The “Waiting for Mueller” Mistake and the Right Wing Bubble

Simon Rosenberg didn’t panic about a 2022 Red Wave. As analysts everywhere were wailing that the Sky Was Falling, he was quietly confident.

Keep that in mind as you listen to this conversation he had with Greg Sargent. I have about the same cautious optimism as Rosenberg (I was less confident than he was in 2022) on this year’s election, but he’s a pro who works from fundamentals, not just last week’s poll results.

Among other things, he talks about how any of six big negatives for Trump could blow the election for him:

  1. He raped E. Jean Carroll in a department store dressing room
  2. He oversaw one of the largest frauds in America history and that he and Rudy Giuliani through all their various misdeeds own over $700M dollars
  3. He stole American secrets, lied to the FBI about it, and shared these secrets with other people
  4. He led an insurrection against the United States
  5. He and his family have corruptly taken billions from foreign governments
  6. He is singularly responsible for ending Roe and stripping the rights and freedoms away from more than half the population

I would add two more: First, Trump routinely defrauds MAGAt supporters. Over the last week, he turned the RNC into a means to do so on a grander scale. Republicans need to hear that they’re being taken to the cleaner by Trump — and by Steve Bannon, whose trial for doing so will also serve as backdrop to this election season.

More tellingly, Rosenberg addressed this detail when he described how Biden’s two big negatives have resolved (my biggest complaint about this interview is it didn’t address Gaza, the unmentioned third), not when he addressed Trump’s scandals.

The Biden crime family story, we just learned in the last few weeks, was a Russian op that was being laundered by the Republican party that blew up in their face.

Rosenberg treated the manufactured “Biden crime family” that was actually a Russian op laundered by the GOP as a resolved Biden negative after he made this point, the most important in the interview, in my opinion.

We have to learn the lesson from waiting for Mueller. Waiting for Mueller was a mistake by the Democratic Party. It prevented us from prosecuting the case against Trump and his illicit relationship with the Russian government that was out there all for us to see. Right? The Russians played a major role in his election in 2016. This is not in dispute in any way. And so I think now what we need to do is not wait for Jack Smith or wait for Merrick Garland. We need to use what’s in front of us and prosecute this in ways that we know is going to do enormous harm.

No superhero will come tell any one of these stories for Democrats. Trump’s opponents have to tell the story of Trump’s corruption. They cannot wait for Mueller. Or Jack Smith.

One of many reasons I’m so focused on the Hunter Biden story is that it is actually what proves the continuity of that story of Russian influence that Democrats failed to tell. Trump asks for Russian help in 2016 and gets it. As part of a campaign in which Rudy Giuliani solicited Russian spies for dirt on Hunter Biden, Trump withheld security support from Ukraine to get the same. Even after that, Trump’s DOJ created a way to launder the dirt Rudy collected from known Russian spies to use in the 2020 election. That campaign created the shiny object that has created the “Biden crime family” narrative. Like Russia’s role in the 2016 election, none of this is in dispute. It’s just not known.

You cannot wait for Robert Mueller or Jack Smith to tell this narrative. But for four months this entire story — this arc — has passed largely unnoticed, even as Trump took steps to deliver Ukraine’s bleeding corpse to his liege, Vladimir Putin.

Those who want to defeat Trump — and honestly, Republicans like Liz Cheney and Amanda Carpenter have been doing a better job of this than most Democrats — have to make sure this story gets told.

This is what I’ve been trying to say over and over and over. The reason why the moderate press hasn’t been telling the story of Trump’s role in the insurrection, of his ties to militia members and his direct inspiration for the most brutal assaults on cops on January 6 is because all their TV lawyers have been whinging instead about their own misunderstanding of the January 6 investigation. They haven’t been telling the story of what we know.

They have been complaining that Merrick Garland hasn’t compromised the investigation to tell them them more, turning Garland into their villain, not Trump.

In the few minutes after I posted these comments on Twitter, commenters have:

  • Complained that the full Mueller Report hasn’t been released, when really they’ve simply been too lazy to understand that the most damning bits have been released.
  • Bitched that Merrick Garland hired Rob Hur, rather than bitching about Rob Hur telling a narrative even after his own investigation had debunked it.
  • Complained about a delay in the January 6 investigation that didn’t happen.

Kaitlan Collins’ interview with Brian Butler, a former Trump employee whose testimony badly incriminated his one-time best friend, Carlos De Oliveira, has been drowned out by all the complaints.

The story barely made a blip. It’s not just the NYT that buries important Trump stories under complaints about Biden, it’s Democratic supporters.

Rosenberg went on to describe how Democrats need to improve this. He noted that the Right Wing noise machine provides them a great advantage on this front, one that Biden will have to spend to combat.

We have to recognize, Greg, that the information environment in the United States is really broken right now and that the power of the Right Wing noise machine to bully and intimidate mainstream media into being complicit in advancing some of their narratives is something that needs a campaign that has half a billion dollars in it to be able to draw even on. What we’ve learned is there is a structural imbalance in the information game between the two parties, that the Republicans have a significant advantage over us in a day-to-day information war.

This is true. But the insularity of the Right Wing noise machine can be made into a weakness for Republicans, even before spending the money. Because right wingers so rarely try to perform for a mainstream audience, as soon as they do — whether it is rising star Katie Britt or Kentucky redneck James Comer — they look like lying morons.

And in the face of that Right Wing noise, Democrats need to be disciplined.

The Biden campaign’s going to have to be wildly disciplined. They can’t chase the daily story. They’re going to have to pick the two or three things they know from research are the things that are a rubicon with the electorate.

[snip]

It’s going to be incumbent upon them to not allow the Trumpian mania and madness sort of push them around every day. They’re going to need to develop an offensive strategy both on what we’re selling and on what we’re indicting him with.

Rosenberg laid out the six bullets; I added two more. Trump will try to distract from that with daily outrages, with spectacle.

Trump — abetted by social media — will try to distract from that argument by demeaning all ability to make, or understand, coherent arguments.

I’m less sanguine than Rosenberg that even discipline is enough to overcome Trump’s circus. Therein lies the challenge.

But he’s right that those who want to defeat Trump have to make that case themselves. Neither Jack Smith, nor the NYT, will save you.

image_print
185 replies
  1. OnKilter says:

    I would like to see a competing summary of the Mueller Report, not the whitewash that Barr presented.
    A summary that highlights the most damning parts of the investigation.

  2. SteveBev says:

    Thank you for drawing attention to this podcast. It made a lot of sense to me when I listened to it yesterday. It makes even more sense now that you have integrated it with longstanding themes in your analyses and added your own highly pertinent comments to the points discussed by Sargent and Rosenberg.

    • Martin_14MAR2024_0335h says:

      Note that of Biden’s three big weaknesses (perceptions of age, perceptions of corruption, Gaza), you mentioned that two of them kind of went up in smoke in the previous couple of weeks. You couldn’t have known that Schumer was going to speak out against Netanyahu so the Dems are taking forceful action to reduce the power of the third one.

      [Welcome back to emptywheel. SECOND REQUEST: Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is far too common it will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. If you continue to ignore moderator’s requests your comments will not clear for publication. /~Rayne]

  3. Harry Eagar says:

    Stumbling speech. I suspect it will determine as many nonpartisan votes as any of the other items. But for which candidate?

  4. Just Some Guy says:

    #2 has a typo, unless you mean TFG and Rudy “own” their debt, which is probably unlikely.

  5. P-villain says:

    The problem I see is that none of the six things Dr. Wheeler lists are unknown or unreported upon, yet Trump voters have their feet set in cement, their eyes closed, their hands over their ears, and they’re screaming “lalalalala.” The idea that somehow these narratives can break through and change minds if only the mainstream media cooperates seems to me to be just a variation on “waiting for Mueller.”

    I am not giving up, I am going to do what little a California voter can, but I am not optimistic these days.

