Harris-Walz: The First Rally

[NB: check the byline, thanks. /~Rayne]

The last thread is getting unwieldy and there’s a lot to discuss after tonight’s first rally in Philadelphia.

Here’s the video if you didn’t get to watch it:

So many memes launched today as well; you have to imagine Team Trump shielding their fragile orange bawbag from the deluge.

I think this one might be my favorite so far:

source: https://mstdn.social/@[email protected]/112917576144993599

Heh. Share a link to your favorites in thread below.

Share this entry

WalzPilled

According to multiple outlets and flight records, the Vice President has picked Tim Walz as her running mate.

Which means we’re in for some awesome Midwest wholesome fun.

Chatter away.

Update: Here’s the campaign press release.

Today, Vice President Kamala Harris announced her selection of Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate in the 2024 presidential election. Together, Vice President Harris and Governor Walz will fight for a future that strengthens our democracy, protects reproductive freedom, and ensures every person has the opportunity to not just get by, but to get ahead.

Vice President Harris and Governor Walz have spent their careers fighting for working families across the country. As a prosecutor, attorney general, senator, and vice president, Vice President Harris has taken on the big banks, led the fight for reproductive freedom, and stood with our allies against Putin’s aggression. Governor Walz is a champion for working families, a retired Army National Guardsman, a former high school teacher and football coach, Member of Congress, and two term governor where he cut taxes for working families, lowered the cost of insulin, and protected women’s right to choose.

Vice President Harris wrote: “I am proud to announce that I’ve asked Governor Tim Walz to be my running mate. One of the things that stood out to me about Tim is how his convictions on fighting for middle class families run deep. It’s personal. As a governor, a coach, a teacher, and a veteran, he’s delivered for working families like his own. We are going to build a great partnership. We start out as underdogs but I believe together, we can win this election.”

Later today, Vice President Harris and Governor Walz will make their first joint campaign appearance at a rally with thousands of supporters in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This event is the first of a five-day barnstorm to introduce the Harris-Walz ticket to voters in key battleground states.

From now until Election Day, Vice President Harris and Governor Walz will continue to crisscross the country to outline the choice between two very different visions for the future: Vice President Harris and Governor Walz, who are running to move the country forward, not backward — or Donald Trump and JD Vance, who are running to enact their extreme and dangerous Project 2025 agenda that will roll back Americans’ rights and freedoms, hurt the middle class, and threaten our democracy.

Governor Tim Walz

Governor Walz is a champion for America’s working families. He enlisted in the Army National Guard, rising to the rank of Command Sergeant Major. After attending college thanks to the GI Bill, Tim Walz served his community as a high school teacher and football coach – taking his team to the state championship for the first time in the school’s history. He became a member of Congress in a Republican district by representing the needs of farmers and rural America. Governor Walz has done more to help middle class families get ahead than any other statewide leader in recent memory. That experience makes him the ideal running mate for Kamala Harris, who has taken on the big banks, led the fight for reproductive freedom, and stood with our allies against Putin’s aggression during her time as a prosecutor, Attorney General, Senator, and Vice President.

As governor, Walz lowered the cost of insulin to $35 per month for many Minnesotans. He eliminated junk fees. And, he signed paid leave into law so that parents can take care of sick family without losing their job. Governor Walz stood up for fundamental freedoms and made Minnesota the first state to pass a law codifying abortion rights after the Supreme Court overturned Roe. He funded Minnesota police departments, putting more cops on the street and investing in body cameras, and established universal background checks for gun purchases. And, he worked across the aisle to pass a bipartisan infrastructure package.

A lifelong Midwesterner, Governor Walz grew up working on his family farm. He enlisted in the Army National Guard when he turned 17, following in his father’s – a veteran’s – footsteps. During his 24 years of National Guard service, he specialized in heavy artillery and retired as the highest-ranking enlisted National Guard soldier in southern Minnesota.

Governor Walz is a gun owner, avid pheasant hunter, and supporter of the Second Amendment – and he, like millions of gun owners, believes that Congress must do more to tackle gun violence in our communities. As governor, he established universal background checks for gun purchases.

For six terms, Governor Walz represented Minnesota’s First Congressional District – a conservative-leaning district where he was only the second Democrat elected since 1890. The son of an Army veteran and a retired Army National Guard member himself, Walz was the ranking member on the House Veterans Affairs Committee, where he passed legislation to help stem veterans’ suicides.

Governor Walz met his wife Gwen teaching high school in Nebraska before moving to Gwen’s home state of Minnesota. A former union member, Tim taught high school for two decades.

Governor Walz and Mrs. Walz have two children, Hope and Gus. Governor Walz and Mrs. Walz struggled with years of fertility challenges and had their daughter, Hope, through reproductive health care like IVF – further cementing his commitment to ensuring all Americans have access to this care.

Share this entry

After CNN and NYT Get Punked by Trump, They Prioritize Free Dick Stories Over Bribery

I spent the weekend with family, so was a bit distracted as the US media had an epically stupid weekend (and today is a bank holiday, so). Twice, multiple outlets, including CNN and the NYT displayed the least competence to serve as a guardian for democracy.

It started when Trump, just hours after telling Fox’s Maria Bartiromo that he didn’t need to debate Kamala Harris because the Vice President was already known, tweeted on his social media site that he had “agreed” to a debate on Fox News.

