Wednesday Reads

Good Day!!

There is quite a bit of news happening today. The top stories involve the Supreme Court, abortion, Hunter Biden, and the phony “impeachment” of President Biden by a bunch of Republican idiots. Here goes:

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two troubling cases, one involving access to early abortions, and another that could affect January 6th cases.

The Washington Post: Supreme Court will decide access to key abortion drug mifepristone.

The Supreme Court will decide this term whether to limit access to a key abortion drug, returning the polarizing issue of reproductive rights to the high court for the first time since the conservative majority overturned Roe v. Wade last year.

230421083228-mifepristone-file-041323The Biden administration and the manufacturer of mifepristone have asked the justices to overturn a lower-court ruling that would make it more difficult to obtain the medication, which is part of a two-drug regimen used in more than half of all abortions in the United States. Oral arguments will likely be scheduled for the spring, with a decision by the end of June, further elevating the issue of abortion, which has proven galvanizing for Democrats, during the 2024 campaign season.

The justices will review a decision fromthe conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit that said the Food and Drug Administration did not follow proper procedures when it began loosening regulations for obtaining the mifepristone, which was first approved more than 20 years ago. The changes made over the last few years included allowing the drug to be taken later in pregnancy, to be mailed directly to patients and to be prescribed by a medical professional other than a doctor.

Medications to terminate pregnancy, which can be taken at home, have increased in importance over the last 18 months, as more than a dozenstates severely limited or banned abortions following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

Read more at the WaPo link.

NBC News: Supreme Court agrees to hear Jan. 6 case that could affect Trump prosecution.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear an appeal brought by a man charged with offenses relating to the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol in a case that could have a major impact on the criminal prosecution of former President Donald Trump.

The justices will hear a case brought by defendant Joseph Fischer, who is seeking to dismiss a charge accusing him of obstructing an official proceeding, namely the certification by Congress of President Joe Biden’s election victory, which was disrupted by a mob of Trump supporters.

Two other Jan. 6 defendants, Edward Lang and Garret Miller, brought similar appeals, the outcome of which will be dictated by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Fischer’s case.

Fritz Ulrich, a federal public defender representing Fischer, said he was pleased that the court will clarify the scope of the law in question but had no further comment.

Trump has been charged with the same offense as well as others in his federal election interference case. The court’s decision to take up the issue, as well as the timing of its ultimate ruling, could therefore affect his case.

How the case against Trump could be affected:

It will take months for the justices to hear oral arguments and issue a ruling sometime during the court’s current nine-month term, which ends in June.

Trump’s lawyers could use the Supreme Court’s involvement as one opportunity to delay his election interference trial, which is scheduled to start in March.

Trump is the front-runner in the polls for the Republican presidential nomination, and any delay in his criminal trial in Washington would be to his benefit.

If Trump were to win the election in November, he would then be in a position to have the charges dismissed. If the case proceeds as scheduled in March and Trump were to be convicted, he could be sentenced before the election.

Read all the details at NBC News.

One more abortion story:

NBC News: Florida abortion rights activists win over Republicans in ballot measure push.

Jaymie Carter is a registered Republican.

She has been named by two Republican governors — first Rick Scott, then Ron DeSantis — to sit on the Board of Trustees for the State College of Florida, and she says she voted for DeSantis in his 2022 campaign for governor.

231212-florida-abortion-rights-se-556p-967933But when it comes to the issue of abortion, she’s breaking with her party.

“Women are concerned about what’s happening with our bodies and our right to choose. And there’s a lot of people that you wouldn’t think would be the pro-choice advocates, but they are,” she said. “And the government overreach, it’s huge right now.”

Carter is one of more than 150,000 registered Republican voters who have signed a petition in support of a ballot amendment that would bar the state from restricting abortion “before viability” — which is usually at 24 weeks — or “when necessary to protect the patient’s health.”

That total comes from the Florida Women’s Freedom Coalition, one of several groups working to gather the 891,523 signatures necessary to get the measure on the ballot, working with Floridians Protecting Freedom, the campaign leading the ballot initiative. The group says it has gathered and submitted more than 1.3 million signatures so far. The website of the Florida Division of Elections says it has validated 687,699 signatures as of mid-December.

Florida is one of nine states where groups are pushing to get measures on the ballot that would bar restrictions on abortion rights, following a streak of wins for similar measures in Kansas and Ohio.

And as the Feb. 1 deadline to get the petitions submitted and verified approaches in Florida, some Republican voters are coming out publicly to support and even advocate for it.

Very interesting. I wonder if Ron DeSantis has heard about this yet?

This is the day that House Republicans ordered Hunter Biden to undergo a behind-closed-doors deposition. In a surprise move, Biden held an impressive press conference, in which he reiterated his willingness to answer questions at a public hearing.

Luke Broadwater at The New York Times: Hunter Biden, Defying Deposition Subpoena, Again Offers Public Testimony.

Hunter Biden, the president’s son, appeared on Capitol Hill on Wednesday morning to offer to publicly testify in House Republicans’ impeachment investigation into his father, though he insisted he would not appear for a private deposition they scheduled over his refusals.

The younger Mr. Biden, who has been served a subpoena to testify, spoke to reporters in a hastily called news conference outside the Capitol near the Senate, across the complex from a House office building where Republican lawmakers were waiting to question him behind closed doors.

“I am here,” Mr. Biden said. “Let me state as clearly as I can: My father was not involved in my business.”

“There is no evidence to support the allegations my father was involved in my business because it did not happen,” he added.

The younger Mr. Biden has objected to providing private testimony, saying he fears Republicans will selectively leak his remarks and try to distort what he says. He has repeatedly proposed that he appear at a public hearing instead to answer their questions.

“They have lied over and over,” Mr. Biden said of Republicans.

Republicans have threatened to hold him in contempt of Congress if he does not comply.

Jacqueline Alemany and Matt Viser at The Washington Post: Ahead of House GOP vote on impeachment inquiry, Hunter Biden defies subpoena.

Hunter Biden will not appear for a closed-door deposition Wednesday, defying a subpoena from House Republicans who are investigating the Biden family’s finances.

“I’m here to testify at a public hearing today,” Hunter Biden said in a statement outside of the Capitol on Wednesday morning. “Republicans do not want an open process where Americans can see their tactics … or hear what I have to say.” [….]

hunter_biden_AP_23312563019935_NAT_1205

Hunter Biden

Hunter Biden maintained that he would answer questions only in a public hearing. His legal team has pointed to past comments in which House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) all but dared Hunter Biden to testify — publicly or privately — and the team has said they don’t trust House Republicans not to selectively leak his testimony.

“For six years I’ve been targeted by the unrelenting Trump Machine asking ‘where’s Hunter,’” Hunter Biden said. “Here’s my answer: I am here.”

Comer over the past two weeks has rebuffed Hunter Biden’s offer to publicly testify before the committee, and Republicans on Wednesday vowed to move expeditiously to initiate proceedings to hold him in contempt of Congress for defying their subpoena.

Hunter Biden “does not get to dictate the terms of the subpoena,” Comer told reporters outside of an empty hearing room where Hunter Biden was scheduled to be deposed. Pressed about whether he has found evidence that President Biden had engaged in wrongdoing or criminal conduct, Comer said he had found “some very serious evidence,” before citing two examples of banking records he has repeatedly mischaracterized.

The fake charges against President Biden:

The foundation of the impeachment inquiry, outlined by Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) in a briefing with reporters last week, rests on an unsubstantiated accusation that has become the linchpin of allegations regarding the Biden family’s purported corrupt and criminal conduct.

downloadRepublicans allege that Joe Biden as vice president pushed for the firing of Ukraine’s top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, to quash a probe into the former owner of Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company where Hunter Biden sat on the board. That allegation has been widely refuted by former U.S. officials, as well as Ukrainian anti-corruption activists.

As part of the inquiry, House Republicans also have elevated claims that the Biden administration slowed a Justice Department investigation into Hunter Biden’s financial background, but that testimony has been repeatedly disputed by officials involved in the case.

