calm and carry on.  :::  March 20, 2023

Robert B. Hubbell

         I acknowledge that the motto used by the British government to sustain public morale before the German blitz in 1940 has been overused. But the sentiment is appropriate for this moment in American history. In the next several months, a former president will likely face three indictments in three jurisdictions for three separate sets of crimes—all of which relate to his effort to gain or retain the presidency. That's a lot! To say the indictments will dominate American politics for years to come would be an understatement.

        A "once-in-the-life-of-a-nation" event will be made more trying because Trump has signaled his defense strategy—threatening violence to intimidate the participants in the judicial process, to disrupt the proceedings, and to undermine the legitimacy of the verdicts. Although we do not have confirmation that Trump will be indicted, he and his legal team have begun leaking information to the press and mounting attacks from Trump's vanity social media platform. Based on those statements, Trump expects to be indicted, to surrender, and to enter a plea this week.

         In language eerily reminiscent of Trump's incitement on January 6th, Trump posted a statement calling on his supporters to "PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!" That was the only encouragement Trump's followers needed to set social media aflame with calls to violence to protect Trump. Basement-dwelling trolls and miscreants called for MAGA extremists to create a "patriot moat" around Mar-a-Lago and to commence a "civil war." See Rolling Stone, MAGA Forum Suggests 'Patriot Moat' at Mar-a-Lago to Stop Trump Arrest.

         Marjorie Taylor Greene echoed those calls with a tweet urging Republicans to adopt a "scorched earth" strategy and claimed that "feds" would turn the MAGA protests into "violence." (FYI: a common conspiracy theory about January 6th asserts that "feds" provoked the protestors to violence.)

         The most disgraceful reaction came from Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who should have condemned Trump's oblique call for violence. Instead, McCarthy legitimized Trump's call to "take back our nation" by tweeting that he is

directing relevant committees to immediately investigate if federal funds are being used to subvert our democracy by interfering in elections with politically motivated prosecutions.

         Huh? Someone needs to do a wellness check on McCarthy to see if he is okay. His statement was so monumentally stupid that he might be feigning illness to distract from the fact he did not immediately rebuke Trump's implied call for violence. His failure to condemn Trump makes McCarthy an accessory to any violence that follows. He has disgraced the Speaker's office in a way seldom seen in our nation's history.

         [Update: Late Sunday evening, McCarthy tried to walk back the implications of Trump's post and McCarthy's tweet. McCarthy called for "calmness," saying,

"I think the thing that you may misinterpret when President Trump talks and someone says that they can protest, he's probably referring to my tweet: educate people about what's going on. He's not talking in a harmful way, and nobody should."

         As I said above: "Huh?"]

         After January 6th, it would be irresponsible to dismiss the potential for violence. Indeed, it seems inevitable that there will be isolated incidents during proceedings that will span years. Trump will use his campaign rallies to inflame passions and foment unrest.

         But . . . we should keep calm and carry on. Whatever happens, our system of justice is bigger and more durable than Trump. He is using the threat of violence to instill fear and raise anxiety in those who seek justice. We cannot surrender to the second-rate tactics of a third-rate demagogue.

         Remaining calm will require discipline and perspective, especially because any violence will be amplified and distorted by the media beyond all recognition. The media expects violence and is prepared to deliver round-the-clock replays of every incident without respite or perspective.

         If violence occurs, we need only reflect on the vastness of America, on its size and heft, on its immensity and scale to place the incidents in perspective. If several dozen protestors disrupt traffic in four blocks of Manhattan, that leaves 332 million Americans peacefully going about their lives in nearly four million square miles of a land that remains effectively boundless more than two centuries after its founding.

         Perspective will not diminish the significance or depravity of any violence, but it will help us remain focused and committed to ensuring that justice prevails—come what may. In this, we cannot fail. We must not. If we retreat or relent because of threats of violence, the rule of law is no more.

         While we should not underestimate the danger posed by Trump, America's strength is rooted in justice and fortified by righteousness. That strength will allow America to hold Trump accountable for his crimes and endure for generations to come. Future generations will know Trump as a faithless servant and traitor—and as a convicted felon.

         Keep calm and carry on. We have elections to win in 2024 and cannot be distracted by the slow wheels of justice.

This explains a lot.

         The current wave of retrograde extremism and mean-spirited divisiveness is sometimes difficult to comprehend. One partial explanation is that an entire generation of white Christian evangelicals see their ranks and power slipping away, and they are angry and fearful about the future. That is the thesis of Jennifer Rubin's op-ed in the Washington Post, Why white Christian nationalists are in such a panic.  

         Rubin writes about the newly released PRRI 2022 Census of American Religion— based on over 40,000 interviews conducted last year. In short, the census confirms a decades-long decline in the absolute and relative portion of Americans who identify as white Christians. The percentage decline of white Christians has been dramatic: 2008 (54%), 2014 (47%), and 2022 (42%).

         Per the report, the MAGA subset of white Christians has been particularly hard hit by the decline:

The group that has declined the most is at the core of the MAGA movement, the group most devoted to Christian nationalism. "White evangelical Protestants have experienced the steepest decline. As recently as 2006, white evangelical Protestants comprised nearly one-quarter of Americans (23%). By the time of Trump's rise to power, their numbers had dipped to 16.8%," Jones explains. "Today, white evangelical Protestants comprise only 13.6% of Americans."

         In a closely divided electorate, a dedicated group representing 13.6% of the population can nonetheless have an outsized impact on elections decided by a few hundred or a few thousand votes. That, in turn, explains the unholy dedication of white Christians to the suppression of votes.

         The shrinking number of Americans who identify as Christians should be a cause for reflection and introspection. It is not—at least not for MAGA Christians. Per Rubin:

With those kind of numbers, the responsible thing to do would be to think about "fixing" what's wrong by adapting to a changing market. Instead, many in this cohort have doubled down, becoming the foot soldiers in the red-hatted MAGA movement. The decline isn't going to be reversed by angry, gray-haired folks demanding abortion bans and "don't say gay" bills.

         While we can never count on Republicans to defeat themselves, neither should we overestimate the strength of our opponent. The current wave of anti-choice, anti-LGBTQ legislation across the nation is being driven by a shrinking minority of religious extremists who appear to be driving people away from their church with their politics. That fact should help us maintain perspective about our prospects for success in reversing the wave of hate-based legislation sweeping the nation.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

#political cartoon. #broken Republican party #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Robert B. Hubbell #MAGA Republicans #Christian Nationalism #white supremecy #evangelical

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

US Supreme Court takes up another reactionary cause.