There were lots of Irish outlets who might not know better. CNN should, but their first instinct was to publish a claim that the debate had been switched; by the end of the day they figured out the ploy.

NYT kept trying — as Margaret Sullivan and others noted, at first and second, they were struggling more than Drudge to understand what happened.

Headlines in the New York Times — probably the most influential mainstream news organization in the nation — matter even more. They make their way into the news ecosystem and can pollute the waters.

That’s why it’s so confounding when such headlines are either wrong or misleading. Consider this one in this past week’s New York Times:

Trump Agrees to a Fox News Debate with Harris on Sept. 4

Donald Trump speaks with Rachel Scott of ABC News at the National Association of Black Journalists conference on July 31 in Chicago. Trump’s comments during the event spawned poor headline choices / Getty

Reading this, a headline-grazer might think that the former president’s agreement was all that was necessary to make a Fox debate a reality. That Kamala Harris was on board. And that Donald Trump is ready for a fine, public-spirited exchange of views.

But that, of course, is not the case. In fact, Trump had backed out of a planned debate on Sept. 10th on ABC. He then came up with a new date, unilaterally changed the venue to Fox and decided it would be in an arena with a big audience, not in a studio with no audience.

Consider the Drudge Report’s headline, which — though not expressed in restrained journalistic language — does manage to get the truth across.

RATTLED TRUMP ONLY WANTS FOX DEBATE

[snip]

The Times, probably responding to the criticism, changed the headline online — twice!

Round 2: Trump Proposes a Fox News Debate

Round 3: Trump Backs Out of ABC Debate and Proposes One on Fox.

Then they faceplanted again, decided that Daily Mail was their assignment editor. They decided to chase the story of an affair Doug Emhoff had years before he even met Kamala Harris that — unlike some of Trump’s, did not involve sexual assault or dozens of felonies to cover up the affair. Then the NYT decided to join in the toddler chase, assigning two journalists to the story that still did not remotely involve any actions that could impact Harris’ fitness to be President (and adopted a double standard with Melania and any dalliances she has had).

Neither of these outlets have yet matched WaPo’s report on the suspect $10M payment via Egypt that kept Trump in his first race (even though CNN had led on the story prior to the WaPo’s recent story).

Indeed, when CNN did a story purporting to describe how Trump’s campaign has stumbled in the last two weeks, they didn’t mention the damning new evidence that Trump has been working for foreign countries all along.

American democracy has almost entirely spun free of any substance. And Trump is exploiting that situation to avoid any accountability.

Share this entry

Fridays with Nicole Sandler

Note: I made a mistake in this. It wasn’t Mike Flynn himself who met with Kyrill Dmitriev in the Seychelles. It was Erik Prince, who was very excited about the tie to the Emirates in the meeting.

Listen on Spotify (transcripts available)

Listen on Apple (transcripts available)

Share this entry

Tanya Chutkan Finally Gets the Trump Case Back

SCOTUS finally remanded its immunity decision to the DC Circuit and the DC Circuit has, in turn, remanded it back to Judge Tanya Chutkan.

So Trump will finally have to deal with his actions on January 6.

As Brandi Buchman noted, Trump will have to file his appeal of the E Jean Carroll verdict by August 14.

In other scheduling news, Judge Noreika has scheduled the Hunter Biden sentencing for November 13 — much later than it had to be, delaying any of the appeals until such time that the President will have to be considering pardoning his son, if he plans to do that. She has yet to rule on Hunter’s Rule 29 motions, but I guess we know how she’ll rule.

Hunter’s tax case is still scheduled for September, and prosecutors continue to insist they can introduce allegations of influence peddling that have nothing to do with his alleged tax evasion and non-payment.

 

Share this entry

Michael Sherwin Failed to Brief Merrick Garland on Trump’s Suspected Egyptian Payment

WaPo significantly advances the story of the suspected $10 million Egyptian payment to Trump — including the role of China in it.

The investigation started when the CIA got a tip from a reliable informant that Egypt had paid Trump the money.

In early 2017, Justice Department officials were briefed on initial reports from the Central Intelligence Agency that Sisi had sought to send money to Trump.

The intelligence had come partly from a confidential informant who had previously provided useful information, according to people familiar with the matter.

That led to Mueller’s focus on Trump’s decision to inject the same amount into his campaign after meeting with Abdel Fattah El-Sisi in September 2016.

Trump repeatedly declined — until Oct. 28, roughly five weeks after the meeting with Sisi, when he announced the $10 million infusion.

As described, Mueller focused on Trump’s finances in 2016, but prohibited investigators from looking at his finances after he became President. Instead, they subpoenaed the Egyptian National Bank, which led to the extended legal fight. Materials finally provided by the bank showed a transfer from Shanghai…

The Research and Studies Center opened an account at the bank’s Heliopolis branch in November 2015, the bank’s records showed. In August 2016, the center opened a second account, this time in the bank’s Shanghai branch. Five days after that, a company that investigators believed was tied to an Egyptian oligarch initiated a transfer of $10 million into the center’s Shanghai account, records showed.

The transfer was held up, then cleared for deposit in Shanghai in December, the records showed. The same amount was transferred from that account to the center’s account at the Heliopolis branch shortly before the cash withdrawal there on Jan. 15, 2017.