“There is no fairness or decency in what these Republicans are doing. Their false facts have become the beliefs of too many people,” Hunter Biden said Wednesday.

“They have taken the light of my dad’s love for me and presented it as darkness,” he continued. “They have no shame.

Jonathan Chait at New York Magazine: We Were Told Biden Is Secretly Running the DOJ. Why Is His Son Being Charged?

It has long been an article of faith on the right that Attorney General Merrick Garland is prosecuting Donald Trump because President Biden wants him to. Even the Trump-skeptical corners of the conservative media casually assert, without bothering to supply any evidence for the charge, that Biden is behind the DOJ investigations.

“Biden Justice Department officials and Democratic prosecutors are currently trying to put the other side’s leading contender for the White House in jail … The vapors over Trump saying he’s going to target his enemies,” argues National Review editor-in-chief Rich Lowry, “is rich coming from people who have targeted their enemy by any means necessary for years now.”

“Meantime, a Justice Department special counsel has filed trumped-up charges against Mr. Trump for allegedly defrauding the U.S. … writes Wall Street Journal columnist Allysia Finley, “Abuse executive power. Ignore the law. Run roughshod over individual liberties. Retaliate against political opponents. Mr. Biden and his allies have done exactly what they warn Mr. Trump will do if he returns to the White House.”

You’d think those conservatives might be questioning this assumption, now that Garland’s Justice Department is prosecuting Joe Biden’s son for tax evasion. But no, they’re just pretending it isn’t happening.

There was never any basis for the charge that Garland is working at Biden’s behest. Garland is well-respected by legal types in both parties — that’s why Barack Obama thought he was the only Supreme Court nominee who stood any chance of confirmation by a Republican Senate in 2016 — and received 70 votes for his confirmation.

Unlike Trump, who repeatedly demanded his attorneys general prosecute his enemies and let his criminal buddies go free, and made these demands privately with even more corrupt intent, there is zero public evidence or reporting to suggest Biden has improperly tried to influence Garland’s decisions.

What’s more, the two Justice Department cases against Trump both flow directly from publicly identifiable sources. Trump is being charged in the documents case because the National Archive asked him to return government property, he refused, and then covered up his crimes when the FBI came looking. The January 6 case comes directly out of an investigation by a House committee that turned up damning evidence….

Indeed, the president is angry with his attorney general. “Biden’s relationship with Garland — which was already tense — has become more frigid amid Biden’s frustration at the lengthy criminal investigation and now prosecution of Hunter by the Justice Department,” reports Alex Thompson, “People close to Biden also have fumed at Garland for appointing a special counsel in August.” Thompson also reports, “One person close to the president unflatteringly compared Garland to the former FBI director James Comey, claiming they both have been obsessed with the appearance of having integrity rather than just trying to make the right decision.”

Read the rest at the link.

The accusers: Jim Jordan and James Comer

The accusers: Jim Jordan and James Comer

The New York Times: House Set to Approve Biden Impeachment Inquiry as It Hunts for an Offense.

The Republican-led House is on track to approve a formal impeachment inquiry into President Biden on Wednesday, pushing forward with a yearlong G.O.P. investigation that has failed to produce evidence of anything approaching high crimes or misdemeanors.

Republicans say the vote, which is expected in the evening, is needed to give them full authority to carry out their investigations amid anticipated legal challenges from the White House. Democrats have denounced the inquiry as a fishing expedition and a political stunt.

G.O.P. leaders refrained for months from calling a vote to open an impeachment inquiry, given the reservations of mainstream Republicans, many of them from politically competitive districts, about moving forward without proof that Mr. Biden did anything wrong. But the political ground has shifted considerably, and most of them are now willing to do so, emphasizing that they are not yet ready to charge the president.

“Voting in favor of an impeachment inquiry does not equal impeachment,” Representative Tom Emmer of Minnesota, the No. 3 House Republican, said at a news conference on Tuesday. “We will continue to follow the facts wherever they lead, and if they uncover evidence of treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors, then and only then will the next steps towards impeachment proceedings be considered.”

Read more at the NYT. I guess we’ll learn later today if the Republicans have the votes for their impeachment inquiry without a shred of evidence to support it.

More stories worth checking out today:

AP: Biden takes a tougher stance on Israel’s ‘indiscriminate bombing’ of Gaza.

The New York Times: Top Court Clears Path for Democrats to Redraw House Map in New York.

Reuters: US agency will not reinstate $900 mln subsidy for SpaceX Starlink unit.

The New York Times: In a First, Nations at Climate Summit Agree to Move Away From Fossil Fuels.

Shan Wu at The Daily Beast: Trump, Elon Musk, and Billionaire ‘Populists’ Threaten Democracy and Freedom.


Mostly Monday Reads: Asymmetric Political and Judicial Warfare

John Buss (@repeat1968) says Cat Turd blocked him so the X chaos agent missed this epic rendering.

Asymmetry is a strategy in warfare.  Also, the strategy of this sort of warfare is asymmetrical.   I will use this conflict type and its literature to posit a political theory on my own. Are you ready?  I believe that the reason that Trump and his White Christian Nationalists have been so successful is that they use an asymmetric strategy with our political and judicial institutions, and they act asymmetrically. It’s the chaos and the show that matters.  It’s also impacted the media. You cannot attempt to deal with the MAGA folks in the historical, democratic, and constitutional framework. Their approach to attacks on the traditional context of our institutions is asymmetric.  You cannot deal with it using only the old frameworks that these institutions traditionally employ.

I found a lot of examples in the headlines to support this.  This quote is from the National Defense University Press. It’s dated September. 30, 2014, so it’s right when we dealt with the Taliban, Afghanistan, and Iraq with our historical conflict strategies for a period.  Its title is “Asymmetry Is Strategy, Strategy Is Asymmetry,” and is written by Lukas Milevski in Joint Force Quarterly 75.  Just as this author states his argument thusly: ” War has allegedly now been transformed from a regular, conventional, purportedly symmetric exercise into an irregular, unconventional, asymmetric event, which must be understood anew.”  

Form over Substance

Theorists of contemporary conflict, whether describing asymmetric or unconventional wars, war among the people, or other iterations of modern armed conflict, usually posit significant change in the character, if not actual nature, of war. Many of them accurately identify and analyze the characteristics of modern interventions. In perceiving significant differences between modern war and wars past, however, they caricature historical conflict.

Thus, Rupert Smith argues that “war as cognitively known to most non-combatants, war as battle in a field between men and machinery, war as a massive deciding event in a dispute in international affairs: such war no longer exists.”4 Martin van Creveld propounds the notion that “the demise of conventional war will cause strategy in its traditional, Clausewitzian sense to disappear.”5 Fourth-generation warfare theorists such as T.X. Hammes identify generations of warfare with particular styles of conducting war; third-generation warfare is, for example, maneuver warfare, and fourth-generation warfare Thus, Rupert Smith argues that “war as cognitively known to most non-combatants, war as battle in a field between men and machinery, war as a massive deciding event in a dispute in international affairs: such war no longer exists.”4 Martin van Creveld propounds the notion that “the demise of conventional war will cause strategy in its traditional, Clausewitzian sense to disappear.”5 Fourth-generation warfare theorists such as T.X. Hammes identify generations of warfare with particular styles of conducting war; third-generation warfare is, for example, maneuver warfare, and fourth-generation warfare “uses all available networks—political, economic, social, and military—to convince the enemy’s political decision makers that their strategic goals are either unachievable or too costly for the perceived benefit. It is an evolved form of insurgency.”6

You could posit that what is being called an attack on democracy also  “uses all available networks—political, economic, social, and military—to convince the enemy’s political decision makers that their strategic goals are either unachievable or too costly for the perceived benefit. It is an evolved form of insurgency.” We can see the chaotic impact of diverse media outlets, including social media and streaming outlets. Tucker Carlson is ready to start one just in time for the primary season.  How many alternative ‘news’ sources that weren’t even dreamed about before Fox News are now available?

Rather than having discussions on how disturbing this all is, we need to find a new approach, just like the British did when they got mowed down in the French-Indian Wars by lining up in columns when their enemy ambushed them from trees and bushes.  Yes, I am an academic who is always challenging and looking for new theories.  It comes with the job and the training.  Here’s my current evidence.