         It has long been the dream of reactionary conservatives to “dismantle the administrative state.” In the current iteration of what passes for conservative philosophy, the federal government is the problem—never mind that it creates the physical, economic, and regulatory infrastructure that allows American businesses to flourish in the most stable, least corrupt markets in the world. The reactionary majority on the Supreme Court appears poised to supercharge the “dismantling of the administrative state” by overturning a long-established rule that defers federal agencies when they interpret their own regulations (the so-called “Chevron deference” standard).

         On Monday, the US Supreme Court granted review in a case that directly challenges the Chevron deference standard. As Mark Joseph Stern tweeted,

Killing Chevron will be a major victory in the conservative legal movement's war against the administrative state. It'll shift a huge amount of power from the executive branch to the judiciary, allowing totally unaccountable, unelected judges to resolve statutory ambiguities.

         Justice Gorsuch has made overturning the Chevron deference standard a centerpiece of his judicial career. Among the people filing “friend of the court” briefs urging the Court to overturn the Chevron deference standard is John Eastman—who was last seen trying to convince Mike Pence that he could single-handedly reverse the results of the 2020 election. That tells you all you need to know about the alignment of interests in overturning the Chevron defense standard.

The next battle in education: “The American Birthright” curriculum.

         A reader sent a link to an important article in Salon, Right's new social studies plan vows to fight CRT, wokeness and the "overthrow of America". As explained in the article, Christian nationalists have developed and are marketing a thinly disguised Christian nationalist curriculum for adoption in public and private schools. The American Birthright curriculum is Critical Race Theory from a white nationalist viewpoint.

         As explained in Salon,

[T]eachers who attended the first training, in Broward County, emerged with deep concerns. Some said the new civics standards appeared to promote "a very strong Christian fundamentalist way" of analyzing U.S. history. Others recounted that trainers had claimed that America's founding fathers opposed strict separation of church and state, had compared the end of school-sponsored prayer to segregation and had downplayed the history of American slavery in misleading ways. (Slides from the training presentation noted that enslaved people in the U.S. only accounted for 4% of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, which both minimizes the number of people ultimately enslaved in America and suggests that other countries' slavery practices were worse.)

         If states are the laboratories of democracy, then public schools are incubators of citizens. We cannot cede the public school system to a curriculum based on Christian nationalism. Tell a friend about the danger posed by the “American Birthright” curriculum.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

#Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Robert B. Hubbell #The American Birthright curriculum #corrupt SCOTUS #reactionary court #education #propaganda #indoctrination

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Sanity prevails!  ::  April 22, 2023

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

APR 22, 2023

         In a 7-2 ruling, the Supreme Court stayed Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling revoking the FDA’s approval of mifepristone. As a result, mifepristone will remain available until the Fifth Circuit and Supreme Court consider Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling on the merits. That process will likely take two years.

         The Supreme Court’s order and Alito’s dissent are here: Danco Laboratories LLC v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine.

         In granting the stay, the Supreme Court pulled back from the precipice of chaos that would have been created by a nationwide ban on mifepristone. There was a palpable sigh of relief among court watchers and reproductive rights advocates that the Court did not accept the invitation to depart the realm of sanity. As Ian Millhiser tweeted,

The Supreme Court did not do the most hackish, credibility-destroying thing it could possibly do.

         Millhiser offers a more sober analysis in his article in Vox, The Supreme Court’s new abortion pill ruling, explained. Per Millhiser,

The plaintiffs’ arguments in this case are laughably weak. They ask the Court to defy longstanding legal principles establishing that judges may not second-guess the FDA’s scientific judgments about which drugs are safe enough to be prescribed in the United States. Moreover, no federal court has jurisdiction to even hear this case in the first place.

[¶]

That said, the Court’s decision to temporarily keep mifepristone legal is a hopeful sign that the justices will ultimately decide not to ban mifepristone. And there are other reasons to believe that a majority of the Court might reject this entirely meritless attack on abortion rights.

         Justice Alito continued his descent into terminal crankiness with a three-page diatribe that belittles the medical necessity of mifepristone and women’s rights to healthcare. Alito would have denied the stay because he believes that a several-month period of restrictions on mifepristone would not “likely [impose] irreparable harm.” Tell that to a woman suffering through a protracted and dangerous miscarriage.

         It is tough to make predictions—especially about the future. But the fact that seven justices refused to allow Kacsmaryk’s ruling to remain in effect bodes well for the ultimate decision on the merits in favor of reproductive liberty.

         That is a good place to come to rest before the weekend. Sanity prevailed (for once), perhaps because the Court realized Dobbs inflicted irremediable damage to its legitimacy.

#Dobbs #SCOTUS #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Robert B. Hubbell #women's rights #reproductive rights

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Jesse Duquette, The Daily Don

* * * *

The Trump indictment.

         On a day of non-stop coverage of the indictment of Donald J. Trump, less is more.

         Here are the facts that matter:

The people of the State of New York filed this Indictment against Donald Trump.

The indictment alleges 34 felony counts of falsification of business records.

The Manhattan District Attorney separately released this Statement of Facts. If you have time, read the 13-page document in full. It sets forth the essential facts and legal theories for everything that will transpire in the case of People of New York v. Donald Trump.

Important allegations in the Statement of Facts include the following:

         From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant [Trump] orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant's electoral prospects. In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York.

         [Michael Cohen] who then worked for the Trump Organization as Special Counsel to [Trump] covertly paid $130,000 to an adult film actress shortly before the election to prevent her from publicizing a sexual encounter with the Defendant. [Michael Cohen] made the $130,000 payment through a shell corporation he set up and funded at a bank in Manhattan. This payment was illegal, and [Cohen] has since pleaded guilty to making an illegal campaign contribution . . . .

         In a conversation captured in an audio recording in approximately September 2016 concerning Woman 1's account, the [Trump] and [Cohen] discussed how to obtain the rights to Woman 1's account from AMI and how to reimburse AMI for its payment.

         [Trump] directed [Cohen] to delay making a payment to Woman 2 as long as possible. He instructed Lawyer A that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public.

During a 58-minute appearance before Judge Juan Merchan, Donald Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges in the indictment.

Judge Merchan declined to impose a gag order, although he cautioned the parties to exercise restraint in making out-of-court statements. Trump promptly disregarded the judge's cautionary warning by making incendiary statements during an evening speech at Mar-a-Lago.

Judge Merchan set the next hearing in the case for December 2, 2023.

Discussion of the indictment.