Three days later, the center closed its account in Shanghai. Within 90 days, its account in Heliopolis was closed, too.

… And following that, a request from a likely Egyptian intelligence front to withdraw the same sum in cash.

A short handwritten letter dated Jan. 15, 2017, in which an organization called the Research and Studies Center asked that the bank “kindly withdraw a sum of US $9,998,000” from its Heliopolis branch, located about seven miles from Cairo International Airport. According to the bank records, employees assembled the money that same day, entirely in U.S. $100 bills, put it in two large bags and kept it in the bank manager’s office until two men associated with the account and two others came and took away the cash.

In summer 2019, after being spun under DC USAO, the FBI was asking for permission to subpoena records from Trump’s 2017 finances. But then Jessie Liu met with Bill Barr, reviewed the underlying CIA intelligence herself, and grew hesitant about further investigative steps.

Sometime after her June meetings with the FBI, Liu met with Barr to discuss the Egypt case. He urged her to personally review the underlying information from the CIA that had prompted the opening of the criminal investigation two years earlier, according to people with knowledge of the discussions.

[snip]

Sometime around September 2019, FBI agents and a supervisor from the field office presented what they considered an ultimatum to Liu: authorize getting Trump’s 2017 bank records or it wasn’t worth continuing to investigate, according to people later briefed on the exchange. Liu listened but turned them down; she said she wasn’t closing the case and was open to subpoenaing Trump’s records later on if agents turned up more compelling evidence to justify doing so, these people said.

After Barr replaced Liu with first Tim Shea and then Michael Sherwin, Sherwin shut down the investigation on June 7, 2020.

Sherwin, the only person quoted in the piece, taunted that Merrick Garland could have reopened the case.

In an interview with The Post, Sherwin said Biden administration appointees, including Attorney General Merrick Garland, who took over the department months later, could have relaunched the probe if they disagreed. “The case was closed without prejudice,” he said. “Anyone could have reopened the case the second I left that office.”

The case was not reopened.

Except, as the last paragraph of the story describes, partly amid the rush of cases in the wake of January 6, Garland and his top aides were never briefed on the case in their first year in office — which for Garland, who wasn’t sworn in until March 11, 2021, would be March 2022.

Garland, senior members of his team, and Biden’s new U.S. attorney in D.C. were never briefed on the Egypt investigation in their first year in office, one former and one current government official told The Post.

The Statute of Limitations expired on January 15, 2022.

There’s still at least one hole in this story.

The money was deposited in Shanghai in August 2016. That’s before the September meeting between al-Sisi and Trump. Though at a time when Trump’s people — including both George Papadophoulos, who played a key role in setting up the meeting with al-Sisi, and Walid Phares, who was investigated for ties to Middle Eastern intelligence — were negotiating a meeting with Russia, in London, in September 2016.

Papadopoulos communicated with Clovis and Walid Phares, another member of the foreign policy advisory team, about an offthe-record meeting between the Campaign and Russian government officials or with Papadopoulos’s other Russia connections, Mifsud and Timofeev.480 Papadopoulos also interacted directly with Clovis and Phares in connection with the summit of the Transatlantic Parliamentary Group on Counterterrorism (TAG), a group for which Phares was co-secretary general.481 On July 16, 2016, Papadopoulos attended the TAG summit in Washington, D.C., where he sat next to Clovis (as reflected in the photograph below).482

Although Clovis claimed to have no recollection of attending the TAG summit,483 Papadopoulos remembered discussing Russia and a foreign policy trip with Clovis and Phares during the event.484 Papadopoulos’s recollection is consistent with emails sent before and after the TAG summit. The pre-summit messages included a July 11, 2016 email in which Phares suggested meeting Papadopoulos the day after the summit to chat, 485 and a July 12 message in the same chain in which Phares advised Papadopoulos that other summit attendees “are very nervous about Russia. So be aware.”486 Ten days after the summit, Papadopoulos sent an email to Mifsud listing Phares and Clovis as other “participants” in a potential meeting at the London Academy of Diplomacy.487

Finally, Papadopoulos’s recollection is also consistent with handwritten notes from a journal at that time.488

[snip]

These are the notes that Papadopoulos professed to be unable to read when meeting with Mueller’s investigators.

This story is also silent about Russia’s role in convincing Egypt to withdraw a UN resolution against Israel after Trump intervened in December 2016.

Finally, recall that Erik Prince and Kyrill Dmitriev met in the Seychelles on January 11 and 12.

Share this entry

Trump Aborts Interview after Smart Black Women Ask Tough Questions

I’m an outlier about the value of the disastrous interview Donald Trump just did with three Black women journalists: Rachel Scott, Kadia Goba, and Harris Faulkner. I think the interview will help Trump reclaim the attention of the press. I think he used it to seed spurious attacks on Vice President Harris that will work to placate his dumb trolls. And I think journalists are falling into the same patterns of enabling this atrocious behavior as they have for years.

The interview was delayed a half hour. Journalists involved said a fight over whether the journalists could fact check in real time caused the delay. Trump claimed there was a sound problem.