Let’s start with the challenge to our judicial system.  This analysis is provided by Jose Pagliery, writing for The Daily Beast. “Trump Has Found a Dangerous Workaround to Gag Orders. Donald Trump will have a number of opportunities to violate gag orders in the coming months. He may have just found a dangerous loophole.”.  Who among us is not frustrated by the lack of our laws to shut this man up as he threatens everyone in sight?

Donald Trump is, once again, outmaneuvering the American court system.

No, his New York bank fraud trial is unlikely to end favorably for the former president. But that trial is quickly becoming a blueprint for defying gag orders—an issue that will only become more pressing as several criminal cases loom on the horizon.

Trump’s strategy has been simple: say whatever he wants, inspire a gag order, appeal the decision, and even if the gag order is upheld, refuse to delete the social media posts he made during the confusion.

Trump then watches his old posts take on a life of their own, inspiring violent threats against his intended targets while he quietly sits by.

Due to a layered series of court appeals, it’s an open question whether the Republican 2024 frontrunner is technically violating the law. But he’s essentially gotten away with ignoring the restriction.

Catherine Ross, a professor emeritus at George Washington University Law School, said the situation is clearly a preview of what’s to come as Trump faces criminal trials in Washington, New York, South Florida, and possibly even Georgia next year.

“Absolutely. We can fully expect anything that Trump thinks worked for him once, he will use again. He is testing, he is refining, and one would even speculate that he is issuing warnings to other judges: ‘You can’t tie me down. I’m impervious,’” she told The Daily Beast.

The nature of the larger threat was explicitly laid out on Friday, when a federal appellate court in Washington warned that in the D.C. case “some aspects of Mr. Trump’s public statements pose a significant and imminent threat to the fair and orderly adjudication of the ongoing criminal proceeding, warranting a speech-constraining protective order.”

But his ongoing bank fraud trial in New York shows that he knows no bounds.

Hugo Lowell writes this for The Guardian. “Trump tests federal gag order with attack on Bill Barr: ‘He was a coward.’  Audience at gala event included allies that Trump is expected to tap for top roles should he be re-elected next year.”  Trump’s MAGA deplorables do not care what he does.  They only love the vitriol spewing from his mouth.  How does a democratic republic work when somewhere between 20 to 40 percent of the voting public don’t care if Trump’s new appointees will act totally outside the law?  Doesn’t this seem like a form akin to terrorism without the vest bombs?

Donald Trump tested the contours of his gag order in the federal criminal case over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, assailing his former attorney general and potential trial witness William Barr in remarks at a Saturday night New York gala event.

“I make this commitment to you tonight: we will not have Bill Barr as our attorney general, is that OK?” Trump said as he discussed a potential second presidency. “He was a coward. He was afraid of being impeached.”

The US court of appeals for the DC circuit notably ruled days before that Trump remains barred from attacking potential trial witnesses in the 2020 election interference case pending against him in Washington as long as his attacks do not involve their participation in the criminal investigation or trial proceedings.

Under that standard, it was unclear whether Trump directly violated the conditions of the gag order, which he has vowed to appeal to the US supreme court. But it tested the restriction’s scope and cast into doubt his ability to stay clear of being held in contempt.

The remark about Barr came during a speech heavy with resentment about Trump’s four criminal indictments and vows for revenge before an audience that included allies he is expected to tap for top justice department roles should he be re-elected next year to the White House.

Trump compared himself again to the legendary mob boss Al Capone. But he appeared to press the point more in front of his most loyal allies, including Kash Patel – widely considered a candidate for FBI or CIA director – and Jeffrey Clark, a former justice department official who has himself been indicted.

Donald Trump and Steve Bannon were giving each other big bear hugs at the event. Bannon is a flame thrower if there ever was one.

Still, the Special Counsel persists. This is from NBC News , and it’s breaking news. “Special counsel asks Supreme Court to immediately decide Trump immunity question.  A federal judge had rejected former President Donald Trump’s immunity claim over his prosecution in election interference case.”  How broken is the Supreme Court with the assymetric strategies used by McConnell to get the worst appointees ever its bench?

Special Counsel Jack Smith on Monday asked the Supreme Court to immediately step in to decide whether former President Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution for his actions seeking to overturn the 2020 election.

“This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office,” Smith wrote in the court filing.

Smith said it was “of imperative public importance” that the high court decide the question so that Trump trial, currently scheduled for March, can move forward as quickly as possible.

On Dec. 7, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over the election interference case, denied Trump’s motion to dismiss his the indictment on presidential immunity and constitutional grounds, prompting Trump to appeal and ask for the case to be put on hold.

In order to prevent a delay, Smith is seeking to circumvent the appeals process by asking the Supreme Court to take up the case and decide the issue on an expedited basis.

Smith asked the court to order Trump to respond by Dec. 18 and then immediately act on his request. Under the timeline proposed by Smith, the court — if it decides to step in — could hear arguments and issue a ruling in a matter of weeks.

This might be a big fucking deal if things work as were designed in the Constitution.

I laughed as I read that Wall Street Donors were coalescing behind Niki Haley, thinking that hiding radical policy plans behind a normal face was going to go anywhere. What worked with Reagan and the Bushes doesn’t work anymore. Their voters don’t want policies. They want pogroms of chaos and destruction.  This is from Politico.  The analysis is by Sam Sutton.  I’m pretty convinced, and so is the DNC, because that’s what they say in volunteer Zoom calls to us to say that the only way to stop this is to overwhelm them in the polls. But, still, strategic gerrymandering has brought us unequal voter power.  “Wall Street donors dreamed of a Trump alternative. Now they’re waking up. Setting aside Trump’s recent noodling on what he could accomplish in a one-day dictatorship, markets are increasingly wary of how U.S. political disruptions can ripple across the global financial system.”

Wall Street’s top GOP donors are slowly realizing that former President Donald Trump is all-but-certain to clinch the presidential nomination. While billionaires and their strategists continue to throw Hail Marys, they’re also thinking about when to throw in the towel.

“The street still hopes for somebody else,” Thomas Peterffy, the GOP megadonor and founder of Interactive Brokers, told POLITICO from the sidelines of the Goldman Sachs U.S. Financial Services Conference last week.

The odds are exceedingly narrow, even with former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley’s recent surge in the polls. If Haley, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis or another Republican fails to overtake Trump, Peterffy said, he still hopes for a brokered GOP convention — which hasn’t happened since Thomas Dewey was on the ballot in 1948 — or a viable, as-yet unannounced No Labels candidate.

The risks of a second Trump presidency are “incalculable and unpredictable,” he said. Of course, Peterffy has previously gone on record saying that he would likely vote for Trump in 2024 if the former president clinches the nomination.

Peterffy’s comments reflect the collective angst of Wall Street Republicans whose views on Trump are completely divorced from those of the GOP base, according to conversations with more than a dozen bankers, attorneys, political consultants and asset managers. There was a period when it seemed as though Trump might fade; allowing a younger, calmer alternative to take his place. Instead, the opposite happened.

A series of criminal indictments have had no effect on his popularity. Some believe it crystallized his support. Now, unless Haley or DeSantis pull off the impossible — or if there’s a deus ex machina event that upends the political world — high-dollar GOP donors will soon face an uncomfortable decision as to how to proceed.

“My sense is Wall Street will be somewhat split on a Trump-Biden rematch,” former Republican Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee told POLITICO. “The border issue, foreign policy, regulation, trade, stability and mental clarity will weigh on people in varying ways.”

For some, the thought of a second Trump term will be enough to keep them off the field. Wall Street likes predictability. And while some of the finance industry’s kingmakers might blanch at the thought of four more years of President Joe Biden, the potential dysfunction of a second Trump term could raise existential questions about the future of American democracy.

Again, we cannot analyze any of these folks trying to take this all like a slightly morphed usual.  Once more, I make a comparison to Asymmetric Warfare and the article up-top.