    • Barringer says:

      Democrats don’t need to change the minds of the 37%. They need to motivate swing voters in the swing states. This election will be won on the margins of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, etc. Get people out to vote against the crooked rapist traitor who wants to strip reproductive rights.

      • BobBobCon says:

        The other piece is that it’s not just about getting people to vote for Biden, it’s about shrinking GOP turnout.

        People have had it drilled into their heads for eight years that Trump voters are like a block of wood instead of a pile of chips. What this year has shown is that a lot of individual pieces aren’t feeling any excitement about a third time, but too many liberals refuse to see the opportunity here.

    • -mamake- says:

      Californians can work on swing state postcard campaigns. Two groups that guide you and provide addresses can be found online.
      “bluewavepostcards.org” and “turnoutpac.org”

    • emptywheel says:

      It’s not Trump voters who need to know. It’s Haley voters (15% of the GOP, possibly) and indys.

    • massappeal says:

      Adding to the fine points made by others above, part of the discipline required of the Biden campaign specifically and Democrats more generally is *not* to respond to whatever shiny object Trump & company toss out, but to *tell the story they/we want to tell”. If you follow Simon Rosenberg for even a short time, this is one of the main things he does: decide what story he wants to tell, and then repeat it over and over again:

      “The Democratic party is strong, unified & winning. The Republican party is weak, divided & losing.”
      “Joe Biden is a good President, the country is better off and we have a strong case for re-election.”
      “Donald Trump – disgraced, diminished, delusional, degraded and dangerous – is a far weaker candidate than he was in 2020.”
      “Do more and worry less.”
      “I would much rather be us than them.”

      Rosenberg is clear about who his audience is: Democrats, Democratic-leaning independents, and non-MAGA Republicans. And he delivers reinforcing versions of the same message to all of them.

      • P-villain says:

        What I liked about the SOTU (and thus, the forthcoming campaign) was Biden’s optimism. Trump is all anger and darkness, and for the critical slice of the electorate you identify, energetic optimism beats brooding pessimism most times.

  6. BobBobCon says:

    “Trump — abetted by social media — will try to distract from that argument by demeaning all ability to make, or understand, coherent arguments.”

    One of my biggest beefs with online liberals is the absolutely reflexive need to respond to any bad news for Trump with a smug “it won’t matter.”

    One of the core messages of Trump is “when you’re a star they let you get away with it” and it’s obviously stupid for liberals to reinforce it. All that does is smother attacks before they get any momentum and discourage turnout. But too many liberals prefer the self gratification of being smug to sticking to an attack plan.

    Trump has real vulnerabilities, but he’s counting on liberals giving up before they even take a shot. It’s mysterious to me why so many liberals want to help him out.

  7. mickquinas says:

    On the very same day that authorities first came to Mar-a-Lago and were given a tour, including the storage closet, possibly at literally the same time that the Feds were on the grounds, Brian Butler was helping Carlos De Olivera load bankers boxes onto Trump’s plane headed for New Jersey. https ://www. washingtonpost. com/politics/2024/03/12/theres-new-reason-think-trump-still-has-classified-documents/ [link broken with spaces]

    I mean. On the one hand we can bitch about probable cause to search Bedminster and etc. and on the other we can shout to the heavens that the guy who was indicted for stealing national secrets is probably still trying to sell us out! We could probably even do both, but it’s really the second one that’s gonna help in November.

    • Scott_in_MI says:

      WaPo’s coverage of that interview was infuriating. They entirely failed to mention that Butler had already been interviewed by the FBI, and that in fact his testimony was part of the Florida indictment – despite the fact that this information was plainly available in CNN’s piece.

  8. Badger Robert says:

    Good start.
    The Democrats have had two notable electoral failures. One was in 1968 when the party was divided by the Vietnam war and someone murdered Bobby Kennedy. The other was in 2016 when Sanders and Clinton disagreed about the message of the Democratic party.
    There is not much evidence that Donald Trump can win an election other than the 2016 against Ms. Clinton.,
    There have been two political comebacks in Presidential history. Grover Cleveland was always popular in New York, which was the dominant state in the US at that time. He lost one election, than returned to the WH against a weak Republican President, Benjamin Harrison. Richard Nixon came back from political exile, but the skipped the 1964 election, and benefitted from the 1968 events.
    Adlai Stevenson lost to Eisenhower, and was probably the Democratic candidate only because no one else thought they could defeat Ike.
    Its not easy to comeback from electoral defeat and defeat the incumbent. Donald Trump is enormously unpopular in CA, so that puts him in the hole in the EC count, and in fund raising.

    • Theodora30 says:

      Gore losing to Bush in 2000 was another notable failure, aided and abetted by Democrats voting for Nader, ((over 90,000 in Florida where Gore lost by less than 600 votes), the Supreme Court and the mainstream media.

      “Going after Gore”
      https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2007/10/gore200710

      “The Times’ Frank Bruni, or How to Succeed in Journalism Without Really Caring (About Issues)”
      https://www.americanprogress.org/article/think-again-the-times-frank-bruni-or-how-to-succeed-in-journalism-without-really-caring-about-issues/

      • WhisperRD says:

        I wouldn’t view Florida 2000 as an electoral failure. Gore did, in fact, get more votes, even in Florida. It was a legal failure to get those votes counted, along with a PR failure to confront the Bush hogwash directly.

        See “Jews for Buchanan,” for example. On ballot design screw-up cost Gore thousands of votes, enough to easily cover the margin.

        • Just Some Guy says:

          Whether or not Florida was a failure is debatable. However, Gore’s inability to win Tennessee, his home state, was certainly a failure.

          Even Mondale won Minnesota in the Reagan landslide of ’84.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Florida 2000 was certainly a failure of will by the Democrats. They were blindsided, I think, by Republicans’ willingness to lie, and to use fakery and faux violence. They were aided and abetted, obviously by a corrupt Republican majority on the Sup. Ct.

          After Nixon and the crap Republicans did to Clinton for his entire term, the apparent lack of preparation was inexcusable.

      • pH unbalanced says:

        As close as the margin was, I prefer to point to the butterfly ballot (3k votes for Buchanan and 19k overvotes spoiling the ballots) and the voting roll purges (50k “felons” removed) as the problem in Florida, rather than Nader, because those are things that threw the election that don’t criticize voters for casting a ballot for their preferred candidate.

    • Super Nintendo Chalmers says:

      The only reason Nixon was elected in ’68 was he, through Anna Chennault, sabotaged the peace talks between the North and the South to prevent the Democrats from achieving peace in Vietnam before the elections. Remember “Tricky Dick” had a “secret plan” to end the war…..except his “secret plan” involved arguably committing treason.

      • PJB2point0 says:

        There is a fantastic multipart podcast on this topic called Nixon at War, which was produced by Kurt Anderson (of Spy Magazine “short-fingered vulgarian” fame). Highly recommended. One thing you will take away is that LBJ’s team probably discovered Nixon/Kissinger’s treasonous actions about 10 days before the 1968 election but for various reasons, both noble and ignoble, Johnson chose not to expose the scheme, which may itself have cost Humphrey the election.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        The Chennault Affair was one of many prongs that led to the Democrats’ loss in 1968. There were more in 1972, including the Canuck letter that derailed Muskie’s candidacy.

        LBJ in 1968 wasn’t much help. He didn’t think much of Humphrey and ignored what he knew about Nixon’s dirty tricks, apparently feeling that to interfere would be taking sides. An odd view for a Democratic President with a reputation for ruthless political savvy.

  9. Badger Robert says:

    Its uncertain, but it seems like the Republican candidate would be impaired by the lack of support from Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, and Cindy McCain. Ken Buck of Colorado is not an important politician on the national stage, but his rebellion against the performative exhibitionist part of his party, demonstrated by resigning this month which created the need for a special election could be evidence that long time Republicans want their party back.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Ken Buck’s timing was precious, though. It may have screwed Lauren Boebert’s already poor chances of re-election. She isn’t doing well in her home district, and isn’t willing to resign now in order to run in Buck’s district, as the rules require. Something tells me that Buck knew that was a likely consequence.