         The indictment alleges financial crimes were committed to protect Trump's presidential prospects. The cover-up was part of a broad ranging “catch-and-kill” strategy that continued into Trump's first months as president.

         The indictment has provoked a torrent of criticism by legal commentators. Most of the criticism hinges on the fact that the underlying offenses of financial fraud are typically charged as misdemeanors. Here, they are charged as felonies. To leverage misdemeanors into felonies, New York must prove that Trump intended to commit other crimes.

         Alvin Bragg identified those other crimes during a news conference, which include:

tax fraud,

facilitating false statements by the National Enquirer's parent company (AMI),

violation of state election laws, and

violation of federal election laws.

         Most commentators focus on the difficulty of proving the last two crimes—violations of federal and state election laws. For example, one of my favorite legal commentators, Ian Millhiser, has annoyed me greatly with this article in Vox, The dubious legal theory at the heart of the Trump indictment, explained.

         Millhiser's analysis is as good as it gets—but I disagree. At the core of Millhiser's criticism is this:

Bragg has evidence that Trump acted to cover up a federal crime, but it is not clear that Bragg is allowed to point to a federal crime in order to charge Trump under the New York state law.

         Millhiser suggests that Bragg must prove a federal crime to prevail. Not true, entirely. Bragg can rely on uncharged state crimes—including violations of New York election laws and income tax violations, as Bragg said in his news conference. Moreover, as Millhiser concedes above, "it is not clear" whether an uncharged federal crime will suffice. The relevant New York statute says that a person is guilty of a felony under state law

when he commits the crime of falsifying business records [and has] the intent to commit another crime . . . .

         The New York statute refers generally to "another crime," not a "state crime" or a federal crime. Just "another crime." Millhiser says that ambiguity might get Trump off the hook. I doubt it. The statute is plain on its face. Trump will undoubtedly make Millhiser's argument, but I believe Trump will lose the argument.

         Okay, that's as deep as I will examine the legal issues. The issues are more complicated than I have described above, and there are other worrisome defenses (including the timing of the payments—all of which occurred after Trump took office).

Despite my disagreement with Millhiser, his analysis is excellent and cannot be easily dismissed. If you are interested in a deep dive into the alleged weaknesses of Bragg's case, Millhiser's article is an excellent resource. See also Mark Joseph Stern in Slate, Donald Trump indictment is not the slam-dunk case Democrats wanted.

         Although two of my favorite legal commentators are raising red flags, I think Bragg can convince the judge that the false financial records were part of a broad-ranging "catch-and-kill" strategy designed to violate state and federal election and tax laws. That should be enough to get the case to the jury.

Trump cannot appeal any pre-trial rulings, which means that if the judge denies the expected motions to dismiss, the trial will take place in the spring of 2024. By then, Trump should be defending two federal indictments and one from Georgia.

Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter

#Robert B. Hubbell #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Trump Indictment #Jesse Duquette The Daily Don #justice #legal #Millhiser

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Bad news for Trump and DeSantis :::  March 13, 2023

Robert B. Hubbell

         Before turning to the real news of the weekend (No, not the Oscars, the failure of Silicon Valley Bank), I wanted to return to a poll released by Navigator Research last week. I mentioned the poll in my “Weekend Thoughts” newsletter, but believe it is worth a second look. The poll is a helpful antidote to the incorrect impression that Ron DeSantis is an unstoppable force with an aura of invincibility and inevitability. Not true.

DeSantis is a small-time politician who is the beneficiary of a gerrymandered state legislature willing to indulge his presidential fantasies. Whether his dystopian view of a fascist America will sell in the marketplace of ideas in the rest of the nation is a question that remains profoundly unsettled. Indeed, that will be the question that Americans decide in 2024.

         The most recent Navigator Research poll suggests that DeSantis’s dreams of a fascist America will fare poorly outside of Tallahassee—the capital of Florida and the nation’s 126th largest city. I don’t mean to suggest that the size of Tallahassee disqualifies the views of its citizens; I do mean to suggest that it is easier to corrupt and commandeer a small, insular political system than it is to succeed on the national stage in a pluralistic society.

    ��    Before examining the Navigator Research poll, let’s recite the usual caveats together: A single poll isn’t meaningful; it’s the trend that matters. Polls can be manipulated, so the quality and professionalism of the polling organization matter. Polls aren’t elections. And, finally, it’s way too early to be consulting polls. In this instance, I would add that Navigator Research is described as a “left of center research and polling organization” by InfluenceWatch—to which I say, “We need more left of center” research and polling organizations to help Democrats communicate the truth about the sentiments of the American people.

         Whew! That was a lot of throat-clearing. Now on to my main point:

         If you were to ask a random sample of Americans which party they trust to keep children safe at school, ensure students access to healthcare, protect them from gun violence, ensure access to clean air and water, and give kids the skills and knowledge to be successful in life, the answer would be clear: the Democratic Party. Frankly, you wouldn’t need a poll to arrive at that conclusion because, as Stephen Colbert would say, “It has the feeling of truthiness.”

         The Navigator poll demonstrates that Americans understand Democrats are more interested in protecting their children than Republicans are and, therefore, trust Democrats more when it comes to educating their children. The main conclusions of the poll are presented in a series of charts here: Americans are Prioritizing Safety and Quality Education While Rejecting Book Bans and Restricted Curriculums | Navigator.

         Most tellingly, Governor Ron “Where woke goes to die” DeSantis has picked the wrong top-line message for his campaign. “Preventing children from being exposed to woke ideas” ranks near the bottom in educational priorities for all voters and is supported only by only 54% of Republicans. Legislative bans on “CRT,” transgender participation in sports, and Black history are losing positions with Democrats and Independents, garnering majority support only among Republicans—which means those positions are losers in national elections where Republicans rank third in voter registration.

         As I said above, these positions have the feel of “truthiness.” And while we should refrain from fooling ourselves to assuage feelings of anxiety, it would have been odd and counter-intuitive if most Americans supported efforts to limit knowledge, discriminate against LGBTQ people, pollute our air and water, and make guns more accessible near schools and in public places.