Hew Strachan has suggested that “the real problem may well be that our policy has failed to recognise war’s true nature, and so has mistaken changing characteristics for something more fundamental than they actually are.”7 This mischaracterization is frequently manifested in the belief, as apparent before Iraq in 2003 and during some of the advocacy for intervention in Syria in 2013, that war is not adversarial, that enemies do not reciprocally interact with, and against, each other. The character of any war is not unilaterally set by any one implicated polity, but by the reciprocal hostility of all those involved. Thus, in not accounting for the enemy’s own initiative against us, the Western powers are blindsided by actions that are then interpreted as integral to the structure of contemporary war rather than as the consequence of something inherent in war, which is more fundamental and eternal.

Substitute the words ‘MAGA movement and Trump’ for the word ‘war.’  As for the Media, I can only shake my head when I read things like this from CNN. “CNN Polls: Trump leads Biden in Michigan and Georgia as broad majorities hold negative views of the current president.” It’s hard to know what to do with polls other than to look at the underlying movements as something to deal with in a strategy designed to approach the asymmetry of fact and poll findings.

Trump’s margin over Biden in the hypothetical matchup is significantly boosted by support from voters who say they did not cast a ballot in 2020, with these voters breaking in Trump’s favor by 26 points in Georgia and 40 points in Michigan. Those who report having voted in 2020 say they broke for Biden over Trump in that election, but as of now, they tilt in Trump’s favor for 2024 in both states, with Biden holding on to fewer of his 2020 backers than does Trump.

Those numbers hint at possible challenges for both candidates in the long campaign ahead. Trump’s advantage rests on the assumption that he can both maintain support among a fickle, politically disengaged group and convince them to actually vote, while Biden will need to win back the support of disaffected former backers who show little excitement about his reelection bid.

Biden’s struggles in both states are apparent in voters’ impressions of his performance as president, and their views on how his policy positions, ability to understand their problems, stamina and sharpness fail to live up to their image of an ideal president.

Overall, just 35% in Michigan and 39% in Georgia approve of Biden’s job performance, the surveys find, and majorities in both states say his policies have worsened economic conditions in the country (54% in Georgia, 56% in Michigan).

Those grim numbers partially reflect softness among his base: About one-quarter of Democratic and Democratic-leaning registered voters in each state disapprove of Biden, and a little more than 4 in 10 say his policies have not helped the country’s economy. Biden’s campaign is working to sell voters on the success of his economic agenda, with a recently launched ad in Michigan focused on small businesses and the middle class.

I’m surprised at Michigan given how tremendously popular their Governor, Gretchen Whitmer, polls.  I’m going to leave you one more thought on strategies against assymetric conflicts from the Joint Force Quarterly journal.  It speaks to the idea that continuing advantage in something may not be enough to resolve the conflict.

Strategy may be thus cast in a more absolute manner than merely the achievement of continuing advantage. Rather, strategy may be interpreted as the generation and exploitation of asymmetry for the purposes of the war. Roger Barnett complains that:

asymmetries arise if opponents enjoy greater freedom of action, or if they have weapons or techniques available to them that one does not. Perpetrators seek to void the strengths of their adversaries and to be unpredictable. They endeavor to take advantage of an ability to follow certain courses of action or to employ methods that can be neither anticipated nor countered effectively.10

Yet this is the very essence of strategy. Strategy is an adversarial act; the enemy also has a will, a capability, and a vote in the outcome. This reciprocal nature of strategy is a primary source of strategy’s nonlinearity, for defeat may beget renewed defiance and alternative attempts to achieve one’s goals, rather than the desired submission. Thus, Edward Luttwak, for instance, identifies the very pinnacle of strategic performance as “the suspension, if only brief, if only partial, of the entire predicament of strategy.”11 The predicament of strategy is the enemy. The pinnacle, therefore, is the removal of the enemy’s ability, however temporarily, to influence outcomes. Suffering from a position of weakness in an asymmetric relationship restricts one’s abilities to influence outcomes based on that relationship. To generate asymmetry effectively is to be, although not necessarily the only way to be, a skilled strategist.

Can the courts, the political process, and the media defang this enemy of democracy? And how?  Thankfully, political cartooning already acts asymmetrically.

Anyway, some thing to think about, discuss, and question.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?

I got a Holiday Card from The White House today so I thought I’d share it with you!


Lazy Caturday Reads

Good Morning!!

Carlton Alfred Smith

Painting by Carlton Alfred Smith

After all these years of carefully avoiding Covid-19, I finally came down with it about a month ago. I wasn’t that sick at first, and I never got any upper respiratory symptoms. However I became extremely weak and after several days, I sat down and was unable to get up again. I had to call 911, and I ended up in the hospital.

Once I got there, it turned out that the sodium level in my blood was dangerously low. That may have been responsible for my weakness. I had no idea that sodium was so important, but apparently it is. You can have seizures and other serious health problems if it is too low or too high.

Day after day the doctors tried to increase my sodium level. Fortunately, the hospital had very good food. I was never really hungry, but part of raising the sodium level was to eat! So I was in the hospital for about two weeks. Then I was transferred to a rehab, but I signed myself out after 3 days, because they weren’t doing anything for me. 

I’m doing OK at home, although I’m still tired and somewhat weak. I seem to have a bit of a mental hangover from the Covid. My memory seems a little worse and I feel spaced out at times. I think it’s improving though.

I saw my own doctor on Wednesday, and learned that my sodium level is back in the low normal range. That is a relief, but I also tested low for iron and protein. I’m waiting to hear back from my doctor about this.

I did manage to stay abreast of the politics news while I was hospitalized. My TV got CNN, but not MSNBC, and I could read news on my phone. Unfortunately, the news has been disturbing, what with the clear evidence that Trump plans to turn our county into a dictatorship and the war between Israel and Hamas.

So what’s happening today? A real horror story in Texas where the government is forcing a woman to continue a pregnancy even though the fetus will not survive and continuing to carry it will likely result in the woman being unable to have any more children.

CNN: Texas Supreme Court temporarily blocks pregnant woman from emergency abortion.

The Texas Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a pregnant woman from obtaining an emergency abortion in a ruling issued late Friday.

The court froze a lower court’s ruling that would have allowed Kate Cox, who sued the state seeking a court-ordered abortion, to obtain the procedure. “Without regard to the merits, the Court administratively stays the district court’s December 7, 2023 order,” the order states.

The court noted the case would remain pending before them but did not include any timeline on when a full ruling might be issued. Cox is 20 weeks pregnant. Her unborn baby was diagnosed with a fatal genetic condition and she says complications in her pregnancy are putting her health at risk.

Following the ruling, Cox’s attorney said they remain hopeful the state’s request is quickly rejected. “We are talking about urgent medical care. Kate is already 20 weeks pregnant,” said Molly Duane, an attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “This is why people should not need to beg for healthcare in a court of law.”

The ruling came just hours after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton petitioned the high court to intervene in the case.

Paxton’s petition stemmed from a ruling on Thursday by a Texas judge who granted a 14-day temporary restraining order against the state’s abortion ban, so Cox could legally terminate her pregnancy.

The decision marked a significant development in the ongoing debate over the state’s medical exception to its controversial ban on abortions after six weeks – one of the strictest in the nation.

Elizabeth-Allan-Fraser-Seated-Reading-with-a-Cat-Patrick-Allan-Fraser-Oil-Painting

Elizabeth Allan Fraser Seated, Reading with a Cat., by Patrick-Allan-Fraser

More from The New York Times: Texas Supreme Court Temporarily Halts Court-Approved Abortion.

The Texas Supreme Court late Friday temporarily halted a lower court order allowing a Dallas woman to obtain an abortion in spite of the state’s strict bans, after she learned her fetus has a fatal condition.

The state court’s ruling was in response to an appeal from Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas, who opposed the woman’s abortion.

The Supreme Court said that, “without regard to the merits” of the arguments on either side, it had issued an administrative stay in the case, to give itself more time to issue a final ruling.

The stay meant that, for the moment, the order from a judge in Travis County district court permitting the abortion was on hold. That order allowed the woman, Kate Cox, to obtain an abortion and protected her doctor from civil or criminal liability under Texas’s overlapping abortion bans.