      But it is just a nit. Messaging is Trump’s one great gift. We have to do a lot more to compete with. As with us, it will require the White House and congresscritter leadership to get outside their comfort zones.

    • BobBobCon says:

      I think an even bigger issue for Trump is his determination to back loyalists over competent candidates down ballot.

      For the Democrats, driving down turnout for Mark Robinson in NC means driving down turnout for Trump, and Democrats can do both with proper message discipline.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        I’ve seen little evidence that Magats value effectiveness. They like Trump because he upsets and breaks things. They see that as courageous. They regard his three-hour work days and constant screw-ups as him being human, rather than the most deeply flawed man ever to visit the White House, let alone to live and work there.

        That attitude speaks volumes about how little all American politicians are doing to meet the needs of average Americans rather than the corporations who lobby them. It should be a guide to Joe Biden’s team about the positive messages they need to focus on and make policy.

        • massappeal says:

          “I’ve seen little evidence that Magats value effectiveness.”

          With all due respect, in terms of Democratic messaging for this election, so what? Trump’s base is going to support him. Heck, 3 years into the Great Depression Herbert Hoover got 40% of the popular vote. He didn’t lose because he lost “his base”. He lost because FDR took away 18% of the electorate that was at the fringes of Hoover’s coalition.

          Biden and other Democratic candidates need to talk about *their* message every day, not respond to Trump’s message.

          P. S. James Fallows has written in the past about Trump’s skill at “getting inside the OODA loop” of his opponents. OODA is Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act. It comes from USAF Col. John Boyd. If you’re able to sustain a faster tempo of OODA loops than your opponent, you have an advantage that can overcome other deficiencies (e.g., technology, money, size).

          Trump *wants* Biden’s campaign responding to whatever craziness he tweets out or says. As long as they’re responding, he’s winning. By contrast, if Biden can set the terms of engagement, he can get inside the Trump campaign’s OODA loop, force them into a reactive stance, and disorient them. (We saw some of that with the SOTU address, and the following speeches and ads from the Biden campaign.)

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          So what? Your comment proves my point that effectiveness in office is irrelevant to a cult. They think it makes Trump even more adorable. That’s a result of messaging, the one thing Trump does care about, and his feral sense of weakness (except his own).

          Democrats, on the other hand, need to be good at both messaging and governance. Without the first, they won’t be able to do the second.

        • SteveBev says:

          Like much else in the world of MAGA believers – their belief in Trump’s “success” or “effectiveness” is a consequence of the propagandising on his behalf rather than any rational assessment based on reasonable and realistic metrics or objective analysis.

          And there are ready made excuses for Trump within their ideology — they view Trump as engaging in a constant battle on their behalf with enemies — ‘the deep state’/‘forces of wokeness’/etc etc — who are infinitely flexible in cheating to thwart him and rob them of his successes; so the blame for delays or disappointments in his projects always falls on the enemies who resist his greatness, and this is incorporated as further proof of how essential he is to the battle to Make America Great Again and smite and spite their enemies.

        • BobBobCon says:

          Effective down ballot candidates drive turnout. Bad candidates depress it.

          Let the Trump backers cheer him on TV all the want. But if get out the vote efforts suffer because grifters have run off with all of the money to bus voters to the polls, if ads don’t get booked because of infighting among staff, and if candidates can’t pull off rallies in the right places because they can’t read a poll, then that’s a problem for all of the GOP.

          One of Suozzi’s key campaign messages in flipping the Santos seat was tying the GOP to chaos. People who actually paid attention to his ads (not the national reporters, of course) saw this. The more Republicans absorb this connection by seeing it in all of their candidates, the less likely they are to turn out in November.

        • Badger Robert says:

          The machine has to run. In thousands of state races, and hundreds of federal races, there has to be working competency, and money. The MAGA thesis is that kicking out the people that used to run the party won’t matter is going to put to the test.

        • SteveBev says:

          “The Trump Tide will lift all boats” is wish-casting not a plan.

          The plan, I fear is a more extensive use of MAGA mobs as “poll watchers” etc, and the lack of proper organisational structure and formal accreditation of party workers, will create more chaos and confusion at the polls and ballot counts, and more disruption by ‘spontaneous interventions’ of ‘patriotic citizens’ who are not formally associated with the GOP.

  10. Badger Robert says:

    How many people out the 74.2 million that voted for Trump in 2020 will switch their votes to Biden based on the points Ms. Wheeler listed? 1% would be devastating. But the Georgia results from 2020 suggest a bigger problem. How many voters will fill in their votes for Republicans in the down ballot races, and leave the Presidential vote blank? 4% in addition to a small amount of switchers would put NC and Florida into play. There is a large potential for cheating in both of these states, so any Biden victory in either state would have to be by a large enough margin to exceed the cheating.

    • Mike Stone says:

      We should fully expect that they will attempt to cheat since this may lead to them winning, but even if they lose they will claim that there was cheating and use that to further undermine our election process.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Oh, my, yes, that Trump Republicans will cheat on an unheard of scale and blame it on Democrats goes without saying. Cheating is what they call electioneering, just as lying is what they call public speaking. (They’ve made formerly bipartisan attributes their own.)

  11. Rugger_9 says:

    This is where the Congressional Ds in both houses can step up. I am still mystified that Schumer hasn’t pushed for analogous hearings for Durham, Hur and updates for Weiss and Smith on their projects. Jeffries can also be more noisy.

    Eventually, even with the courtier press keeping their thumb on the scale, the pile of evidence will come out. As noted in the post, Butler’s interview should have been a bigger splash than it was, probably because Biden is ‘old’.

    • bgThenNow says:

      First, I agree w Marcy. This is an important post re: the election. But I think holding hearings in the Senate in lieu of the dis functional House would be unhelpful. Someone has to adult in the void. All of us need to be getting active locally to elect Ds up and down ticket. I am going to enjoy the new RParty leadership if they fail to support the down ticket and state parties nationwide. I am not up on the finances of the National parties but in my state I believe national party funding is critical to our party organization. We are a poor state and without the support from the top we would be really hurt statewide. Coordinated campaign and all of that. So I look forward to the collapse of the RParty.

      • 0Alexander Platt0 says:

        “All of us need to be getting active locally to elect Ds up and down ticket.”

        I hate this so much. I’m brilliant at what I do, and have acquired exquisitely valuable education and experience to allow me to do it, and in doing it I’m furthering humanity in a societally valuable way. And now I’m told that instead, what I need to be spending my time and efforts doing is going door-to-door to solicit email addresses so the DNC can ask for donations to help prevent Nazis from taking over the government and putting my family members in camps. I hate that this seems to be true. I hate that this is only kind of an exaggeration. I really really hate that even if we succeed we seem to be stuck doing it again and again, year after year.

        Sorry. I’m done ranting now.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          You can do it yourself or pay someone else to go out and canvas, if you’re brilliant at something that makes a lot of money. But for want of a nail, the election was lost is not a refrain any of us can live with.

          That rant also speaks to a major gap in contemporary education, one strongly supported by the corporatization of universities: the idea that we are all Thatcherite creatures whose only purpose is success and becoming “a really useful engine” for some employer.

        • 0Alexander Platt0 says:

          useful to society != useful to an employer, and is a worthy goal. (I am done ranting, though.)

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          See, Thomas the Tank Engine, the Fat Controller. His and the Rev. W. Awdry’s patronizing image of how one becomes valuable to society has not aged well.

        • bgThenNow says:

          I don’t do DTD for the national party. I don’t collect info or provide support to the DNC in any of this work. I go DTD to promote good candidates in local races to try to improve our community. I like to meet the people, their animals, see their yards and gardens, and learn the neighborhoods.