Scott started by asking what Trump would say to Black voters after the shoddy treatment he has given to Black people (this Aaron Fritscher thread documents that all of them were things Trump himself said, but they include his attack on the Squad and other Black journalists) and his hosting of Nick Fuentes. Trump responded by accusing Scott of being rude and ABC of being fake news. He filibustered. His mispronounced “Kamala.” She asked for an answer.

She then asked if it was appropriate for other Republicans to call Harris a DEI hire. Trump deflected the question by asking Scott to define the term. Ultimately, he didn’t answer that question. He then falsely claimed that Harris switched her identity from Indian to Black. “All of a sudden she became a Black person.”

Trump’s most noxious supporters were prepared for that attack line, with Laura Loomer releasing Harris’ birth certificate, claiming that because it lists her father as Jamaican, she’s not Black. Others posted old articles that describe her as South Asian without ever saying she’s not also Black.

As is the general pattern, journalists ran to ask Republicans in Congress about Trump’s disgusting behavior. As is normal, they instead gaslighted, daring journalists to call them out, yet another means by which Trump disciplines Republicans, by demanding they act stupid for him in public.

And then a bunch of mainstream outlets parroted Trump’s words, without labeling them clearly as false, much less demonstrating that Trump staged his tantrum to attract attention by being as outrageous as possible.

It’s certainly possible that, this time, it’ll be different. It’s certainly possible that, this time, Trump won’t succeed in reclaiming the media attention without ever paying a price for his racism. It’s certainly possible that Kamala Harris will be able to flip this tired old script.

It’s certainly possible, too, that American voters are simply uninterested in the latest Birther conspiracy peddled by a conman.

But to my mind, one of the most important takeaways is that the former President couldn’t even take this damned interview to term: According to Scott, his handlers halted the interview after around 35 minutes, just as he got his first question about Project 2025.

He aborted an interview after three smart Black women asked tough questions.

Share this entry

America’s Whimpering Democracy Is Trump’s Past, as Well as Future

There was a bit of a kerfuffle yesterday in response to an Erik Wemple claim that the media has not shirked media coverage of the risk posed by Trump while focusing non-stop on Biden’s (but not Trump’s) age.

Wemple made a list — and given the prevalence of lefty columnists, not a particularly impressive one, once you look closely.

But it also betrays the degree to which journalists have the same blind spots I have noted in NYT’s series on the subject (which makes up 15 entries in Wemple’s list): they ignore or understate how much of this Trump did in his first term and continues to do it via his right wing allies in Congress.

Charlie Savage, Maggie Haberman, and Jonathan Swan keep teaming up to write the same story over and over: A second Trump term is going to be bad … really bad.

Just some of these stories, in reverse order from Tuesday’s latest installment, are:

There are several aspects to these stories: a bid to eliminate civil service protections, a personalization of power, and the elevation of people who proved willing to abuse power in his first term: Russel Vought (who helped obstruct the Ukraine investigation), Stephen Miller, and Johnny McEntee (who even before January 6 was making a willingness to invoke the Insurrection Act a litmus test for hiring at DOD), and Jeffrey Clark.

The series, thus far, skirts the language of authoritarianism and fascism.

[snip]

These stories admit that Trump did some of this in his first term. But they describe a process of retribution by the guy who got elected — with abundant assistance from Maggie Haberman — on a platform of “Lock her up!,” who breached the norm of judicial independence 24 days into office when he asked Jim Comey to “let this” Mike Flynn “thing go,” as something that took a while to “ramp up.”

[snip]

[T]hese pieces always vastly understate how much politicization Trump pulled off in his first term, and never describe how that politicization continues at the hands of people like Jim Jordan.

Such reporting will be most salient, I believe, if reports show voters the costs of such abuses of the judicial system have already had and are already having.

Even as the kerfuffle was unrolling, Rosa Brooks published a piece in The Bulwark describing the lessons from a series of five nonpartisan simulations on how American democracy might fare if Trump wins in November.

The simulations showed that the risk Trump poses isn’t necessarily the immediate totalitarianism or civil war liberals sometimes raise, but instead targeted persecution against those who speak up.

The exercises produced some “good news”: None of the simulations devolved into mass violence or civil conflict, and Team Trump found it difficult to fully execute its most ambitious plans. For instance, in one of our exercises, Trump’s efforts to detain millions of undocumented migrants floundered; the money and infrastructure for such a massive operation proved too challenging.

[snip]

High-profile nonprofit groups are undergoing IRS audits, forcing their senior staff to spend most of their time huddled with accountants and lawyers. More university presidents have resigned in the face of investigations, audits, and threats to yank federal funding over curricula and the actions of student protests. Meanwhile, a number of high-profile journalists are the targets of leak investigations. The owners of several major media outlets are under investigation for specious criminal tax code violations, and the FCC is considering revoking the broadcast licenses of a dozen television stations. Liz Cheney, Adam Schiff, and retired Gen. Mark Milley are under investigation for allegedly mishandling classified materials.

The nation’s streets are largely peaceful. But around the country, numerous civil servants, reporters, teachers, librarians, election officials, and other community leaders are being doxxed and threatened.