“We fear that justice delayed will be justice denied,” said Molly Duane, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing Ms. Cox.

Paxon is a crook who has been under indictment for years and who recently survived an attempt by the legislature to impeach him.

While the Texas bans allow for exceptions to protect the health and life of a pregnant woman, doctors have said that vague legal language created fear of prosecution and an unwillingness to perform abortions.

Mr. Paxton’s filings came hours after a district court judge issued a temporary restraining order barring Mr. Paxton and others from enforcing the state’s overlapping abortion bans against Ms. Cox’s doctor, Damla Karsan, or anyone who assisted her with providing an abortion to Ms. Cox.

In granting the order, the judge, a Democrat, found that Ms. Cox, 31, a mother of two young children living in the Dallas area, met the criteria for an exception to the state’s abortion bans. Her fetus was diagnosed with trisomy 18, a fatal condition in all but a small number of rare cases; Ms. Cox, who is 20 weeks pregnant, had been to the emergency room several times for pain and discharge during her pregnancy.

On Friday, lawyers from the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is also representing Dr. Karsan, filed a response to Mr. Paxton with the state’s highest court.

“The State’s mandamus petition is stunning in its disregard for Ms. Cox’s life, fertility, and the rule of law,” the lawyers for Ms. Cox wrote. “Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court deny the writ and instruct the Attorney General to comply with binding orders from a Texas court.”

A ruling would apply only to Ms. Cox and her current pregnancy.

Abbott Handerson Thayer (American painter, 1849-1921) Favorite Kitten

Abbott Handerson Thayer (American painter, (1849-1921) Favorite Kitten

A large majority of Americans support abortion rights. At Politico, Alice Miranda Ollstein and Adam Cancryn suggest that what’s happening in Texas could help Democrats in 2024: Dems want to focus on abortion rights. A Trump ally may have just helped.

A showdown in Texas over one woman’s right to terminate a non-viable pregnancy could keep abortion at the center of the 2024 election and change the trajectory of legal challenges to state bans.

The case underscores the legal and ethical gray areas physicians have faced since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. And it has amplified a debate over who is exempt from strict abortion bans, who has legal standing to challenge the bans and the liabilities doctors risk in interpreting vague laws with stiff penalties as they help patients navigate time-sensitive medical crises.

Legal experts say the Texas case’s implications stretch far beyond the state’s borders and highlight the defects of a post-Roe legal regime in which a patchwork of state laws is open to clashing interpretations. Several states have vaguely worded exemptions to their abortion bans that rely on the judgment of medical providers to decide who is sick enough to qualify. And those doctors risk losing their license, and can face steep fines or years in prison if a jury disagrees with their call.

“All of this confusion is revealing that Dobbs is not itself workable,” said Greer Donley, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh, referring to the case that overturned Roe. “Dobbs is premised on the distinction between elective and therapeutic abortions, that … you can ban one while protecting the other. We’re learning in real time that that’s not possible.”

Read more at the Politico link.

Recently, there have been a number of stories in the mainstream media acknowledging the obvious fact the Trump plans to turn our country into a dictatorship modeled on Putin’s Russia and Kim Jong Un’s North Korea. Now the Trump campaign is trying to put the genii back in the bottle.

The Washington Post: Trump camp escalates attempt to limit second-term talk from outside allies.

Top officials in Donald Trump’s campaign sought Friday to quell discussions about his possible second term in the White House, amid alarms about authoritarianism and reports about personnel.

“Let us be very specific here: unless a message is coming directly from President Trump or an authorized member of his campaign team, no aspect of future presidential staffing or policy announcements should be deemed official,” Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita said in a written statement to the media.

The unusual statement, which came after a similar message from the senior advisers last month, reflected growing concerns in Trump’s circle about some perceptions associated with his second term. It comes as experts and political opponents have raised alarms about the former president and his allies embracing authoritarian ideas and rhetoric.

Wiles and LaCivita added a warning to their missive: “Let us be even more specific, and blunt: People publicly discussing potential administration jobs for themselves or their friends are, in fact, hurting President Trump … and themselves. These are an unwelcomed distraction.” [….]

two-girls-dressing-a-kitten-by-candlelight-by-joseph-wright-of-derby-1734-e28093-1797-english

Two girls dressing a kitten by candlelight, by-candlelight-by-joseph wright of derby (1734-1797), English

The Washington Post and other outlets have previously reported that Trump and his allies have drawn up specific plans to use the federal government to punish his opponents, including discussions of invoking the Insurrection Act on his first day in office, which would allow him to use the military against civilian demonstrations. Trump, who is campaigning on his grievances and vowing retribution, has also repeatedly said that he sees his prosecutions as justification to turn the Justice Department and the FBI against his opponents.

Friday’s statement also came amid an escalating response from the campaign against reports describing a second Trump term that would be more extreme and autocratic than his first. Trump advisers, who have sought to run a more disciplined campaign compared with Trump’s previous ones, view those reports as unhelpful for the general election.

Trump, however, has at times undercut that message, including on Tuesday during a town hall with Fox News’s Sean Hannity. When asked whether he “would never abuse power as retribution against anybody,” Trump said, “Except for Day 1,” and proceeded to talk about drilling for oil and closing the border.

A coalition of right-wing groups known as Project 2025 has been preparing for an incoming Republican administration. But in light of reports about Trump’s potential second-term policies, including on immigration and personnel, Wiles reached out to the project’s director, Paul Dans of the Heritage Foundation, to tell him the reports were not helpful, The Post previously reported.

Putting a genii back in the bottle is not an easy thing. Democrats should run on the autocratic threats that Trump himself has made repeatedly.

The New York Times: Fears of a NATO Withdrawal Rise as Trump Seeks a Return to Power.

For 74 years, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has been America’s most important military alliance. Presidents of both parties have seen NATO as a force multiplier enhancing the influence of the United States by uniting countries on both sides of the Atlantic in a vow to defend one another.

Donald J. Trump has made it clear that he sees NATO as a drain on American resources by freeloaders. He has held that view for at least a quarter of a century.

In his 2000 book, “The America We Deserve,” Mr. Trump wrote that “pulling back from Europe would save this country millions of dollars annually.” As president, he repeatedly threatened a United States withdrawal from the alliance.

Yet as he runs to regain the White House, Mr. Trump has said precious little about his intentions. His campaign website contains a single cryptic sentence: “We have to finish the process we began under my administration of fundamentally re-evaluating NATO’s purpose and NATO’s mission.” He and his team refuse to elaborate.

That vague line has generated enormous uncertainty and anxiety among European allies and American supporters of the country’s traditional foreign-policy role.

European ambassadors and think tank officials have been making pilgrimages to associates of Mr. Trump to inquire about his intentions. At least one ambassador, Finland’s Mikko Hautala, has reached out directly to Mr. Trump and sought to persuade him of his country’s value to NATO as a new member, according to two people familiar with the conversations.

In interviews over the past several months, more than a half-dozen current and former European diplomats — speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution from Mr. Trump should he win — said alarm was rising on Embassy Row and among their home governments that Mr. Trump’s return could mean not just the abandonment of Ukraine, but a broader American retreat from the continent and a gutting of the Atlantic alliance.

Read more at the NYT.

Platt Powell Ryder - American artist, 1821–1896 Woman at Spinning Wheel

Platt Powell Ryder – American artist, 1821–1896 Woman at Spinning Wheel

One more story on Trump’s autocratic plans from ABC News: Liz Cheney says Donald Trump’s ‘dictator’ remark should be taken ‘literally and seriously.’

Former GOP Rep. Liz Cheney, who is warning about the potential dangers of a second Donald Trump presidency, said Americans should take his recent dictator remark “literally and seriously.”

Trump raised alarms earlier this week when he declined to flat out reassure the public that he wouldn’t abuse power if he is elected, instead telling Fox News host Sean Hannity he wouldn’t be a dictator “except on Day One.”

Some Republicans have suggested Trump was making a joke but Cheney — who had a lead role in investigating his actions after the 2020 election and on Jan. 6, 2021 — disagreed.