          I find this sadly cynical. If you are good at what you do and get paid well to be an awesome employee, contribute to the world by sending money to THE CANDIDATES YOU SUPPORT who advance your career or whatever else motivates you. That would be fantastic.

          In fact all of the mail I get from the national campaigns, I return (postpaid) without a check enclosed and STOP THE GENOCIDE written on the forms.

  12. RationalAgent19 says:

    “He (trump) oversaw one of the largest frauds in America history”

    Which specific fraud was this?

    “he and Rudy Giuliani through all their various misdeeds own over $700M dollars”

    Own or owe?

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      It is hard to choose from among Trump’s many frauds. Perhaps it was the Big Lie he’s still selling. Or his inhuman handling of Covid. Or just being Trump playacting as president. Why not suggest your own?

    • Shadowalker says:

      The fraud that the lie that Trump was a wildly successful businessman was based on. Which he ran on originally in 2016.

    • RationalAgent19 says:

      Ah, it’s the fraud case in Manhattan. trump has to pay a more than $450 million judgment in the civil fraud case. trump appealed to reduce the fine, and was rejected by Judge Singh. trump will try again this month with a panel of five appellate court judges.

      When trump fails to secure the bond, the New York attorney general’s office can collect the $454 million from him. The attorney general, Letitia James, has provided trump a 30-day grace period, which expires on March 25. Then she will seize trump’s bank accounts and perhaps some of his New York properties.

      This website helpfully keeps track of trump’s mounting fines, second by second: https://trumpdebtcounter.com/

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        The thirty day grace period after the effective date of a civil judgment in NY is a function of state law, not the NY AG’s discretion. It’s to allow the appealing party time to put up an appeals bond.

        Yes, if Trump fails to secure an appeals bond, the NY AG can begin enforcement action to collect the now $464 million and counting he owes the state.

        The amount of the bond Trump needs to obtain a stay, while he appeals the decision, is about 120% of the judgment amount, so it’s more than $550 million. It will be more by the time the clock runs out on putting it up.

        • Bruce Olsen says:

          If he’s successful in getting such a massive bond it will clearly make him an even more significant national security threat than he has already shown himself to be.

          I hope there’s a way to learn who is providing the funds in time to expose any malfeasance.

          There’s a lot of chitchat about Chubb’s Russian subsidiary being the actual source of the appellant’s E. Jean Carroll appeal bond, implying the possibility of Russian participation. but I haven’t seen anything hard.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Yep, there’s a lot of smoke around that still invisible campfire.

          The two large appeals bonds would be about $650 million in new, if contingent liability. Plus, it’s likely they would have had to pay about 10% of that in cash, as a non-refundable fee to get the bonds. That alone is a lot of cash.

          The Trumps and their legal entity defendants will need to book that somehow. Judge Engoron’s monitor and financial compliance director have authority only over the legal entity defendants, not the individuals. They won’t know how the Trumps book it, something Trump will take into account in how he divides up the liability among the defendants in the NY AG fraud case.

          That liability is joint and several, which means, the bond aside, the state can collect the whole amount from any party that has sufficient assets to settle the debt. Normally, that holds true for how the bond issuer collects what it’s owed from the Trump defendants, if it has to pay on the bond.

  13. JJ Hayden says:

    AS mickquinas pointed out in the reference to the WaPo article (washingtonpost. com/politics/2024/03/12/theres-new-reason-think-trump-still-has-classified-documents), we do not know the full scope of the Trump classified documents theft and more importantly the current disposition of some of those documents. Perhaps they are now collateral for loans to cover court and legal costs.

  14. Robot-seventeen says:

    Thanks Marcy. This is a real problem for democrats and seems to always be overlooked. Democrat messaging is so tepid and at times outright idiotic. I’m now seeing Obama standing next to Biden propping the old boy up and speaking for him as if he’s interpreting or signing for him and the look is absolutely ridiculous. “You must vote for my beta or else we’re all in trouble!” says the former.

    I have no doubt they’ll throw millions of dollars of ad buys reinforcing this negative image rather than engaging their brains and using Obama to strengthen Biden. They have no clue how to connect pictures with ideas and so lost the election with arguably the most qualified and able candidate in history to a grossly unqualified carnival barker in 2016. A large part of that loss was imaging – not only from the campaign but from a decade or two of attacks on HRC.

    After watching the joke first through HRC and then what looks to be the beginning of another democratic messaging nightmare (this really shouldn’t even be close) I’ve gotten a bit cynical about it. If they’re that incompetent, perhaps they don’t deserve it. Sure. I can blame the media and the decades long attack on journalism, academia and science but the right wing has martialed the “uninformed voter” through simplistic messaging that delivers. Maybe the dems should try some of that.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Your assessment of Biden, Obama, their relationship and Obama’s messaging seems a tad inaccurate.

      • Robot-seventeen says:

        Not from what I’ve seen but I haven’t seen everything, I’m sure. I don’t think their relationship is negative, the visuals I’ve seen are.

        My other assertions are inescapable.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          “My assertions are inescapable” ranks with “resistance is futile” among robotic responses.

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          Yet they are. Get back to me when you have the experience to back it up, although I am aware lawyers know everything. I’ve been in the business for a long time.

          They suck at messaging. End of story.

        • Just Some Guy says:

          One of the more annoying and undignified tropes on the comments here is the constant pissing contests re: other commenters’ work experiences. It’s not usually remotely relevant nor useful.

          Furthermore if you are in the “business” of “messaging” (which is so vague as to be meaningless) and you think that the Democratic Party messaging needs help, nothing is preventing you from doing so! I myself am not in whatever that “business” is, but it seems to me that if I was, I’d sure as hell want to help the Dems if I thought my help could be useful.

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          I don’t comment here unless I do have the experience. Who cares about somebody’s opinion? It’s not a “trope”. I read people here because of their experience, which has value. And here you are (not in media in any way) giving me a useless opinion. It’s a waste of space.

        • Just Some Guy says:

          Mr. Media Guy:

          1. It’s a trope because you’re not the only person who makes the fallacious argument that one’s opinion must only be relevant due to commensurate experience. If you haven’t noticed, the primary author of this blog is not an attorney yet many people who comment here and respect her opinions are attorneys, which should tell you something, some sort of hint, even.
          2. Either way, the complaint about work experience is irrelevant, classist nonsense. I know janitors, for example, whose opinions on non-custodian arts matters I’d trust more than a self-proclaimed “media expert” who declines to actually state their experience while simultaneously using declasse terms such as “beta.”
          3. The figurative elephant in the room that you declined to address is, again, if you are so concerned about the Biden campaign’s messaging, and have relevant expertise, don’t you think that you can contribute more than comments on this blog? Y’know, where most of the other commenters are likely Biden voters and probably disagree with you?

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          Yeah right. I know carnival barkers who have attained the presidency. Good point. I prefer trained pilots fly my airplane for instance. I’m thinking your janitor wouldn’t be a good choice, but it’s very open minded of you.

          I originally politely responded to a journalist with my view of the democrats provably bad use of the media, which I’m qualified to comment on from a professional perspective, only to be flamed by a lawyer for no apparent reason other than he wants to ape Bmaz or something. After the second ignorant comment I’d had enough.

          As for my bonafides, I can assure you they are legitimate but I have no intention of opening me or my clients up to doxing by dopes like you or others who may wander through. You can scan through Terry Rossio’s site at wordplayer in the hall of fame for my username (old EW robot17) which should ensure my anonymity and is somewhat relevant.

          You have no idea what I contribute so why question it?

        • Just Some Guy says:

          Oh I do have an idea what you’re contributing, alright. It’s also clear that you have reading comprehension issues, in addition to blowing smoke and, well, contributing little else of worth.

        • Bruce Olsen says:

          For someone with such god-like powers you don’t seem to have noticed that Obama is, ummm, Black.

          Trump’s base is built on and motivated by bigots who dehumanize, ummm, Black folks (and other “others” of course). That’s the core of the GOP these days, yeah?