         I am not saying that we can relax or relent in our opposition to the Trump/DeSantis strain of fascism that underlies their 2024 platforms. I offer the Navigator poll only as a counterweight to balance the unrelenting and unquestioning coverage provided every time the Florida legislature passes another bill to outlaw knowledge, legitimize discrimination, intimidate educators, abrogate liberties, and codify white nationalism. Those may be the beliefs of most members in a gerrymandered legislature in Florida, but they are not the beliefs of most Americans. That is bad news for both Ron DeSantis and Donald Trump.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

#whammond #woke #Ron DeSantis #corrupt GOP #Criminal GOP #fascism #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #polling #Robert B. Hubbell

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

[Herb Block Foundation]

* * * * *

Americans want gun control.  :: May 1, 2023

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

MAY 1, 2023

         Americans mourn for the victims of the weekend gun violence in Texas and the Texans forced to live in a society that glorifies guns above public safety. The details of two shootings over the weekend are horrifying. In the first, neighbors asked a man shooting an assault rifle in his front yard at 11:00 PM to stop because he was waking sleeping infants in the neighbors’ home. The man with the assault rifle then executed five of the neighbors in their home—including an eight-year-old boy. The gunman remains at large. Governor Abbott said nothing for 24 hours (other than releasing a photo of his golden retriever). When he finally commented, he tried to diminish the horror of the executions by describing the victims as “illegal immigrants.” See Business Insider, Gov. Abbott Calls Texas Mass Shooting Victims 'Illegal Immigrants'.

         In a second killing, a man on a date was scammed out of $40 by someone pretending to be a parking valet. When the man learned he had been scammed, he shot and killed the scammer, then returned to the restaurant to finish his dinner with his date. He has been arrested.

         When everyone is armed, the temptation to solve every disagreement by resorting to arms is overwhelming. The killings are sickening, and the lawless situation is dispiriting. But . . . there is reason to hope. All Americans are tired of the senseless killings that are the inevitable result of an armed populace. Fox News conducted a poll that confirms that a majority of Americans—including Republicans—now favor enhanced regulations of firearms. See Mom’s Demand Action, New Fox News Polling Confirms Popularity of Gun Safety Laws Among Democrats, Republicans, and Gun Owners.

         Moms Demand Action summarizes the key points of the Fox polls as follows:

87% of Americans support requiring criminal background checks on all gun buyers, including 83% support from gun-owning households.

81% of Americans support improving enforcement of existing gun laws.

81% of Americans support raising the legal age to buy a gun to 21, including 76% of gun-owning households.

80% of Americans support allowing police to take guns from those considered a danger to themselves or others, also known as Red Flag laws, including 76% of gun-owning households.

61% of Americans support banning assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons, including 50% support from gun-owning households.

         But Republican legislatures are not able to restrain themselves. They are captives of the NRA and the minority of Americans who value guns above all else. The Fox poll suggests that Republicans are vulnerable on a core issue going into 2024. They have picked the wrong side on guns and reproductive liberty. And the economy.

         The fact that Republicans seem hell-bent on creating the worst platform possible for 2024 does nothing to reduce the sting and sorrow of the latest mass shootings. But there is a path forward for Democrats as Americans come to understand the dark future that Republicans are plotting.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

#Gun control #Herblock #Herb Block Foundation #gun violence #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Robert B. Hubbell #automatic weapons #weapons of war #Moms Demand Action

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Mike Luckovich

* * * *

Pride Month and the fight against fascism.  June 5, 2023

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

JUN 5, 2023

         June is Pride Month, a celebration that commemorates “the 1969 Stonewall Uprising in New York and celebrates the LGBTQ community and the fight for equal rights.” For decades, Pride Month celebrated the annual incremental gains in the liberties and progress toward full personhood of LGBTQ people under the law. Today, Pride Month is marked by renewed urgency to protect the rights of LGBTQ people as extremist legislators and governors seek to turn back the clock on rights that were hard won over the last half-century.

         The assault on LGBTQ rights is being promoted by politicians whose aim is to stigmatize a small population to gain power. At its core, attacking vulnerable populations to gain political power is fascism. Commentators and politicians were initially reluctant to label such efforts as fascist, but the historical parallels are inescapable. Comparing MAGA extremism to its historical antecedent is appropriate and necessary to raise the alarm about the ultimate threat posed by the new American fascism embedded in the MAGA base of the Republican Party.

         Of course, the MAGA extremists who are targeting LGBTQ people are also attempting to suppress the rights of Black and Latino Americans and women. But they are engaged in a stepwise process: Their most ferocious and transparent attacks are currently focused on LGBTQ people, but they intend to target minorities and women next—after they have normalized hate against LGBTQ people. We must stop them.

         Over the weekend, reader Doug S. suggested in the Comments section on Saturday that I “devote a couple of newsletters to the issue of fascism in America . . . which is a huge and growing problem much misunderstood.” Doug’s comment prompted a thoughtful discussion of the issue of fascism in America. He wrote, in part,

Although Hitler is an extreme example of fascism, fascism is about much more. It requires a strong leader, millions of followers (e.g., Brownshirts), an objective of some kind of societal purity, a demonization of groups of people in an objective to advance the power of the leader and his followers. Here are some current examples: Trump and “Mexican rapists;” Asians and “Kung flu,” the “Muslim ban,” DeSantis and LBGTQ people; and Marjorie Greene and white Christian nationalists.

         Reader Jody W. expanded on Doug’s point, noting the early efforts in pre-WWII Germany to discriminate against gay men:

Thom Hartman has been focusing strongly on fascism in his Substack blog (Thom Hartmann | Substack). One feature Hartmann points out that I hadn't given much attention is how fascist leaders find a small subset of the population that can be demonized easily with the right propaganda.

Once they have achieved their objective of eliciting hatred and violence toward that group, they know that their success then allows them to broaden propaganda efforts outward to other larger groups. I think that Hitler focused on gay men.

         Many readers pointed to Heather Cox Richardson’s essay in Letters from an American on May 29, 2023, in which Professor Richardson described a US Army pamphlet distributed in March of 1945. The pamphlet was entitled “Fascism” and was designed to inform and equip US soldiers in the WWII version of the information war. Per Professor Richardson, the pamphlet included the following:

They [fascists] maintain themselves in power by use of force combined with propaganda based on primitive ideas of ‘blood’ and ‘race,’ by skillful manipulation of fear and hate,

If we permit discrimination, prejudice, or hate to rob anyone of his democratic rights, our own freedom and all democracy is threatened.

         The above sentence from the Army pamphlet bears repeating:

If we permit discrimination, prejudice, or hate to rob anyone of his democratic rights, our own freedom and all democracy is threatened.

         Pride Month reminds us that if we “look the other way” as dozens of MAGA-dominated state legislatures discriminate against LGBTQ people, their actions “threaten all democracy.”