You can imagine how this unfolds. Most people will see the writing on the wall: Speak out, and life becomes unpleasant. Your address and children’s names will be posted on social media. You’ll get a nasty letter from the IRS. Perhaps your brother’s undocumented girlfriend will go to work one day and never come home, and you won’t know if she’s been detained or deported. Your pregnant niece might be stopped by police as she drives from Texas to New Mexico, and grilled about whether she’s heading to an abortion clinic. Maybe the FBI and Homeland Security will use undercover agents—or even government surveillance capabilities—to spy on organizations from school boards to church groups, in search of “illegals,” “Christian-hating communists,” the “woke,” and other “vermin.”

The chilling effect on our politics would be intense. Ordinary citizens would self-censor. Many federal, state, and local leaders, rightly worried about the effects on themselves and their families, will quietly step down from their roles.

Definitely read the piece. As you do, though, consider the ways that this, too, is a story of Trump’s past and present, not just his future.

Just yesterday, for example, FBI’s Deputy Direct Paul Abbate said that he “absolutely did not” sign off on the settlement of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page’s lawsuits and “would never sign off on something like that.”

The allegations in the Privacy Act part of the complaint — the only part included in the settlement — show that before the misconduct allegations against Peter Strzok had been resolved, someone shared his texts with the White House, which in turn got leaked to the press before Sarah Isgur released them en masse, with Rod Rosenstein’s approval.

59. Between late July and December 2017, someone from the Department of Justice alerted the White House to the existence of these texts and, at least, their general content. On information and belief, officials in the White House, in turn, began to contact members of the news media about the texts as a means to try to undermine the Special Counsel’s investigation.

60. No later than December 2, 2017, at least two news organizations printed stories including characterizations of the contents of some of Special Agent Strzok’s texts.

[snip]

62. On December 12, 2017, DOJ willfully and intentionally disclosed to numerous news outlets approximately 375 text messages to, from, and about Special Agent Strzok. In a press release, DOJ called this act a “public release” of the messages.

Years ago, I was told this was a clear violation of the Privacy Act. Having gone through discovery, DOJ appears to agree.

By saying he would never sign a settlement with someone targeted in violation of the law, Abbate was (wittingly or not) stating an unwillingness to make things right after the government violates the rights of a long-valued FBI employee. And Abbate has to know that there are plenty of right wing agents who never got disciplined for sending pro-Trump texts on their phones, including the agents who handled one of the informants targeting the Clinton Foundation.

Republicans threw a similar tizzy fit after DOJ settled Andrew McCabe’s lawsuit for a similar violation of his rights — in that case, of his due process rights. And in McCabe’s case, granting McCabe’s due process would likely have revealed that the allegations he willfully lied about his role in a story that exposed the investigation into the Clinton Foundation were unproven.

The time to stand up to the kind of individualized targeting that Trump has long used is now, was last year, was seven years ago, when the extended campaign to turn Strzok and Page into the face of the Deep State first began.

Waiting to learn the outcome of the election is a cop out.

The time to catalog the damage Trump has already done by the kind of treatment the Bulwark projects in the future is now. All the more so given that its anonymous participants, described to include “former senior officials from President Trump’s first administration, along with former senators and members of Congress,” surely include a number of people who’ve received this treatment. If the way to combat Trump involves solidarity to prevent this isolating doxxing, then such a group is precisely the kind of group that should set an example.

LOLGOP and I are working on a podcast episode that talks about all the people at the FBI that Trump targeted: in addition to Strzok and Page, McCabe and Jim Comey, every person mentioned in the Carter Page IG Report, a number of key witnesses in the Durham investigation, often leveraged to cultivate the testimony Durham needed to sustain his conspiracy theory. That retaliation did real damage to the FBI’s expertise on Russia.

But it has continued even since Trump left office. After first being investigated in the wake of the IG Report, a top Russian analyst, Brian Auten, remains a target because he tracked Russia efforts to influence the 2020 election. Laura Dehmlow — then a unit chief in FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force and now the Deputy Director of the National Counterintelligence Center, was bullied because she didn’t come out and say that the FBI had obtained a laptop attributed to Hunter Biden from a computer repairman (which remains inconclusive regarding any Russian influence). Tim Thibault, who in 2016 was one of the people who predicated investigations of the Clinton Foundation, was targeted in part because he made the decision — at the request of FBI agents trying to preserve the integrity of the Hunter Biden investigation — to shut down Peter Schweizer as an informant. Elvis Chan, long one of the most important FBI agents in fighting Russian hacking, was misrepresented as part of the Twitter Files, and ever since, the House GOP has been demanding he sit for a deposition either represented by his personal lawyer or the FBI’s lawyer.

Other members of the “Deep State” that Trump or his flunkies have targeted include:

  • The 51 former spooks who signed a letter stating that the release of the Hunter Biden laptop before the 2020 elections “has the earmarks of a Russian information operation”
  • Witnesses at either of Trump’s impeachments
  • January 6 Committee witnesses and members
  • Capitol Hill Police who testified in January 6 trials
  • Witnesses in the Durham investigation
  • Former Trump officials who’ve spoken out against Trump (again, these likely include some participants in Bulwark’s simulations)
  • Members of the Hunter Biden investigative team, including those who were engaged in the more aggressive targeting of him
  • Every judge, prosecutor, and identified FBI agent who has investigated Trump (note: Aileen Cannon was also targeted)
  • Judges who’ve overseen January 6 trials or those of Trump’s associates
  • Those who didn’t support Jim Jordan as speaker

This has a noticeable effect. Not only does Abbate (along with Chris Wray) cow before Congress rather than explain that Trump’s Administration violated the law, which has repercussions, but it led the FBI to hesitate before going after Trump and his people both before January 6 and during the stolen documents case.