          If you don’t think featuring Obama would motivate record GOP turnout perhaps you were napping through your many years of experience.

          Maybe you should “martial”, ummm, marshall your thoughts first.

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          It’s the way they feature Biden which is what counts come vote time. Using Obama is absolutely necessary and an asset but standing them up doing an Abbott and Costello routine (which is what I’ve seen – there may be better examples) sends the wrong message. Obama’s needed as a cheerleader NOT a comparison on camera. I like Biden, and his presidency may turn out to be better the Obama’s, but he should be featured as Presidential not as Obama’s sidekick.

          If it were me (it’s not but I’ve done lots of these stand ups and other PR messages) I’d have Obama praising Biden who is shown doing Presidential things in stills, and buttons the end with a thanks. Simple.

          And cut it with the hall monitor stuff.

        • Curious2024 says:

          Thank you, robot-seventeen, for adding your perspective and experience.

          My understanding is that it has to do with the roles voters have seen Obama and Biden play.
          If voters’ strong association of the two is CEO and 2IC, and then the CEO disappears from public view, and the 2IC takes on the leadership role. …..

          If the former CEO reappears and takes on a lead role, in the voters’ mind it could re-affirm their perception of the former CEO being the “leader”. … and the former 2IC being the “weaker” party in the relationship.

          If, on the other hand, the former 2IC is shown in the leadership role, doing CEO things, and the former CEO is there as cheerleader and showing his support (not just in the content of what he says, but also in the way the interaction between the two is visually portrayed), then it emphasizes the new CEO’s role.

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          According to some polls (I have no idea how accurate they are) the public has failed to be made aware of the fantastic job Biden has done returning normalcy to at least some parts of the federal government. That tells me there’s a fundamental flaw undergirding the democratic party’s message. If the polls are correct (not a given) there is a major disconnect between information voters have received and reality. That I believe is the message that needs to resonate. The country needs a level-headed captain in charge, and I think that’s what happened in 2020, at least to some degree.

        • Bruce Olsen says:

          The grammar Nazi dons his martial garb only when the circumstances demand it.

          I assume you’re not talking about your career in media when you refer to cheerleaders, so I guess you’re talking about using surrogates. Sure, Obama should be a surrogate, but way off-screen to avoid marshalling votes on behalf of the bigot lobby–though by my understanding, in 2020 Clyburn did the heavy lifting.

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          Taken. Just wasn’t necessary IMV. I don’t think they worry about the bigots. If anything, Obama should have the vapors gushing about the job Biden’s done with Biden off screen. To me – and this was just the first look – my instant reaction was like he was escorting him to suppertime and medicine at the home. Why not stills of Biden with dignitaries, speaking at the UN, helping at disaster sites with his wife etc etc. Positive and strong. Let Barrack slam Donald. He’s really good at that. It would drive Trump nuts and insulate Biden. I dunno.

          We’ll see but I’m truly concerned the DNC is being outplayed – I think it was Perez who was the disaster.

        • Shadowalker says:

          What business is that? Messaging or running for the office of President while in office. If the latter, you should know that the process is a marathon and involves competently carrying out the duties of the office while simultaneously campaigning for the second and final term.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          You may have been in an unidentified business for a long time, but you don’t seem to have been here for very long. But no worries, I won’t be getting back to you.

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          I’ve been here for several years, commenting occasionally when I have value, as in experience, to add. If I felt it necessary to add my resume I would but let’s say I have been in every segment of entertainment, advertising and PR for several decades with lotsa people you’ve heard of and many you’ve paid money to see. I don’t particularly care whether you believe it or not.

          You promised not to get back to me. Please keep it.

        • theartistvvv says:

          I haven’t noticed you in the years I’ve been here, and I’ll be sure to take no further notice of your without-credential, hostile and silly bluster, noting that you are shite at your own “messaging”.

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          More credentialed than you thanks. You apparently can’t read so I guess it’s no loss. See ya.

    • massappeal says:

      “This really shouldn’t even be close.”

      Really? Why?

      Trump lost the popular vote by 2 percentage points in 2016, and by 4 percentage points in 2020. History shows (Eisenhower-Stevenson, Cleveland-Harrison) that when voters have made up their minds about 2 candidates once, very few change their minds in a rematch.

      • Robot-seventeen says:

        “They have no clue how to connect pictures with ideas and so lost the election with arguably the most qualified and able candidate in history to a grossly unqualified carnival barker in 2016.”

        Please see above. That’s the acid test.

      • Robot-seventeen says:

        “They have no clue how to connect pictures with ideas and so lost the election with arguably the most qualified and able candidate in history to a grossly unqualified carnival barker in 2016.”

        See above. That’s the acid test.

        • massappeal says:

          Thanks for your response. To paraphrase the odious Donald Rumsfeld: you go to the ballot box with the electorate you have, not the electorate you wish you had.

          This electorate has voted for the Democratic candidate by a 2-4 point margin against Donald Trump twice in the past 8 years. That doesn’t assure any particular outcome, but it does suggest that, in the world as it is, this November’s presidential election is also likely to be close (regardless of which “one weird trick” you, or I, or anyone else thinks Democrats should use to win in a landslide).

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          Times are different I suppose but this clown shouldn’t win a primary. Certainly not a general. It’s like the Yankees playing baseball against the Ontario Reign minor league hockey team and losing.

          I suppose the celebrity candidate has a real hold… I dunno. I prefer a person who knows how to do the job.

        • massappeal says:

          We agree; Trump *shouldn’t* win a primary election, let alone a general election. And we both prefer a person who knows how to do the job.

          But that’s the difference between the world as it is and the world as it *should* be. In the world as it is, he’s lost the popular vote by 2-4 points twice and won the electoral college once. Barring some major change, history suggests that he’ll win or lose by a few percentage points in November.

          This is a classic case of an election where campaigns can be decisive. And a key part of campaigns is recognizing the reality of the electorate you’re dealing with, then building your strategy and tactics from there.

        • Robot-seventeen says:

          And what I’m saying is their tactics and strategy are wrong and aren’t paying off. So far. This should be easy to illustrate the differences and I for one think the general electorate can distinguish the difference and vote accordingly. We’ll see how it goes but for now the best message was delivered at the SOFU.

    • Super Nintendo Chalmers says:

      HRC’s campaigning skills were no match for her resume. She made numerous strategic mistakes both times she ran for POTUS, starting with her campaign managers. She ran not to lose which is different than running to win. She picked a boring milquetoast White Guy TM in Tom Kaine when she should have picked Julian Castro.

      Despite all of her shortcomings, the only reason she wasn’t elected was that Comey sabotaged the election with his bogus announcement 10 days before the election and some blatant Russian interference to boot.

      We’ve never gotten the whole story on how the Russians successfully hacked either all or practically all the state voter registration databases in 2016. DHS told a number of different versions of what actually happened , ultimately admitting more than 30 state databases had been hacked.

      My theory is that the Russians and their Republican friends did two different things with these data bases. First, they made some subtle changes in the registration of Democrats so that the correct details didn’t match, making a number of people ineligible to vote. Second thing was that fake identities were created in the database which were then used to vote absentee in those states.

    • WhisperRD says:

      When you see on man next to another and you conclude “beta,” that tells us more about you than about how they’re standing.

    • Swamp Thing says:

      One significant improvement by the Democratic messaging machine would be to learn from the Republicans how to repeat things ad nauseam. It’s how they have managed to win the messaging wars with the poorly educated cohort of our country. The main difference being that our messages will bear the truth. In virtually every comparison, Biden is light years ahead of Trump.

      Should the Democratic ad machine construct ads that compare the two men:
      In terms of character,
      In terms of fitness for office,
      In regard to the support of labor,
      In regard to the support of women and minorities,
      In regard to the issues of health care and Social Security,
      In regard to support for voting rights,
      In terms of how to address the climate problem,
      In terms of foreign policy experience and knowledge,
      In terms of Ukraine/Russia,
      In terms of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict (consider the alternative!),
      there could be no assessment that reasonably supports Trump.