         The initial anti-LGBTQ bill in Florida has spawned a dozen imitators. See NPR,  (4/10/22), More than a dozen states propose so-called 'Don't Say Gay' bills. Targeting speech related to LGBTQ people is patently unconstitutional. Indeed, fascism itself is, by definition, contrary to the US Constitution. To the extent that MAGA-fascists use the authority of the state to discriminate against subsets of the US populace based on race, gender, or sexual orientation, such efforts will likely fail. See, for example,

CNN Politics, Tennessee anti-drag show law deemed 'unconstitutional' by Trump-appointed federal judge,

ABC News, Oklahoma agrees to not enforce gender-affirming care ban while temporary order sought; and

Lambda Legal, Advocates to File Lawsuit Against New Law Banning Healthcare for Transgender Youth in Texas.

         But even as courts and litigants seek to stop the tide of legislation targeting LGBTQ people, Ron DeSantis is busy signing new legislation intended to stigmatize people based on their gender identity and sexual orientation. See CNN (5/17/23), DeSantis signs into law restrictions on trans Floridians' access to treatments and bathrooms.

         What can we do to stop the creeping menace of fascism? The most obvious solution is to seize control of the state legislatures and state houses that have become the breeding ground for fascism. We are already hard at work on that task, but we must ensure that our efforts are informed by the underlying threat posed by MAGA legislatures—fascism.

         We must raise the alarm in plain words backed by unassailable facts and an accurate recounting of history. I can hear some readers pleading for restraint, for lowering the temperature, for avoiding ugly words that will cause offense. It is not the word “fascism” that is ugly; it is the underlying hate that is ugly. We will never defeat the hate and animus of fascism if we are too polite or timid to call it by its name.

         Many passed the threshold of acknowledgment long ago, while others are coming to that realization now. For some, January 6th was the turning point; for others, it has been the spate of legislation targeted at LGBTQ people over the last eighteen months. Others may be uncomfortable using the term. Wherever you are on that spectrum, we must agree that the fight to protect the liberties and human dignity of LGBTQ people is important for the defense of democracy itself. It is not “their” fight. It is “our” fight. If MAGA extremists succeed in normalizing hate against LGBTQ people, you may be next on their list.

#Mike Luckovich #Mother Nature #Post Precipitation Rainbows #Pride month #fascism #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Robert B. Hubbell #LBGTQ #discrimination #MAGA radicals

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Barry Blitt, The New Yorker  ::  [Scott Horton]

* * * * *

Don’t be distracted!   :::  March 29, 2023

Robert B. Hubbell

         Some topics are so contentious that it is difficult to maintain a linear discussion of cause and effect, problem and solution, and premises and conclusions. Mass shootings at schools is one such topic. Any discussion of efforts to protect school children from gun violence immediately veers into disputations over gun terminology, statistics, mental health, and the Framer’s intent relating to technology they could have never imagined.

         America has a gun problem. We cannot allow ourselves to be distracted from that simple truth by arguments intended to delay, dissemble, or confound. America’s gun problem is that its citizens own too many guns designed to kill people. America is a global outlier in gun ownership and gun violence. That correlation is a complete explanation of why America is the only country in the world that regularly witnesses the slaughter of its schoolchildren.

         Do other factors contribute to mass shootings at schools? Of course, they do. But imagine an America in which private ownership of guns was illegal and non-existent. How many mass shootings at schools would America experience under those conditions? Zero. Guns are the problem.

         By comparison, in nations where gun ownership is severely restricted, school shootings are non-existent or exceedingly rare. In the period from 2009 to 2018, the US experienced 288 school shootings. In the same period, Canada and France experienced 2 each, Germany experienced 1, and the UK experienced 0. America is an outlier in school shootings. The only relevant difference between the US, Canada, France, Germany, and the UK is the number of guns in private hands.

         I am going to great lengths to make the point that guns are the problem because the response from Republicans to the Tennessee school shooting predictably attempted to distract from the issue of guns. Marjorie Taylor Greene blamed gender transition therapy for the shooting, concluding, “Everyone can stop blaming guns now.” Greene also blamed the fact that the killer was undergoing treatment for mental health issues. Still others (including Josh Hawley) contended that the killer was motivated by anti-religious animus. (More on that in a separate article below.)

         A Tennessee member of Congress told reporters that they “were not going to fix it” (gun violence) because we can’t “legislate against evil.” Wrong! The clueless and callous congressman is apparently unaware that Canada, France, Germany, the UK, and other countries have managed to “legislate against the evil” of school shootings by restricting gun ownership. The Tennessee representative said that he keeps his children “safe” by home-schooling them—suggesting that we should cower at home so that gun rights absolutists can carry weapons of war into the public square. See Tennessee Republican says ‘we’re not gonna fix’ school shootings (usatoday.com).

         Tennessee makes the unlicensed purchase and possession of firearms easier than obtaining a driver’s license or a voter ID. The killer was able to legally purchase a half-dozen assault rifles, a pistol, and military ammunition without a background check. Tennessee is currently considering legislation to make it easier to carry firearms in public without a permit.

         Of course, if we do nothing except make it easier to purchase and possess guns, then we are “not going to fix it”—by design. But that is a dereliction of duty and a desecration of the memories of dead schoolchildren who believed that adults would take action to protect them.

         We must not waver in our conviction to ban assault weapons. We must not be distracted by arguments over the “definition” of assault weapons or the fact that assault weapon deaths are a small portion of an obscenely large number of annual gun deaths in the US (45,000+).

         We are right; they are wrong. We constitute the strong majority; they constitute a small and shrinking minority. Should we pursue other remedies like repealing gun manufacturer immunity to civil lawsuits? Yes. But America’s problem is guns designed to kill lots of people quickly with a minimum amount of effort.

         Congress must act. Any politician who does not support an assault weapons ban does not deserve your financial support or your vote. Let them know your position and accept nothing less than an ironclad commitment. When we do that, we will get the results we want—and the protection our children deserve.

Another casualty of the Tennessee school shooting.

         The Tennessee school shooting has engendered much discussion about the gender identity of the killer. I have separated this discussion from the act of the shooting itself to focus on a disturbing consequence of the Tennessee school shooting—conservatives are using the shooting to declare that transgender people are the “enemies” of Christianity. See Rolling Stone, Tucker Carlson Claims’ Trans Movement Is Targeting Christians’.

         Tucker Carlson has said many reprehensible things that justify his removal from Fox. But his comments about transgender people being the “enemies” of Christianity are beyond the pale of a civilized society. I will not repeat Carlson’s heinous remarks, but they are worse than you can imagine. Like Trump, Carlson makes oblique references to a war of violence between transgender people and the Christian church. The statements are quoted in the Rolling Stone article.