There are those outside of government, too.

A sustained campaign to shut down efforts, both within and outside social media companies, to limit mis- and disinformation has led many programs and experts to quit, largely after sustained doxing and disinformation campaigns.

Perhaps most alarmingly, Trump and his mob have targeted election administrators around the country, both prominent and not. Even if Kamala Harris wins more votes than Trump in November, there are known localities and states where there’s real question whether election denying voting officials will certify the vote. Patrick Byrne has even started issuing death threats against those prosecuting Tina Peters for tampering with election equipment back in 2020.

This is not just about loyalty. This is not just about cowing law enforcement. This is not just retribution — though that serves as cover.

Particularly taking account of the election workers targeted in service of Trump’s Big Lie, this must be understood as systematic: an attack on particular institutions and norms of liberal society: the rule of law, elections, and truth.

We don’t have the luxury of waiting until after November to start defanging the right wing’s stochastic terrorism. That’s true, because they’ll be using it to stoke fear leading up to the election. That’s true because Jim Jordan still has three months wielding a gavel to elicit lynching threats. But it’s also true because the guy managing the FBI is so afraid of Congress that he’s unwilling to say that people selectively targeted for such treatment by Donald Trump are entitled to due process.

Share this entry

Trump’s Stranglehold on the GOP Is a Vulnerability

Kamala Harris’ first couple of stump speeches as Presidential candidate included three parts:

  • Set up of prosecutor versus felon contrast (“I know his type”)
  • Tribute to Joe Biden
  • Lay out promise for the future (“Not going back”)

Last night’s speech (at least until CSPAN’s feed crapped out) swapped the second part — the tribute to Biden — and replaced it with an attack on Trump’s role in tanking the border bill.

That swap came after the Vice President’s campaign released this ad, similarly targeting Trump for his role in killing the bill.

To be sure — this is the same approach Biden has taken: imputing from Trump’s deliberate tanking of the border bill opposition to fixing the border. It was undoubtedly one of the reasons Biden spent so much time negotiating the border bill, only to have Congress tank it.

But when Biden used that approach, he explained it. Harris turned it into an attack on Trump’s selfishness.

These ads will not deflate Republican efforts to turn Harris’ role in working with Central America to try to decrease the flow of migrants, which they’ve spun into being the border czar in charge of the entire border, into fear about her approach to the border. But it succinctly flips the script.

It holds Trump accountable for things he made other Republicans do at his behest.

The same is true of the departure of Paul Dans, the head of Project 2025, from Heritage Foundation.

Trump’s campaign managers — Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles — released a statement crowing after Dans’ departure.

Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign — it will not end well for you.

And Dans booked, then no-showed, an appearance with Kaitlan Collins show.

But ultimately, if you’re making the personnel decisions, as it appears Trump’s campaign did on Dans’ departure, then you own it. It only serves to reaffirm Trump’s role in the project.

And none too soon. Multiple outlets are publishing the forward that JD Vance did for Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, including his adoption of Roberts’ call to “circle the wagons and load the muskets” to take out government.

Vance has deep ties to the Heritage Foundation, and in particular to Kevin Roberts, who has been president of the right-wing think tank since 2021 and is the architect of Project 2025. Vance has praised Roberts for helping to turn the organization “into the de facto institutional home of Trumpism” and has endorsed elements of Project 2025. Vance is also the author of the foreword to Roberts’s upcoming book, Dawn’s Early Light, which The New Republic has obtained in full even though the book’s publisher, HarperCollins’s Broadside Books, has apparently tried to suppress it amid the scrutiny of Project 2025 and Vance’s ties to Roberts.

The subtitle and cover of Roberts’s book were softened as scrutiny of the Trump campaign’s ties to Project 2025 grew. The book was originally announced with the subtitle “Burning Down Washington to Save America” and featured a match on the center of its cover. The subtitle is now “Taking Back Washington to Save America,” and the match is nowhere to be seen. Promotional language invoking conservatives on the “warpath” to “burn down … institutions” like the FBI, the Department of Justice, and universities has also been removed or toned down, though it is still present in some sales pages.

But the inspiration for that extreme language can be found in Vance’s foreword, which ends with a call for followers to “circle the wagons and load the muskets,” and describes Roberts’s ideas as an “essential weapon” in the “fights that lay [sic] ahead.” (The New Republic downloaded Dawn’s Early Light earlier this month from NetGalley, which provides advance copies of books to reviewers and booksellers. Copies were removed from the platform earlier this month.)

Trump might yet replace Vance — though he has only a few weeks before ballot finalization would make that far more difficult.

But he can’t disown the hundreds of top Trump aides associated with this project.

Because of Trump’s stranglehold on the Republican Party, Kamala Harris is in a sweet spot: She can claim credit for Joe Biden’s successful policies. But she can also treat Trump as a near-incumbent, holding him accountable for all the things Republicans have been doing to help Trump beat Joe Biden for the last two years.

That may turn out to be a serious vulnerability for Trump going forward.

Update: Roger Sollenberger confirms that LaCivita pushed Dans out.