“I think we have to take everything that Donald Trump says literally and seriously,” Cheney said in an interview with ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl, which will air Sunday on “This Week.”

“And I think that we saw, frankly, what he was willing to do already after the 2020 election in the lead up to Jan. 6, after Jan 6,” she continued. “People need to remember that when Donald Trump woke up on the morning of Jan. 6, he thought he was going to remain as president. And we saw the extent to which he was willing to attempt to seize power when he lost an election.”

Cheney called it “wishful thinking” to believe that Trump would “now abide by the rulings of the courts or be stopped by the guardrails of our democracy.”

She is absolutely right.

Just a couple more stories before I don’t have the energy to continue:

Speaking of NATO, if Republicans continue to block U.S. aid to Ukraine, we may soon be forced to send U.S. troops into a shooting war. If Ukraine is no longer able to resist being taken over by Russia, Putin will not stop there. If he attacks a NATO ally, we will be forced to a war that could possibly become World War III.

BBC News: Laura Kuenssberg: Ukraine in ‘mortal danger’ without aid, Olena Zelenska warns.

Olena Zelenska has warned that Ukrainians are in “mortal danger” of being left to die if Western countries don’t continue their financial support.

Ukraine’s first lady spoke to Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg a day after Republican senators in the US blocked a key aid bill.

It would have provided more than $60bn (£47.8bn) worth of support to Ukraine.

Speaking hours after a Russian missile attack, she said: “If the world gets tired, they will simply let us die.”

auguste-lorange-1833-1875-girl-sleeping-with-kittens-19th-century

Auguste Lorange (1830-1875) Girl sleeping with kittens

The White House has warned that US funds for Ukraine could soon run out, but Republicans have held up a deal to authorise more assistance.

They are seeking to secure compromises from President Joe Biden and Democrats in Congress on funding for US border measures, in exchange for their support.

President Biden said the failure to agree Ukraine aid would be a “gift” for President Vladimir Putin, warning history would “judge harshly those who turned their back on freedom’s cause”.

Nearly two years since Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, the first lady expressed grave concern over delays in funding.

In an exclusive interview to be broadcast on Sunday, Olena Zelenska told the BBC the slowdown in aid represented a “mortal danger” for her country.

She said: “We really need the help. In simple words, we cannot get tired of this situation, because if we do, we die.

“And if the world gets tired, they will simply let us die.”

The first lady continued: “It hurts us greatly to see the signs that the passionate willingness to help may fade.

“It is a matter of life for us. Therefore, it hurts to see that.”

Another “first lady,” Casey DeSandis, really put her foot in it yesterday.

The Daily Beast: Florida First Lady’s Plea to ‘Moms and Grandmoms’ Sows Confusion.

Florida first lady Casey DeSantis sparked confusion on the campaign trail Friday after calling on supporters of her husband, Ron DeSantis, to flock to Iowa to participate in its looming caucuses.

“We’re asking all of these moms and grandmoms to come from wherever it might be—North Carolina, South Carolina—and descend upon the state of Iowa to be a part of the caucus because you do not have to be a resident of Iowa to be able to participate in the caucus,” Casey DeSantis said during an appearance on Fox News.

“So moms and grandmoms are going to be able to come and be a part and let their voice be heard in support of Ron DeSantis,” she continued.

The Iowa Republican party then issued a reminder that, actually, “you must be a legal resident of Iowa and the precinct you live in and bring photo ID with you to participate in the #iacaucus.”

[Emphasis added] The Iowa Republican party then released a statement explaining that you must live in Iowa in order to participate in the caucuses. Casey then pretended that she was only calling for volunteers, not out-of-state voters. Sure. Casey is apparently as dumb as her husband.

That’s all I have for you today. I know there is much more happening, so please post any thoughts and links on any topic in the comment thread.


Finally Friday Reads: White-Washing our Lives

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

We’re heading to the end of the year as measured by the Romans and their Sun God, who stole that calendar from the Greeks and other things from the Egyptians.  The Egyptians were more interested in the Dog Star since it appeared in the east each solar year when the Nile flooded than the sun. Julius Caesar replaced the slightly confusing Greek Lunar Calendar with the Egyptian one in 45 BC.  The Romans stole a lot from the Greeks, too.  A later Pope, Gregory XIII, tried to correct the bugs in that one. However, we still have leap years and months with varying numbers of days. That’s why they constantly have to tinker with it. They’re forcing it to be what they want.

None of this is particularly relevant to the many folks who still follow the lunar calendar for important days. It shows you just how much conquerors can usurp everything meaningful to you as they rewrite your celebrations, history, and culture.  I have a meeting next week where everyone is supposed to share their holiday traditions with pictures and stories before we go on the obligatory week off, which really is not the best time of year to have a forced week off.  I always get to be the one who says there are no holidays in this month for me. But you can ask me on January 14th next year.

I just try to stay out of the way of all the money-centric activities during the month and the frenetic business that wears everyone out and causes many to be depressed. If you are one of those folks who experience depression this time of year, you are not alone, and do not hesitate to seek help.  Also, please remind any of your friends and family who struggle this month that you stand by them and are willing to help them.

Fig. 2. Virginian Luxuries. Courtesy of the Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Folk Art Center, Williamsburg, Va.

There is a genuine effort to white-wash history in this country. Texas is a mainstay in these activities. This is from the Texas Monthly. “The Texas Historical Commission Removed Books on Slavery From Plantation Gift Shops. An agency spokesperson claimed that the move had nothing to do with politics. Internal emails show otherwise. ” There are many plantations here in Louisiana and many focus on the treatment of slaves in their presentations of history. It’s not pretty and it shouldn’t be, because it wasn’t.

After visiting the Varner-Hogg plantation an hour south of Houston, amateur historian Michelle Haas was incensed by what she had seen. At an exhibit that details the farm’s use as a sugar plantation worked by at least 66 slaves in the early nineteenth century, she’d watched an informational video. To her mind, it focused too much on slavery at the site and not enough on the Hogg family, which had turned its former home into a museum celebrating Texas history. She’d also seen books in the visitor center gift shop written by Carol Anderson and Ibram X. Kendi, two Black academic historians who have been outspoken on the issue of systemic racism. Outraged, she emailed David Gravelle, a board member of the Texas Historical Commission, the agency that oversees historical sites at the direction of leaders appointed by Governor Greg Abbott. “What a s—show is this video,” Haas wrote on September 2, 2022. “Add to that the fact that the activist staff member doing the buying for the gift shop thinks Ibram X. Kendi and White Rage have a place at a historic site.”

Over the next eight months, Haas continued to email Gravelle, advocating for such books to be removed. In turn, Gravelle, a marketing executive based in Dallas, took up the cause internally at the Historical Commission, calling on agency staff to do away with the titles Haas didn’t think belonged at the gift shops. By November of this year, it appeared Haas’s demands were met. The Texas Historical Commission no longer sells White Rage by Anderson or Stamped From the Beginning by Kendi, or 23 other works to which Haas later objected, at two former slave plantations in Brazoria County, including Varner-Hogg. Among the literature no longer available for purchase is an autobiography of a slave girl, a book of Texas slave narratives, the celebrated novel Roots by Alex Haley, and the National Book Award–winning Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison.

The Texas Historical Commission did not provide Texas Monthly with a list of titles no longer for sale. Chris Florance, a spokesperson for the agency, said many books were removed from the historical sites as part of an effort that he said was launched in March to reduce inventory as the agency transitions to a new point-of-sale software system. Emails acquired by Texas Monthly through an open-records request reveal, however, that Gravelle was concerned about the way those books presented Texas history and about potential attention from state lawmakers over what books were available for purchase. The emails also show that he had raised those concerns in February, before the agency decided to change its software system.