         To be clear, transgender people are more frequently the target of violence than other groups. Indeed, a study by the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law found that transgender people are four times more likely to be the target of violent crime than the general population. The anti-LGBTQ hate speech emanating from some sects and congregations in the Christian church normalizes the notion that transgender people are somehow “different” or “less than” and do not deserve to be treated like people.

         It cannot be said enough: Transgender people are people, and if Tucker Carlson can declare a war on trans people by saying they are the “natural enemy” of the Christian church, Carlson and his torchbearers will come for you next. The right-wing war on transgender people is a national emergency that deserves urgent attention from every American. Fascists and strongmen everywhere follow the playbook of first attacking a small and relatively defenseless group before they expand their sights to others.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

#Robert B. Hubbell #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #gun violence #FAUX News #Barry Blitt #the new yorker #Gun Lobby #money in politics #Corrupt GOP #Criminal GOP

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Trump's Mother’s Day greeting.

         I highlight the following for everyone who continues to harbor doubts about Joe Biden’s age or mental fitness. On Mother’s Day in the US, Trump sent the following greeting:

Happy Mother’s Day to ALL, in particular the Mothers, Wives and Lovers of the Radical Left Fascists, Marxists, and Communists who are doing everything within their power to destroy and obliterate our once great Country. Please make these complete Lunatics and Maniacs Kinder, Gentler, Softer and, most importantly, Smarter, so that we can, quickly, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!'

         Besides the obvious omission of Melania, the mother of his son Barron, Trump failed to mention his daughter Ivanka, who is the mother of his grandchildren. While those omissions are inconsiderate and crass, that is not the most important point about the post.

         As one commenter observed in response to the post, “The sooner we all acknowledge Trump is mentally ill, the safer we will be.” Good point! We have accepted and normalized behavior by Trump that would be instantly recognized as possible signs of mental illness in any other American. The accumulated heft of Trump's ravings on Truth Social should be taken as conclusive proof of his derangement.

         And yet . . . Democrats are letting Republicans control the narrative that “Biden is too old” or “not mentally fit” for the job. Oh, yeah? Take a look at the video of Biden in the Fox News story above where he is commenting on Title 42 and the debt ceiling during a rest stop on his five-mile bike ride. In addition to noting that he bought an orchid for Jill Biden for Mother’s Day, he included this gem on negotiations about the debt ceiling (in response to a reporter’s question):

It’s never good to characterize a negotiation in the middle of the negotiations. I remain optimistic because I am a congenital optimist. But I really think there is a desire on their part as well as ours to reach an agreement. And I think we’ll be able to do it.”

         Biden may be slower than he was forty years ago, but he is plenty sharp. Heck, I hope I can still ride a bike at 80 years old. The fact that Biden can do so while parrying with a press pool playing “gotcha” is impressive.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

#Robert B. Hubbell #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Dark Brandon #commentary #political #MAGA tears #TFG

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

The “Alvin Bragg” in us all.   ::  April 12, 2023

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

APR 12, 2023

         Alvin Bragg deserves an “A” for effort. The Manhattan District Attorney made the much-criticized decision to indict Trump for falsifying business records. The seemingly innocuous charges are directed at the cynical “catch-and-kill” scheme designed to protect Trump’s presidential prospects in 2016. Many legal commentators criticized the timing of the charges, which served as the first indictment of a former president. Others have questioned the strength or seriousness of the charges.

         In typical Trump fashion, he has called on his minions to destroy the systems that threaten him. Trump demanded that Jim Jordan investigate the New York justice system that produced the indictment, vilifying Bragg in the process. Jim Jordan complied with Trump’s wish, issuing subpoenas to Bragg and two former prosecutors in his office. The subpoenas called for information that would reveal the strategy and communications at the heart of Bragg’s case against Trump. In short, Jim Jordan allowed a House committee to serve as a member of Trump’s defense team by seeking information beyond the reach of criminal defendants.

         Jordan’s subpoena is an extra-constitutional power grab that violates state sovereignty. Bragg could have simply ignored the subpoena and resisted any effort by the DOJ to enforce it. (Congress has no power to enforce its own subpoenas; it must rely on the DOJ to bring contempt proceedings.) But rather than wait for Jordan to act, Bragg filed a fifty-page complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction that serves as a broadside on Jordan’s constitutional folly.

         The complaint is here: Bragg v Jordan. It is a remarkable document worth reading in the original, at least in part. (I recommend pages 1-7.) Bragg asks a federal district court to issue an injunction to prevent Jordan from using the House Judiciary Committee to interfere in the state's sovereign duty in prosecuting Trump. He also seeks to prevent his two former prosecutors from testifying before the Judiciary Committee.

         The complaint is audacious in its request for relief and stands little chance of success. Enjoining Congress is a heavy lift—especially before a judge appointed by Trump. But Bragg has seized the initiative in challenging an unprecedented attempt to transmogrify Congress into a “national District Attorney” with the power to supervise prosecutions at the state level. Jordan’s gambit will fail, though Bragg’s lawsuit may not be the vehicle that brings it down.

         Still, Bragg has forced Jordan to respond within three weeks to searing allegations that Jordan is actively seeking to interfere in a state criminal prosecution. The complaint alleges, in part,

[Jordan] and his allies have stated they want the District Attorney to come to Capitol Hill to explain himself and to provide a “good argument” to Congress in support of his decision to investigate and prosecute Mr. Trump. And they have threatened that the House of Representatives will hold Alvin Bragg to account for indicting Mr.Trump.

[R]ather than allowing the criminal process to proceed in the ordinary course, Chairman Jordan and the Committee are participating in a campaign of intimidation, retaliation, and obstruction. Mr. Trump in particular, has threatened New York officials with violent and racist vitriol.

Chairman Jordan and the Committee have, in essence, appointed Congress as a super grand jury that can flex its subpoena power to second guess the judgment of New York citizens and interfere with the state criminal justice process.

         Jordan will bellow and howl, pointing to Congress’s rightful power to conduct hearings regarding federal appropriations to states for law enforcement functions. But none of those appropriations include second-guessing Alvin Bragg’s prosecutorial decisions. No longer can Jordan engage in shifting and inconsistent explanations for his effort to rummage through the files of a state prosecution. He must declare his purpose and his goals. In doing so, Jordan and his lawyers will be made to look like the fools they are.

         So, Bragg gets an “A” for effort. He had the courage to indict Trump despite delays in other prosecutions and has now shown the chutzpah to tangle with a powerful House committee. Good for him. We need more of what Bragg’s got, not less.