The Trump campaign forced the architect of the ultraconservative Project 2025 manifesto out of his job on Tuesday as it sought political cover from a controversy dogging Republicans, the Daily Beast can report exclusively.

Trump campaign manager Chris LaCivita “put the screws” to mastermind Paul Dans in an effort to force him out and shut down the right-wing shop behind Proejct 2025, a sprawling blueprint that sought to overhaul the federal government and implement an array of far-right policies for a potential second Trump administration, a well-placed source told the Daily Beast.

Share this entry

“My Beautiful Christians:” Trump’s Pandering to Christian Nationalists

The other day, during an address to a Turning Point conference, Trump implored,

Christians, get out to vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore my beautiful Christians. I love you. I’m [not/a] Christian.You have to get out and vote. In four years, you won’t have to vote again, we’ll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have to vote.

Horse race journalists didn’t care. They found it more important to repeat and therefore magnify Trump’s latest slur on Vice President Harris.

When I first looked at how NYT covered it at 3:37AM ET, this was their headline.

At 8:311AM, this story from Michael Gold was published. It still focused on magnifying the slurs Trump used against Harris.

That story included Trump’s comment about voting, along with Gold’s spin of it as a claim that Trump would address the concerns of Christian voters sufficiently that they would no longer have to vote, buried in ¶14.

At the end of his speech, Mr. Trump urged the religious crowd to vote in November, suggesting that if elected he would address their concerns sufficiently enough that they would no longer need to be politically active. Earlier, he had lamented that conservative Christians do not vote proportionately to their size, a complaint he has made repeatedly in recent weeks.

“Christians, get out and vote. Just this time,” Mr. Trump said on Friday. “You won’t have to do it anymore, you know what? Four more, years, it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine, you won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.”

Let it be noted that one of NYT’s allegedly professional horserace journalists believes that the white Evangelical Christians who have been among Trump’s most important supporters vote in disproportionately low numbers or that any Republican would forego that most important part of their coalition. (That said, for demographic reasons Trump can’t change with a speech, white Evangelicals make up an increasingly smaller proportion of the voting public, which poses an entirely different kind of threat than apathy.)

Only much later, around noon ET, did Gold figure out that the “not have to vote” stuff was far more newsworthy than Trump calling the Vice President a “bum.”

 

In spite of disinterest by journalists paid to write horserace stories, the clip went viral on social media, setting off a debate about what Trump meant. Right wing trolls pushed the same horseshit claims of low turnout (again, we’re talking about the in-person and TV audience for a Turning Point conference!) that Gold provided. Others attributed it to Trump’s narcissism, a suggestion that he only cares about votes so long as he would be on the ballot.

Three Sunday morning shows dealt with it — all abysmally.

Martha Raddatz for example, let Chris Sununu dismiss the comments as a “classic Trumpism,” without asking what he meant by “this stuff” when he said it “can be fixed.” Then she went back to the horse race.

There are several things people are ignoring.

First, Trump said something quite similar — and he said it at another Turning Point conference — just a month and a half ago, in Detroit.

Only, at that point, before Joe Biden had dropped out of the race, Trump said,

I said, we don’t need votes. And Charlie Kirk is helping. He’s got his army of young people. These are young patriots. They don’t want to see happen what’s been happening in our country.

Thank you Charlie.

[USA chants]

And I said to Charlie, and I said to Michael [Whatley], listen, we don’t need votes. We’ve got more votes than anybody’s ever had. We need to watch the vote, we need to guard the vote.

We need to stop the steal.

In mid-June, before Biden dropped out, Trump wasn’t concerned about turnout. Now he is.

This comment — to the people Charlie Kirk had assembled to listen to Donald Trump — is best understood as a comment about Trump’s plan to win. As the January 6 Committee discovered, when Trump decided in late December 2020 that he was going to speak and march to the Capitol, Carline Wren turned to Kirk to help turn out bodies. Turning Point was also allegedly used to launder speaking fees to Don Jr and his girlfriend. As it happened, Kirk backed out of attending and deleted his boasts about arranging dozens of busses so others could do so. He pled the Fifth rather than explain to the January 6 Committee anything about all that.

But nevertheless, Charlie Kirk got busloads of people to Trump’s insurrection.

To the extent that Trump needs lots of bodies to be somewhere, Charlie Kirk is a key part of that process. And in June, he wanted them out to surveil polling centers, once again mobilizing Stop the Steal. Friday, he emphasized he actually needs some people to show up to the polls.

Trump’s plans for the election — and how they may have changed with Biden’s departure — is an important background for this. As Tim Alberta described it, after Trump took over the RNC, he got rid of the field organization (potentially dooming down-ticket candidates), and replaced it with Big Lie perpetrators.

The Trump campaign’s takeover of the RNC in March—installing the former president’s daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, as the new co-chair, while establishing LaCivita as chief of staff and de facto chief executive, all of it long before Trump had technically secured the party’s nomination—didn’t sit well with many Republicans. Appearances aside, the imperatives of a presidential campaign are not always aligned with those of the RNC, whose job it is to advance the party’s interests up and down the ballot and across the country. “Party politics is a team sport. It’s bigger than Ronald Reagan or Donald Trump or any one candidate,” said Henry Barbour, a longtime Mississippi committeeman, who has fought to prevent the national party’s funds from going to Trump’s legal defense. “Nobody’s ever going to agree on exactly how you split the money up, but you’ve got to take a holistic approach in thinking about all the campaigns, not just one.”