      Of course this is only a partial list, but each point could be its own commercial. These drums need to be beaten until we hear them in our sleep. But it’s not for the vanguard of liberal thinkers like those who populate this blog, it’s the only way to reach lazy thinkers.

      • Swamp Thing says:

        Is there a problem with my comment? I know that I recently changed my username if that’s it.

        [Yes, it’s the name change. It may take a while to “train” the algorithm. /~Rayne]

  15. Alan King says:

    MSM likely know exactly why they are ignoring these Trump facts, and Dems probably know exactly why they don’t want to hold MSM feet to the fire:

    Trump generates clicks and MSM needs clicks. Dems challenging this expose themselves to ridicule in MSM — at least until the Dems generate more clicks than Trump. It’s just business.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      The greatest thing we have to fear is fear itself.

      It stops thought and paralyzes action.

    • WhisperRD says:

      It’s not about clicks. The news divisions are carrying coverage that serves the business and financial interests of their owners.

      Covering Trump’s crimes would get as many “clicks” as covering up for him does.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        As you say, many media are following the likes and priorities of their owners.

        Clicks mean money and are very much sought after. But covering Trump’s crimes would earn them significantly more adverse press from the likes of Fox News, including the feared claim that a medium was taking sides, which the MSM regards as more threatening than Donald Trump.

      • RipNoLonger says:

        Is there any real difference between covering trump and his crimes? If every time he opens his mouth he utters a lie, that is a crime against truth.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Depends on what you mean by covering. A medium can repeat and magnify Trump’s lies, without correction. Or they can use a truth sandwich or some other mechanism to make clear they are reporting a lie, rather than whitewashing or magnifying it. Marcy does the latter.

  16. harpie says:

    Historian Thomas Zimmer with some educated hope:
    https[]://thomaszimmer[].substack.com/p/what-does-defend-democracy-actually

    What Does “Defend Democracy” Actually Mean? Biden’s State of the Union hinted at a key shift in the liberal imagination: From a merely restorative to a potentially more transformative vision for America
    Thomas Zimmer [Historian at Georgetown // Democracy and Its Discontents – Podcast: Is This Democracy // Newsletter: Democracy Americana] MAR 12, 2024

    […] If you can look past the questions about politics and electoral impact, the actual speech was really interesting. It provides a window into how Joe Biden, his camp, and, by extension, those at the center of liberal, Democratic politics want to present themselves – into how they conceive of the political conflict and their own role in it. […]

    […] “We’ve never fully lived up to that idea” [Biden] […]

    Myths of American exceptionalism have often blunted the response to anti-democratic threats. To a considerable degree, the fate of democracy will depend on whether or not the country’s political and societal elite can finally move past the false reassurances that these exceptionalisms offer.
    […]

    If the danger is truly as great as Joe Biden says, must we not look for a response that is commensurate with such an immense threat – one that propels America forward and transforms it into something closer to the kind of egalitarian multiracial, pluralistic democracy it never has been yet [***]? […]

    If Joe Biden can help us re-imagine an anti-fascist consensus not in service of a purely restorative project, but as a reminder of the nation’s egalitarian aspirations, as a plea to finally defeat those anti-democratic forces in our midst and push America forward, I am all for it.

    [***] = He uses Langston HUGHES’ phrase from Let America Be America Again

    O, let America be America again—
    The land that never has been yet—
    And yet must be—the land where every man is free.

    • Bruce Olsen says:

      Most people are worried about much more mundane stuff, like continuing to get enough money to eat and have a place to live.

      This is why an increasing number if younger people are wondering whether democracy is that important.

        • ColdFusion says:

          If they think it’s hard being poorer here, they should try it in a place like Russia. And they should vote to make things better.

        • Bruce Olsen says:

          That’s what my Dad and most of his generation said when someone started noting some of the inequities in the US. ‘Go live in Russia, see how much you like it.’
          Ironic that the GOP is all about Russia these days.

        • Bruce Olsen says:

          Not very helpful, is it?

          Especially since their fucking around will cause us to find out.

      • RipNoLonger says:

        Pretty strong statement. Can you provide any sources for this?

        This is why an increasing number if younger people are wondering whether democracy is that important.

        • Konny_2022 says:

          Maybe Bruce Olsen had a poll from earlier this year in mind that Biden is losing the youth, but may answer your question himself.

          I set more hope in the youth though, after reading about the Biden endorsement by 15 youth groups (see my comment to another EW post: https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/03/13/how-alleged-geezer-joe-biden-caught-rob-hur-and-mark-krickbaum-trying-to-sandbag-him/#comment-1044401).

          And it shouldn’t be forgotten that those who were 14, 15, 16, 17 years old in 2020 add to the electorate in this year.

        • Bruce Olsen says:

          It’s not Biden losing youth, it’s youth (all ages, really) viewing democracy as less essential over time (or less able to deliver what citizens need). The GOP-Fox “Axis of Evil” has obviously had a lot to do with this.

          Recent link from the Guardian about global trends away from democracy
          https: //www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/11/younger-people-more-relaxed-alternatives-democracy-survey

          A couple of 2016 articles that show the longer term trends clearly. They summarize a journal article linked below.
          https: //www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/08/yes-millennials-really-are-surprisingly-approving-of-dictators/

          https: //web.archive.org/web/20161208071110/https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/world/americas/western-liberal-democracy.html

          The journal article alluded to in the 2 above links
          https: //www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/the-signs-of-deconsolidation/

          [Rayne et al I hope I got the links to your liking]

        • Rayne says:

          It’s not so much that the links are to my liking, but whether they’ll clear without moderator intervention. All of these did clear.

          One cautionary note about “youth” — Millennials are already 30-40 years old.

        • Bruce Olsen says:

          True. But I don’t think their maturity frees them from the lack of security (and even agency) that most people in the 90% feel, no matter their age.
          I was pretty surprised that the youngest seem to be drifting “right”, but then I grew up blasting Nazis when we pretended our sticks were rifles, and WWII films were all over TV. And we hid under our desks in school in an atomic-age display of security theater that far surpasses today’s pre-flight shoe checks. My Dad even served in WWII.
          I started cutting down on the Kool-Aid when Vietnam came along, but even then it was pretty clear who the bad guys were (Nazis and Commies) and just how bad they were.

          Now “both sides do it” and some younger people can only flip a coin.

        • Rayne says:

          You’re casting judgment on the first generation which grew up on Fox News bullshit, 9/11, and social media. If you can’t see how that would fuck with their heads — especially white Millennials, I can’t help you.

          There’s a lot more granularity to this as well; I have a +40-year-old male stepchild who was stoplossed after 9/11, and a 30-year-old daughter who is terrified of having a kid now. You should be able to guess which one leans toward autocracy.

  17. Ginevra diBenci says:

    “Trump” has existed to the general public almost entirely as a false memory implanted by a MAGA disinformation machine. The candidate himself has emerged from this protective cocoon rarely; when he has, his glaring malfunctions have gone unnoted by the MSM. That dreamworld will end soon. All of us are about to see Real Trump, a lot–as The GOP Candidate, no longer presumptive–and that exposure cannot help him with voters on the cusp.

    • ExRacerX says:

      Yes, and when the alarm clock finally rings, hopefully we’ll be spared the sight of the would-be emperor in his birthday suit.

    • Badger Robert says:

      I want to respond in agreement with this post. Trump is not new any longer. His material is old, he doesn’t perform it well. The voters are generally older, and except for the MAGA cult members, possess a large amount of marketing resistance. There is not much evidence that he can expand his share of the electorate. On the contrary, Ms. Haley’s demonstrated that voters will look for an opportunity to vote against Trump, and possibly get rid of him.
      I don’t think reversing Roe v. Wade sits well with college educated women, or with voters under 40, who grew up in a world of reproductive freedom. I think that strikes a more personal note about how politics can affect daily life than the competing scandal narratives.
      Trump’s Presidency did not end well. The epidemic was not under control and the economy was on pause due to the uncertainty of possible worst case scenarios. Its unlikely that swing voters have forgotten that, or want to go back to it.