Texas Attorney General, and all around corrupt crook is going after the Ob/Gyn who will hopefully, still perform a necessary abortion approved by a Judge just days ago.  This letter was sent to Three Hospitals where the Doctor would likely perform the surgery.  AG Paxton has done nothing to protect the children of Texas from death by guns, but that is his response to procedure necessary to keep this woman healthy and alive. It his not his or the state’s business.  This is from The Guardian. “Texas attorney general says he will sue doctor who gives abortion to Kate Cox. Ken Paxton issues threat after judge ruled this week that Cox, a pregnant woman with a lethal fetal diagnosis, can get an abortion.”

The Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, has threatened to prosecute any doctor who provides an abortion to Kate Cox, a woman with a non-viable pregnancy, advising hospitals to ignore a court order issued on Thursday allowing her to get the procedure.

The rightwing Paxton issued the warning to three Houston-area hospitals after a Texas judge ruled this week that Cox, a pregnant woman with a lethal fetal diagnosis, may obtain an abortion under the narrow medical exceptions offered by the state bans.

In a brazen dismissal of the court’s decision, Paxton wrote that the judge’s order “will not insulate hospitals, doctors or anyone else from civil and criminal liability.”

Paxton also wrote that the hospital where Cox obtains an abortion “may be liable for negligent credentialing the physician” who performs the procedure.

The Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit on behalf of Cox after she learned last week that her fetus has trisomy 18, a fatal chromosomal condition, as well as other health issues, including a spinal abnormality. Continuing the pregnancy could threaten Cox’s life and future fertility. The 31-year-old mother of two has already rushed to the emergency room four times with severe cramping and fluid loss, but doctors have told her that their hands are tied by the state laws.

On Thursday, the Travis county judge, Maya Guerra Gamble, issued a temporary restraining order to permit Cox’s doctor to perform the abortion.

“The idea that Ms Cox wants desperately to be a parent and this law might actually cause her to lose that ability is shocking and would be a genuine miscarriage of justice,” the judge said, following an emergency hearing on Thursday.

Late Thursday night, the state appealed the judge’s ruling, in a motion asking the Texas supreme court to immediately block Gamble’s order.

In Paxton’s letter to the hospitals involved in Cox’s case, the attorney general wrote that Gamble was “not medically qualified to make this determination”.

“He is trying to bulldoze the legal system to make sure Kate and pregnant women like her continue to suffer,” said Marc Hearron, the senior counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights, in a statement. “Fearmongering has been Ken Paxton’s main tactic in enforcing these abortion bans. Rather than respect the judiciary, he is misrepresenting the court’s order.”

Cox’s case marks the first time a pregnant person has asked a court for an emergency abortion since Roe v Wade was decided in 1973.

Anti-Semitism and Anti-Muslim speech is a topic of a debate over freedom of speech in this country. It has been especially focused on the speech of students and professors at Universities.  Michelle Goldberg provides this Op-Ed for the New York Times. “At a Hearing on Israel, University Presidents Walked Into a Trap.”

On Wednesday, a dear friend emailed me a viral clip from the House hearing on campus antisemitism in which three elite university presidents refuse to say, under questioning by Representative Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican, that calling for the genocide of Jews violates school policies on bullying and harassment. “My God, have you seen this?” wrote my friend, a staunch liberal. “I can’t believe I find myself agreeing with Elise Stefanik on anything, but I do here.”

If I’d seen only that excerpt from the hearing, which has now led to denunciations of the college leaders by the White House and the Democratic governor of Pennsylvania, among many others, I might have felt the same way. All three presidents — Claudine Gay of Harvard, Sally Kornbluth of M.I.T. and Elizabeth Magill of the University of Pennsylvania — acquitted themselves poorly, appearing morally obtuse and coldly legalistic. It was a moment that seemed to confirm many people’s worst fears about the tolerance for Jew hatred in academia.

But while it might seem hard to believe that there’s any context that could make the responses of the college presidents OK, watching the whole hearing at least makes them more understandable. In the questioning before the now infamous exchange, you can see the trap Stefanik laid.

“You understand that the use of the term ‘intifada’ in the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict is indeed a call for violent armed resistance against the state of Israel, including violence against civilians and the genocide of Jews. Are you aware of that?” she asked Gay.

Gay responded that such language was “abhorrent.” Stefanik then badgered her to admit that students chanting about intifada were calling for genocide, and asked angrily whether that was against Harvard’s code of conduct. “Will admissions offers be rescinded or any disciplinary action be taken against students or applicants who say, ‘From the river to the sea’ or ‘intifada,’ advocating for the murder of Jews?” Gay repeated that such “hateful, reckless, offensive speech is personally abhorrent to me,” but said action would be taken only “when speech crosses into conduct.”

So later in the hearing, when Stefanik again started questioning Gay, Kornbluth and Magill about whether it was permissible for students to call for the genocide of the Jews, she was referring, it seemed clear, to common pro-Palestinian rhetoric and trying to get the university presidents to commit to disciplining those who use it. Doing so would be an egregious violation of free speech. After all, even if you’re disgusted by slogans like “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” their meaning is contested in a way that, say, “Gas the Jews” is not. Finding themselves in a no-win situation, the university presidents resorted to bloodless bureaucratic contortions, and walked into a public relations disaster.

The anguished and furious reaction of many Jews to that viral clip is understandable. Jewish people of many different political persuasions have been stunned by the rank antisemitism and contempt for Israeli lives that has exploded across campuses, where Jewish students have been threatened and, in some cases, assaulted. This week, when I wrote that the backlash to anti-Israel protests threatens free speech, I received many emails from people who felt I was refusing to grapple with an evident crisis. “You are worried about an overreaction when there hasn’t yet been a sufficient reaction to the antisemitism terrifying Jewish students on campus,” said one.

But it seems to me that it is precisely when people are legitimately scared and outraged that we’re most vulnerable to a repressive response leading to harmful unintended consequences. That’s a lesson of Sept. 11, but also of much of the last decade, when the policing of speech in academia escalated in ways that are now coming back to bite the left.

Amid the uproar over the campus antisemitism hearing, many have claimed that if Stefanik were asking about attacks on any other ethnic group, there would have been no waffling. But Stefanik did ask about another group. Her first question to Gay was, “A Harvard student calling for the mass murder of African Americans is not protected free speech at Harvard, correct?” Gay started to respond, “Our commitment to free speech,” but Stefanik, perhaps realizing she wasn’t going to get the answer she wanted, cut her off and changed tack.

Yet clearly, at many universities, the defense of free speech has been inconsistent. Some elite schools now cloaking themselves in the mantle of the First Amendment to ward off charges of coddling antisemites have, in the past, privileged community sensitivity over unbridled expression. So when university administrators say, as Gay did, “We embrace a commitment to free expression, even of views that are objectionable, offensive, hateful,” many in the Jewish community see a galling double standard.

But as the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a libertarian-leaning civil liberties group, said in a statement about the hearings, “Double standards are frustrating, but we should address them by demanding free speech be protected consistently — not by expanding the calls for censorship.” Unfortunately, that is not what’s happening.

“The general point that there’s a hypocrisy around free speech and an imbalance around free speech on college campuses is right,” said Ryan Enos, a Harvard professor of government. But, he said, many of the people pointing this out “are not doing it to stand up for free speech; they’re just doing it because they want to shut down speech they disagree with.”

This is from ABC News “Hospitals in southern Gaza are at ‘breaking point,’ international organizations say.  The WHO said patients are being forced to be treated on the floor.”

Hospitals in central and southern Gaza are at a “breaking point” and struggling to care for the influx of patients amid the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, Doctors Without Borders and the World Health Organization say.

Two hospitals — Al-Aqsa Hospital in central Gaza and Nasser Hospital in southern Gaza — are overwhelmed and are being forced to prioritize those with life-threatening conditions, according to Doctors Without Borders, or Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), which has staff working at both medical centers.

“We hear bombing around us, day and night,” Katrien Claeys, an MSF team leader in Gaza, said in a press release Monday. “In the last 48 hours, over 100 dead and over 400 injured people arrived at the emergency room of Al-Aqsa Hospital. Some patients were taken for surgery right away.”

The fog of war is perhaps the worst place to get actual information on atrocities be it the brutal rapes and murders of Israeli women at a Music Festival or the bombing of young and elderly at a hospital.