The RNC under Ronna McDaniel, who chaired the national party from early 2017 until LaCivita’s takeover, had become a frequent target of Trump’s ire. He didn’t like that the party remained neutral in the early stages of the 2024 primary—and he was especially furious that McDaniel commissioned debates among the candidates. But what might have bothered him most was the RNC’s priorities: McDaniel was continuing to pour money into field operations, stressing the need for a massive get-out-the-vote program, but showed little interest in his pet issue of “election integrity.”

“Tell you what,” Trump said to Wiles and LaCivita. “I’ll turn out the vote. You spend that money protecting it.”

The marching orders were clear: Trump’s lieutenants were to dismantle much of the RNC’s existing ground game and divert resources to a colossal new election-integrity program—a legion of lawyers on retainer, hundreds of training seminars for poll monitors nationwide, a goal of 100,000 volunteers organized and assigned to stand watch outside voting precincts, tabulation centers, and even individual drop boxes.

When someone fires all the field staff and instead hires Christina Bobb, it’s a pretty big tell that they don’t plan to win the election the democratic way.

They plan to double down on the Big Lie.

Or they did, before Biden dropped out.

As Alberta noted in a follow-up, Trump’s entire plan revolved around Biden. Now Trump is stuck plaintively reminding rally-goers of the six-year campaign, he and Russia, with the help of the entire Republican party, launched against Biden’s kid. “Where’s Hunter? … That was the big one.”

That’s a big part of the background that is missing from discussion of Trump’s comments.

The other is what it means that, after falsely claiming that Christians are being targeted by law enforcement right along with billionaires who engaged in fraud to cover up fucking a porn star, Trump told a bunch of Christian nationalists that they needed to vote just one more time.

As Sarah Posner laid out in a piece analyzing the way right wingers exploited the shooting attempt on Trump, these are people who use apocalyptic tropes to motivate voters and activists.

For the Trump faithful who believe God anointed him president and, after the attempt on his life, that God protected him from death, there are no coincidences — only miracles, signs, and wonders. Charlie Kirk, the founder of the far-right Turning Point USA and a fellow denizen of the conspiratorial fever swamps of X, chimed in on Posobiec’s tweet. “Armor of God,” he replied, just in case Posobiec’s meaning was lost on anyone. “The next verse is this: ‘For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.’” For good measure, Posobiec replied to Kirk, quoting the next verse, Ephesians 6:13. “Therefore, put on the armor of God,” he concluded, “that you may be able to resist on the evil day and, having done everything, to hold your ground.”

Posner added more in Bluesky this thread.

The point is, Trump’s audience of Christian nationalists do view taking over government in apocalyptic terms. They did, on January 6. And it nearly worked the first time.

This was only a Trumpism, as Sununu called it, to the extent that Trump is an epic conman who knows how to mobilize his audience, even Christian nationalists with whom Trump shares little more than a fondness for authoritarianism.

So sure: Perhaps this was just an attempt to juice more turnout out of a group that already turns out in high numbers, almost exclusively for Republicans. Or maybe — as his comments in June were — it’s part of a larger effort to delegitimize democracy.

But even beyond Trump’s last coup attempt, there’s a context here, one you need to at least acknowledge if you’re going to claim to assess his comments.

Update: I only very belatedly realized I put the context from the second NYT take after the third version of it. As made clear now, Gold did mention the “never vote again” comment, but he put it in ¶14.

Update: McKay Coppins has a piece in the Atlantic analyzing the prayers said at Trump events. A taste:

There are many ways to parse the text. You could compare the number of times Trump’s name is mentioned (87) versus Jesus Christ’s (61). You could break down the demographics of the people leading the prayers: 45 men and 13 women; overwhelmingly evangelical, with disproportionate representation from Pentecostalism, a charismatic branch of Christianity that emphasizes supernatural faith healing and speaking in tongues. One might also be tempted to catalog the most comically incendiary lines (“Oh Lord, our Lord, we want to be awake and not woke”). But the most interesting way to look at these prayers is to examine the theological motifs that run through them.

The scripture verse that’s cited most frequently in the prayers comes from 2 Chronicles. “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”

Ryan Burge, a Baptist minister and political scientist I asked to review the prayers, told me that this verse—which is quoted 10 times—is regularly cited by evangelicals to advance a popular conservative-Christian narrative: that America, like ancient Israel before it, has broken its special covenant with God and is suffering the consequences. “The Old Testament prophets they’re quoting talk about sin collectively instead of individually—the nation has fallen into wickedness and needs healing,” Burge said. “The way they use this verse presupposes that we’re spiraling down the tubes.”

[snip]

[R]ather than asking God to make Trump an instrument of his will, most of the prayers start from the assumption that he already is. Accordingly, many of them drop any pretense of thy-will-be-done nonpartisanship, and ask explicitly for Trump’s reelection. “Lord, you have a servant in Donald J. Trump, who can lead our nation,” a woman offering a prayer in Laconia, New Hampshire, told God at a rally on the eve of the state’s Republican primary. “Help us to overcome any obstacles tomorrow so that we may deliver victory to your warrior.”

Share this entry