  18. Upisdown says:

    Don’t forget Trump trying to extort Zelensky into pinning the blame for Putin’s email hacking on CrowdStrike.

  19. Sue Romano says:

    Barry Berke made exactly the same points to Nicolle Wallace; eg we don’t need a prosecution from Jack Smith for American voters to vote for Biden…that Trump is unfit to be CIC. Similar to Mike Donilon’s win strategy in 2020, making the case on character alone. Unfortunately that clip can’t be found of Barry speaking to Nicolle.

  20. Spencer Dawkins says:

    On item 4,

    He led an insurrection against the United States

    As stated, that point is begging for “but Trump hasn’t been indicted for leading an insurrection, so it isn’t true/doesn’t matter” from the all-mango fan club. If I understand correctly, it IS true that the Colorado courts didn’t dispute whether there was an insurrection, or whether Trump led it, and neither did Trump’s defenders, even when they got to the Supreme Court.

    I don’t know how visible it would be, if Jack Smith was working to add insurrection to Trump’s copious inventory of charged felonies (is there still a grand jury convened that he could go to?), and if charging Trump now would be a problem, I’m fine with waiting, but I do look forward to Trump to be charged at the right time, with some anticipation.

    • Yohei1972 says:

      It doesn’t matter what the Trump fan club thinks about his insurrection. They’re unreachable at this point and they’re not numerous enough to win an election by themselves. It matters what swing voters think, and the less committed R and D voters, the ones who won’t switch parties but might or might not show up to vote depending on how media and campaign narratives nudge them.

  21. Theodora30 says:

    Most people are not aware that the Biden crime family lie got started by Steven Bannon’s partner Peter Schweizer in this book:
    “Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends” – which shot to No. 1 when it was released March 2018 – provided the basis for Trump’s attacks against Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter and his business dealings in the Ukraine.“
    https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/local/state/2019/10/11/impeachment-inquiry-narrative-has-florida-roots-secret-empires-book-peter-schweizer/3929838002/

    Bannon and Scweizer used the same tactics that had succeeded when they pushed the Clinton Foundation corruption “scandal” into the mainstream media. Schweizer wrote a book based on “research” done by Bannon’s Government Accountability Institute then got The NY Times and WaPo to print those lies. This is one tactic Bannon uses to get the mainstream media to help weaponize his disinformation
    https://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/21/how-steve-bannon-played-the-mainstream-media/

    When Bannon and Schweizer wanted to get the mainstream media to buy the Biden – Ukraine story Schweizer got his pal John Solomon to publish the story in The Hill instead of going directly to the Times as he had with the Clinton Foundation story. The mainstream media picked it up from there. Solomon wound up getting fired for that story.
    I would like to know if Bannon and Schweizer had communicated with Russian sources/Smirnov to create the crime family propaganda.

    • Brad Cole says:

      Jimmy Finkelstein was Solomon’s boss and enabler until the subpoenas started arriving. Mercury, happy days are here again.

    • Konny_2022 says:

      I have no answer to your question, Theodora. But whenever Bannon is mentioned I can’t help but remember Cambridge Analytica which was dissolved in 2018 after the scandal of its involvement both in the 2016 elections in the US and Brexit in the UK which also happened in 2016 (and many more sinister operations) came out. Maybe it’s worth revisiting stories abouth their connections, if not for connections to Russia so at least for methods to influence elections.

  22. gmokegmoke says:

    Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted Presidential winners for decades, also believes that the winds are filling Biden’s sails. Of the 13 keys he identifies for winning, Biden now has 5 while Trmp has only 3. Source: https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/man-who-correctly-predicted-us-election-winners-since-1984-reveals-who-is-likely-to-win-2024/news-story/af723bf6ef3da0887d982b5c33ae2775

    The 13 keys are “party mandate, contest, incumbency, third party, short term economy, long term economy, policy change, social unrest, scandal, foreign/military failure, foreign/military success, incumbent charisma, and challenger charisma.” More on Lichtman’s 13 keys at https://www.pollyvote.com/pollyvote-election-forecasting/models/mixed-models/keys-to-the-white-house/

    No reason to be complacent though. The bigger the landslide, the more progress can be made in the next four years.

  23. hans_14MAR2024_1451h says:

    It’s all about turn out.

    [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is far too short it will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. Thanks. /~Rayne]

  24. klynn says:

    “Trump asks for Russian help in 2016 and gets it. As part of a campaign in which Rudy Giuliani solicited Russian spies for dirt on Hunter Biden, Trump withheld security support from Ukraine to get the same. Even after that, Trump’s DOJ created a way to launder the dirt Rudy collected from known Russian spies to use in the 2020 election. That campaign created the shiny object that has created the “Biden crime family” narrative. Like Russia’s role in the 2016 election, none of this is in dispute. It’s just not known.”

    “The Biden Crime Family Narrative.” SMH. Every GOP narrative and op with RU is projection.

  25. bloopie2 says:

    Unfortunately for the Biden campaign, I’d venture to say that 99% of Americans don’t much about Manafort, Stone, or “the RU operation”. When any summary speaks in that language, or in your more detailed statement from your next succeeding post:

    “Remember that any tie between Alexander Smirnov and Donald Trump is most interesting if there’s some obvious way that Scott Brady would have learned of Smirnov’s meeting with Burisma”

    the story becomes, in my opinion, too complex to tell in less than a few l-o-n-g paragraphs that will lose most people by the third sentence. (“And anyhow, who cares, they’re all crooks, my mother taught me that.”)

    At that point, this “knows nothing about campaign advertising” person says, best to stick with those bullet points.

    • He raped E. Jean Carroll in a department store dressing room
    • He oversaw one of the largest [business] frauds in America history and that he and Rudy Giuliani through all their various misdeeds own over $700M dollars
    • He stole American secrets, lied to the FBI about it, and shared these secrets with other people
    • He led an insurrection against the United States
    • He and his family have corruptly taken billions from foreign governments
    • He is singularly responsible for ending Roe and stripping the rights and freedoms away from more than half the population

    (and maybe, or maybe not, add one that the Biden crime family story is a lie intended to smear Joe)

    That seems to be plenty for a one-minute campaign ad. Would that work?

  26. SJP NPC_CHANGE-REQD says:

    The corrupt judge puts his thumb on the scale of justice and forbid all of Trump’s due process, defenses and evidences. Just like most judges and prosecutors. See Duke Lacrosse and Ted Stevens.
    “Looks at every basic element of due process in a civil case and says “Yeah, we’re going to take the under consideration” i.e ignore it. requiring Trump’s attorney to pre-vett questions to limit what he says. To limiting the questions they can ask of E. Jean Caroll. Limiting Discovery and just frankly looking at a bunch of inconsistencies that are not allowed to be pointed out in E. Jean Caroll’s story.”

    [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Thanks. /~Rayne]

    • Sherrie H says:

      Trump et al were allowed to bring up inconsistencies etc at the original defamation trial, and did. He was not allowed to keep bringing them up at the damages trial after they’d already been heard by a jury and he’d lost. That loss is why discovery, allowed testimony etc were different at the second trial, he had already been found legally liable and the only thing left to determine was damages.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      LOL. Your comment is either snark or an expression of views derived exclusively from Fox News.

  27. SelaSela says:

    I wish I could share your and Rosenberg’s optimism. I was cautiously optimistic about 2022, but I don’t feel the same way this time. There are several reasons I am really worried about the next presidential elections:
    First, the polls. And yes, there is still plenty of time from now till November, and lots of things can still change. But for now, the numbers are bad. The national numbers are bad, and the swing states numbers are even worse. And while democrats can still turn things around, historically there was never a time in recent history when democrats where behind in the polls and won. There were few times where democrats where leading in the polls and lost. So this is a new territory.