         I cannot leave this topic without linking to an essay in The Bulwark by Philip Rotner, Sorry Doubters, But Bragg Was Right to Indict Trump. With apologies to several friends who have written on this topic, Rotner’s essay is the best there is. Read it, and you will be convinced not only that Bragg made the right decision but also that he has a strong case.

         Moreover, Rotner makes an unassailable point about those who argue that Bragg should not have indicted Trump on charges that were not “serious enough” to bring against a former president. Rotner responds:

Really?

Anyone who believes that should be honest about it: Just come out and say that certain powerful people are indeed above the law, that the decision on whether or not to indict Trump should have been made based on politics rather than law, and that prosecutorial discretion, in this case, compels turning a blind eye to Trump’s elaborate scheme to cover up blatant violations of election laws by falsifying business records and committing tax fraud.

Count me out.

         Well said. Count me out, too, if you believe Trump should be held to a different standard of justice, or that his case must be “airtight,” or that the prosecutor must “be certain he will not lose.” Those standards appear nowhere in the law and should not apply uniquely to private citizen Trump.

Another problem with Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling is.

         I have been chipping away at the various aspects of Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling that make it so wrong. But it is difficult to know where to begin when an opinion is a judicial confection based on theology rather than law. Two authors have noted a serious (and potentially fatal) flaw in the ruling: the lack of “standing” of the plaintiffs. See Dennis Aftergut and Erwin Chemerinsky, The Hill, Abortion pill issue will show us what this Supreme Court is really made of.

         “Standing” is a constitutional requirement that only injured persons can sue for relief in federal court. The requirement ensures that ideologues do not abuse the federal courts by seeking advisory opinions in cases where no litigant is actually injured. And yet, it appears that Judge Kacsmaryk granted relief to parties that do not have standing.

         As explained by Chemerinsky and Aftergut, a conservative organization of doctors organized itself in Judge Kacsmaryk’s district in order to bring their lawsuit before him. The conservative organization members did not claim they suffered direct injury from the FDA’s approval of mifepristone. Instead, they invoked a generalized, speculative “stress” on doctors everywhere who must deal with complications from mifepristone:

The judge said that the conservative organization could sue on behalf of doctors because “adverse events from chemical abortion drugs can overwhelm the medical system and place’ enormous pressure and stress’ on doctors during emergencies and complications.”

         The plaintiffs presented no evidence to support their fanciful argument of a medical system overwhelmed by a drug that is statistically safer than Tylenol. If the US Supreme Court applies the law to the facts, it should order Kacsmaryk to dismiss the lawsuit for lack of standing. More to come!

A thought experiment about gun deaths.

         Charlie Sykes penned a powerful essay about the numbness that overwhelms us as we hear about a seemingly endless stream of mass shootings. See Charlies Sykes, Morning Shots Newsletter, Numbed America.

         Sykes writes,  

But we have gotten to the point where coverage of one slaughter is interrupted by breaking news of yet another. And our doom loop of thoughts, prayers, debate, and inertia has become numbingly familiar.

Legislators across the country have rushed to protect children from being exposed to books like “My Two Mommies,” and the story of Anne Frank, but not from being blown apart by killers with weapons of war and high-capacity magazines.

         Sykes notes that the typical response of politicians like Senator Rick Scott and Ted Cruz is to offer “thoughts and prayers.” Sykes then invites us to engage in a thought experiment:

Instead of talking about the routine slaughter of children and our fellow citizens in schools, banks, nightclubs, and grocery stores, imagine we were talking about terrorist attacks.

Imagine that there had been 145 attacks from members of the Sinaloa Cartel, or that dozens of airplanes had been hijacked and hundreds of passengers killed.

Would Rick Scott merely offer thoughts and prayers? Would Ted Cruz suggest that we need more locked doors? Armored backpacks? More armed guards? More bans on drag queen story hours?

         The point of the thought experiment is that if the deaths of innocent school children and coworkers were from a different source than Americans wielding assault rifles, Congress would surely find the will to act. They would not throw their hands in the air and claim the problem cannot be fixed.

         Remember that fact next time you hear a cowardly politician claim, “We can’t legislate against evil.” We can. It’s called banning assault rifles and taking guns away from people who are a threat to themselves or others.

To prove that point, Washington state has taken the first step by banning the manufacture or sale of assault rifles: The Hill, Washington state Senate passes assault-style weapons ban. And Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed an executive order permitting the removal of guns from people who present a danger to themselves or others. See Politico, Tennessee governor calls for law removing guns from dangerous people. (Lee, of course, suffered the loss of a close friend in the Tallahassee shooting last week.)

         Let’s hope these steps portend the beginning of a national trend.

Concluding Thoughts.

         I highlighted Alvin Bragg’s lawsuit because it shows a willingness to engage on the field of battle that seems missing from the Democratic Party’s usual response to outrageous behavior by MAGA extremists. Engaging our adversaries is important, even if we do not always win.

         Dominion Voting Systems and E. Jean Carroll will commence trials against Fox News and Donald Trump for defamation this week. They may win, they may not. But Fox News and Trump will think twice the next time they utter false and defamatory statements. Trump and Rupert Murdoch will be forced to appear in court and endure public scrutiny in a forum where they are not in control.

         There are lots of “Alvin Braggs” out there, fighting the good fight every day. Most days, they do so in relative obscurity until it turns out that their “behind-the-scenes” labor has saved us from catastrophe. So, tonight, a tip of the hat to all of you who work every day, in ways large and small, to fortify our democracy. The sum of your efforts is the vital force that sustains democracy on a daily basis! Thank you!

         Talk to you tomorrow!

#commentary #Robert B. Hubbell #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Alvin Bragg #Charlie Sykes #The Bulwark #Rule of Law #Andy Singer

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Jack Ohmann, Sacramento Bee

* * * *

We cannot live in fear.  ::: April 6, 2023

Robert B. Hubbell

         Before all votes were counted in Justice Janet Protasiewicz’s commanding win in Wisconsin, Democrats began to worry that the GOP supermajority in the legislature would impeach and remove the newly elected justice from office. The panic was created by the election of a Republican to the Wisconsin senate on Tuesday, a victory that gives the GOP enough votes to convict Justice Janet Protasiewicz in an impeachment trial.

         The details of the threat are described by The Guardian, as follows:

[Dan Knodl] has said he would consider impeaching Protasiewicz, who is currently a circuit court judge in Milwaukee, if she remained on the bench there. He did not say whether he would consider impeaching Protasiewicz as a supreme court justice.