    I’m also a bit discouraged when I talk to people about Tump’s corruption, all the criminal things he did, the damage he did and the future damage he would do if elected. And not just Trump’s hard core supporter but also people who used to support Biden. The response is always “La La La, I can’t hear you”. No matter how much effort I put into explaining to them the same points you list, they just find excuses they use to ignore all that.

    Another problem is that voters have short memory. And by “short memory”, I don’t mean they really forget. But things that happen several years ago no longer matter to them. Take Roe V. Wade for example. In 2022, lots of people were i shock, and lots of people were mobilized when it was overturned. But as time goes by, many people get used to the new reality and become complicit. They still care about it, but they are just not as energized by this as they used to. They same also true for Jan 6th.

    And finally, my biggest concern is not about people who switch sides, but about the voters that stay home and not vote because they are not as excited about Biden, because they disagree with him about Gaza and support for Israel, because they are concerned about his age. Because they are not happy about the economy, because they don’t like the ultra-progressives, etc. They won’t vote for Trump, but they won’t feel the urgency to go out and vote this time around.

    For the democrats to win, they do need to keep raising the alarm about Trump, but this alone won’t be enough. They must also restore confidence in Biden. Without that, we would loose (and by “we”, I don’t just meet democrats, but the entire US). Biden must go out and talk more. Be more present. His SOTU speech was great, but this alone is not enough. He must keep doing it to make his case and bring voters to the polls.

    • massappeal says:

      “…historically there was never a time in recent history when democrats were behind in the polls and won.”

      Romney led Obama narrowly in most polls a month before the 2012 election.
      Clinton trailed Perot by 14 and Bush by 6 in June 1992 polling.

    • Konny_2022 says:

      “Biden must go out and talk more. Be more present. His SOTU speech was great, but this alone is not enough. He must keep doing it to make his case and bring voters to the polls.”

      Here is a list where Biden spoke after SOTU (compiled from the WH pages):

      – March 8: Remarks by President Biden Campaign Event, Philadelphia, PA;
      – March 9: Remarks by President Biden at a Campaign Event, Atlanta, GA;
      – March 11: Remarks by President Biden at the National League of Cities Congressional City Conference;
      – March 11: Remarks by President Biden on Lowering Healthcare Costs for American Families, Goffstown, NH;
      – March 11: Remarks by President Biden at a Campaign Event, Manchester, NH;
      – March 12: Remarks by President Biden, President Andrzej Duda, and Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland Before Bilateral Meeting;
      – March 13: Remarks by President Biden on How His Investments are Rebuilding Our Communities and Creating Good-Paying Jobs, Milwaukee, WI.

      I think that’s a pretty impressive list so far. The March 12 event reminds us that Biden has still a side job to campaigning like getting visited by and talking with foreign leaders.

      • Rayne says:

        Your timeline tells us what the problem is: the media doesn’t cover competence. Compare the amount of media coverage given to anything Trump said or did from 2015 through 2021 versus coverage of Biden at these events.

        • Konny_2022 says:

          Exactly! That’s why I turned to the WH pages. I even omitted the press gaggles — the type of president-press interaction that was covered for the 45th president as if the gaggles (back then also named “chopper talks”) were press conferences proper.

          Maybe it’s worth checking the WH sites once in a while to check what again the media didn’t cover. It’s not only the speeches and remarks but also fact sheets and the like.

        • Rayne says:

          This is why I follow Steve Herman-VOA on Mastodon. There’s a reason Musk booted off the dead bird app a career journalist with a history of straight news reporting who is paid by us, the people.

          I am slowly parsing reports from October to present about Gaza. It’s sickening watching what has been a balancing act of support for a long-time ally and begging that ally to stop killing civilians. But if I only watched corporate news I wouldn’t grasp this.

        • dimmsdale says:

          thank you, Rayne, look forward to following him. He’s also on Bluesky at @newsguy.bsky.social

        • Konny_2022 says:

          I am not — and never was — on any social network whatsoever. I’ve read about Mastodon. Perhaps I should give it a try.

          What makes the selective MSM coverage in the US even more shameful is that foreign correspondents seem to rely on them. That’s at least what I can say for German newspapers which I follow relatively regularly.

    • Yohei1972 says:

      Where are you getting these assertions about polling? As Massappeal points out, that’s pure fiction. What the historical data actually show is that head-to-head candidate polls have little predictive value this far out from the election.

      As for the challenges with unenthusiastic voters potentially staying home – true enough as far as it goes, but Trump has that problem too, in spades, as polling and the breakdown of primary vote results show.

      There’s no room for complacency, but neither is there any call, or use, for despondency or panic. Especially not based on fabricated or cherrypicked assertions.

  28. Bobster33 says:

    Remember when Carville got Clinton elected with the slogan it’s the economy, stupid? In this election cycle, it’s abortion and marijuana legalization. Aside from net neutrality, abortion and marijuana legalization have some of the highest approval ratings of any issue. And to get someone off of their ass to vote, it helps to get them angry. Abortion is one such issue.

    As an aside, I would advise Biden and Kamala to actually use the word “abortion” when they talk about this issue. I’ve chatted with a few of the 20 somethings in the extended family and they are pissed that the older Democrats are afraid of the word.

    • Troutwaxer says:

      Maybe the message for MAGA-types should be even simpler: “Trump’s a loser” and variations thereof.

  29. Brad Cole says:

    “…not (widely) known…”
    The astroturf VRWC has dominated much of the political media narrative since the 80s. By getting the high ground there, they have an edge. They use it to cast obfuscating and confusing tales, most can’t or won’t wade through it.

  30. Savage Librarian says:

    Make America Greed Again

    The American standard version
    of how Persona ditched the Person
    incorporates some immersion
    into coercion and diversion.

    That’s not to say desertion
    was the least bit less urgent
    but only to cast aspersion
    on thinking things can’t worsen.

    The Person found Persona
    at a dive bar in Daytona.
    They shared a cold Corona
    and yakked about Estonia.

    Then they both were shown a
    live shark that had grown a
    foot by a man in a kimono
    who claimed to be the owner.

    Soon Persona Non Grata
    entered too and got caught up
    where the talk, like fierce lava,
    was spewing up far hotter.

    This was no bourgeois drama
    with “thank you” and “de nada,”
    This was more like “not gonna.”
    Destination rock bottom.

    And, so it was. Lesson learned:
    Persona’s fate was well earned,
    The Person was duly spurned,
    Persona Non Grata, burned.

    But everyone else still yearned
    to murmur of the concerned
    who wanted it all adjourned
    as if the world had not turned.

    6/8/19

    I still believe this.

  31. flounder says:

    During the Hur hearing, did a single Democrat bring up Butler and his story about loading the missing classified material boxes onto Trump’s plane, or the one about him overhearing Trump’s cronies scheming to destroy the security footage? I watched most of it and heard nothing.

  32. ExhumeHume says:

    The major players of the ongoing coup are walking a tightrope. One the one hand, they have to move fast enough to keep the coup moving to its goal by January. On the other hand, they have to move slow enough to stay below the threshold of obviousness so as to ensure everyone stays compliant and docile, thereby avoiding civil unrest that could trigger Martial Law and the invocation of the Insurrection Act while it’s in the hands of Biden.

  33. Franktoo says:

    This list of Republican worked for President Trump during his first term as president. They know him best and are not supporting re-election.

    Former Vice President Pence. Video clip explaining why.
    Former Attorney General Barr
    Former Secretary of Defense Esper
    Former Secretary of Defense Mattis
    Former National Security Advisor John Bolton
    Former National Security Advisor McMaster
    Close Friend and Former Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie
    Former WH Chief of Staff John F Kelly
    Director of national Intelligence Dan Coats
    Former Deputy WH Press Secretary Sarah Matthews
    Former WH Communications Director Stephanie Grisham

Comments are closed.