         Should we take the threat seriously? Of course, we would be fools not to! Should we live in fear of that prospect? Absolutely not! In the immortal words of Brendan Sullivan, “We are not potted plants.” If the Wisconsin GOP decides to disenfranchise the one million plus citizens of Wisconsin who voted for Justice Janet Protasiewicz, those one million voters will have something to say about that development—and it will not be good for Republicans. Indeed, it would be electoral suicide for Wisconsin Republicans.

         Justice Janet Protasiewicz’s election demonstrated that Republicans in Wisconsin are hemorrhaging support in major suburbs, a previous GOP stronghold. See this discussion by Steve Kornacki on MSNBC. Disenfranchising the voters in the suburbs of Madison and Milwaukee will do nothing to bolster GOP prospects in those former strongholds.

         And then there is this: Imagine for a moment that the Wisconsin GOP decides to overturn the mandate of the people by removing Justice Janet Protasiewicz. Would those voters “go gently into that good night?” Or would they, for example, call for a general strike? Or walk out of state, county, and municipal offices to shut down the government? Or hold continuous massive demonstrations in front of the state Capitol? Or all the above?

         (Hint to Wisconsin Republicans about your future if you remove Justice Janet Protasiewicz: Look at ongoing protests in Tennessee over the GOP legislature’s callous and underwhelming response to the mass shooting in Tallahassee last week.)

         If Republicans in Wisconsin want to tell Democrats they have no voice in running the state in accordance with democratic rules, there is no reason for Democrats to support an institution that exists merely to oppress them. Do I think it will come to that? I don’t.

         But it doesn’t matter what I believe about the likelihood that the threat will materialize. My point is that we cannot live in fear. We are not powerless, we are not potted plants, and Wisconsin Democrats are shifting the electoral landscape by championing reproductive liberty, protection from gun violence, and fair elections. That is a powerful combination of issues on which Democrats have the high ground—politically and morally.

         We should resist every effort and all talk of impeaching Justice Janet Protasiewicz. But no one should live in fear of that development. Indeed, post-Dobbs, Democrats have been on a winning streak in which reproductive liberty has been front and center. See NYTimes, Wisconsin Rout Points to Democrats’ Enduring Post-Dobbs Strength.

         But even if Republicans remove Justice Janet Protasiewicz, the Democratic Governor Tony Evers fills the vacancy by appointment. Article VII, Wisconsin Constitution - Ballotpedia (“The vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the governor, which shall continue until a successor is elected and qualified.”)

         Details aside, if Republicans decide that we must have a political fight over whether elections matter in Wisconsin, then we must not shrink from that fight or live in fear. Indeed, if Republicans insist on forcing the issue, the sooner the better. They will lose; we will win.

         And the same logic applies to the indictment of Donald Trump, where similar angst is driving public handwringing and second-guessing by commentators. Republican prosecutors in red-state counties across the nation are grumbling about indicting President Biden. Should we take the threat seriously? Of course! We would be fools not to. Should we live in fear of that happening? Absolutely not!

         The lunatic conspiracy theories on which Biden might be indicted would be litigated through the US Supreme Court—which, as of this writing, still recognizes Article II of the Constitution. The theories being bandied about include a ludicrous allegation that Biden has “opened” the southern border when, in fact, he has (unfortunately) reimposed many of the Trump-era policies. See, e.g., Los Angeles Times, Biden's new immigration strategy expands on Trump border policy and continues Title 42.

         What about “Hunter Biden’s laptop? Be my guest! Or claims that Biden runs an international pedophilia ring? GOP prosecutors couldn’t do more to drive persuadable Independents away from their fringe political leader, Donald Trump. Or a claim that private citizen Joe Biden was (allegedly) on a single conference call with his son in 2017 that discussed a Chinese energy investment? Last time I checked, “conducting business” is not a crime.

         So, we cannot permit ourselves to be dissuaded from upholding the law because Republicans threaten to break the law. This point is made in a brilliant essay by Josh Marshall in his Editor’s Blog,

But let’s address the argument head on. Will all future presidents now face a gauntlet of post-presidential judicial scrutiny?

It’s worth remembering that Donald Trump is the first and only president in American history to attempt a coup d’etat to remain in office illegally and that was before any history of presidential prosecutions. The problem isn’t incentives. It’s Donald Trump.

It amounts to the same specious argument . . . “Don’t follow the law because we’ll break the law”.

         We have no choice but to enforce the law; indeed, it is our duty if we want to maintain a civilized society governed by laws rather than brute force. So, can we please stop the collective handwringing about prosecuting Trump for something that every other American would be prosecuted for if they engaged in the same conduct? I, too, regret that the Manhattan indictment was first, but that is not Alvin Bragg’s fault.

         After the rash of articles on Tuesday explaining how weak the case against Donald Trump is, supporters of the case made strong arguments that it is no different than other cases successfully prosecuted by Bragg. And on the key question of whether state or federal election crimes can be used to leverage misdemeanors into felonies, commentators with extensive experience in New York responded, “Of course, they can!” See Karen Friedman Agnifilo and Norman Eisen op-ed in NYTimes, We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong.

With the release of the indictment and accompanying statement of facts, we can now say that there’s nothing novel or weak about this case. The charge of creating false financial records is constantly brought by Mr. Bragg and other New York D.A.s. In particular, the creation of phony documentation to cover up campaign finance violations has been repeatedly prosecuted in New York. That is exactly what Mr. Trump stands accused of.

         So, depending on which legal commentator you cite, the case is “novel” and “weak,” or “routine” and “strong.” Here’s my advice: Let Alvin Bragg do what prosecutors do and stop worrying about bad faith attacks on the prosecution. Will Kevin McCarthy succeed in forcing Alvin Bragg to appear before a House committee? Maybe, but I doubt it. If he does, my money is on Alvin Bragg being able to handle himself.

         But, as in Wisconsin, if House Republicans believe their path to victory in 2024 involves “defunding the FBI and DOJ” to rescue an indicted, twice-impeached, failed coup plotter who is raging against the trial judge, his family, and the prosecutor, Republicans have made the wrong bet. We should be confident in that assessment. After all, Trump lost in 2018, 2020, and 2022 using the same grievance-based script he repeated at Mar-a-Lago after his indictment.

         So, let’s not obsess over the bad-faith, self-defeating tactics Republicans are using. If Republicans decide that we must have a political fight over whether former presidents are above the law, then we must not shrink from that fight or live in fear. Indeed, if Republicans insist on forcing the issue, the sooner the better. They will lose; we will win.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

#Rule of Law #Robert B. Hubbell #Robert B. Hubbel Newsletter #Trump Indictment #Wisconsin #lawless Republicans #voter suppression #gerrymandering #minority rule