The fog of the NRA is also difficult to traverse. We have a lot of festivals and holidays surrounding light this year; Diwali, Channukah, the birth of the light of the world, etc.  But it’s sure difficult to shine the light on so many thing things these days even with global internet and news.

This is from NBC News.  “Man federally charged after firing shots outside New York synagogue, officials say. The suspect was identified as Mufid Al Khader, 28, officials said.”

A man arrested in connection with shots that were fired outside a synagogue in Albany, New York, on Thursday has been federally charged, officials said.

Mufid Fawaz Alkhader was arrested and charged with possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, FBI spokesperson Sarah Ruane told NBC News.

Alkhader, 28, was born in Iraq and is now a U.S. citizen. He recently lived in Schenectady, New York, according to the criminal complaint.

No one was injured in the incident, in which two shots were fired from a Kel-Tec KS7 12 gauge pump shotgun outside Temple Israel around 2 p.m., Albany Police Chief Eric Hawkins said. Police don’t know in what direction the shots were fired, he said.

“We were told by responding officers that he made a comment, ‘Free Palestine,’” Hawkins said at a news conference.

The shooter fled but was confronted by another person in a vehicle in a lot, Hawkins said.

“The suspect at that point made some statement to this person who was in the vehicle to the effect of he feels that he’s being victimized,” Hawkins said.

The suspect then dropped the shotgun, and officers arrived and arrested him, said Hawkins, who emphasized that Al Khader acted alone and that there is no further threat to the community. There was also no damage to the building.

Hawkins said his understanding is that the suspect made the “Free Palestine” comment around the time he was taken into custody.

This is from The Daily Beast. “Bystanders Stop Woman Torching Martin Luther King Jr.’s Atlanta Birth Home.”

Off-duty police officers and tourists on Thursday helped to stop a woman setting fire to the house where Martin Luther King Jr. was born in Atlanta after she doused the property in gasoline, authorities said.

The 26-year-old woman was confronted by a pair of visitors from Utah as she poured fuel on the porch of the house, Atlanta Police Chief Darin Schierbaum said. Two off-duty New York City Police Department officers who had been visiting the home then pursued the suspect and detained her until local law enforcement arrived, Schierbaum added.

“That action saved an important part of American history tonight,” the police chief said.

One of the tourists from Utah, Zach Kempf, said he initially thought the woman was watering shrubs in front of the house. Kempf told The New York Times he and the co-worker with whom he was visiting the home then asked the woman “what she was doing” as she tried to open the screen door, but “she didn’t respond.”

It was then that she allegedly emptied a five-gallon container on the porch and retrieved a lighter she’d left in the grass next to the porch. Kempf said he blocked the woman with his body as she attempted to get back onto the porch while holding the lighter.

He told the Times the woman had a “nervous energy” but “wasn’t aggressive” and eventually backed down, turning around and walking off down the street. Kempf said he called 911 and “yelled at the two guys down the street that she was trying to set the house on fire and to follow her.”

Kempf said the men—the off-duty NYPD cops—restrained the woman. He added that later, after local officers arrived at the scene, the suspect’s father and three sisters showed up after tracking her location from her phone. Her family described the woman as a veteran who was in mental distress, according to Kempf.

The Atlanta Police Department said the woman was arrested for attempted arson as well as interference with government property. In a statement, the King Center said an “individual attempted to set fire to this historic property” but was fortunately unsuccessful “thanks to the brave intervention of good samaritans and the quick response of law enforcement.”

“If the witnesses hadn’t been here and interrupted what she was doing, it could have been a matter of seconds before the house was engulfed in flames,” Atlanta Fire Department Battalion Chief Jerry DeBerry told reports.

From a poster dated c.1913. Force Feeding suffragettes during a hunger strike in the UK.

The arsonist was a black woman.  No one knows right now why she decided to torch the home of the civil rights leader. One of our next National Holidays will celebrate the birth of Martin Luther King, Jr. I’d like to draw your attention to the speech he gave on December 11, 1964 as a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.  “The quest for peace and justice” Perhaps in a season celebrating so much light and experiencing so much darkness Dr King’s words are enlightening.

Every man lives in two realms, the internal and the external. The internal is that realm of spiritual ends expressed in art, literature, morals, and religion. The external is that complex of devices, techniques, mechanisms, and instrumentalities by means of which we live. Our problem today is that we have allowed the internal to become lost in the external. We have allowed the means by which we live to outdistance the ends for which we live. So much of modern life can be summarized in that arresting dictum of the poet Thoreau1: “Improved means to an unimproved end”. This is the serious predicament, the deep and haunting problem confronting modern man. If we are to survive today, our moral and spiritual “lag” must be eliminated. Enlarged material powers spell enlarged peril if there is not proportionate growth of the soul. When the “without” of man’s nature subjugates the “within”, dark storm clouds begin to form in the world.

This problem of spiritual and moral lag, which constitutes modern man’s chief dilemma, expresses itself in three larger problems which grow out of man’s ethical infantilism. Each of these problems, while appearing to be separate and isolated, is inextricably bound to the other. I refer to racial injustice, poverty, and war.

These words do not get as much play on his birthday as many of his other speeches and writings, but I think it’s worth reading the details he provides on his three categories.

It is also important to realize that the more we bury past actions, the more likely we will tolerate their repeat. The struggle for peace and justice continues.

Let me add a quote from Abigail Adams.  “Don’t forget the Ladies.”  Also, love is love.  People know who they are better than you. Embrace the LGBTQ+ community and their rights.

If you celebrate light this month, be the light you seek at all times.  You have several calendars to choose from to keep track of your path.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?

[Verse 1]
Strikes across the frontier and strikes for higher wage
Planet lurches to the right as ideologies engage
Suddenly it’s repression, moratorium on rights
What did they think the politics of panic would invite?
Person in the street shrugs—”Security comes first”

[Refrain]
But the trouble with normal is it always gets worse
The trouble with normal is it always gets worse

[Verse 2]
Callous men in business costume speak computerese
Play pinball with the third world trying to keep it on its knees
Their single crop starvation plans put sugar in your tea
And the local third world’s kept on reservations you don’t see
“It’ll all go back to normal if we put our nation first”

[Refrain]
But the trouble with normal is it always gets worse
The trouble with normal is it always gets worse

[Verse 3]
Fashionable fascism dominates the scene
When the ends don’t meet it’s easier to justify the means
Tenants get the dregs and the landlords get the cream
As the grinding devolution of the democratic dream
Brings us men in gas masks dancing while the shells burst

[Refrain]
But the trouble with normal is it always gets worse
The trouble with normal is it always gets worse
The trouble with normal is it always gets worse
The trouble with normal is it always gets worse


Thursday Reads: I read the News today, Oh Boy

John Buss @repeat1968

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

Is it just me, or do all news outlets have headlines that seem more appropriate for tabloids lately?  I’m old enough to remember the late Fanne Fox, the stripper known as “the Argentine Firecracker” who brought down Representative Wilbur Mills in the 70s.  I also remember toe-tapping Larry Craig and his adventure in the Minneapolis Airport back in 2007.  Remember Mark Foley and the Senate Page Scandal in 2005?  Oh, and then there was my Congressman Bill Jefferson and his refrigerated money from Nigeria in his refrigerator. These scandals were shocking in their days but are quaint compared to what we’ve got going on today.

Most of these folks would just not run for re-election and check themselves into some place to be rehabbed for alcohol abuse. None of them even have the slightest bit of shame today.   HBO is already making a George Santos movie.  At least The Hill is calling him a ‘disgraced politician.’

HBO is reportedly set to produce a movie about Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.), who was just expelled from Congress after a damning ethics report.

Deadline reported on Monday that the network has optioned the rights to author Mark Chiusano’s new book on the disgraced politician.

Chiusano’s book, “The Fabulist: The Lying, Hustling, Grifting, Stealing, and Very American Legend of George Santos,” was published last week.

Former “Veep” and “Succession” producer Frank Rich and Mike Makowsky, writer-producer of HBO award-winning film “Bad Education,” will executive produce the Santos’ film project with Chiusano serving as a consulting producer, per Deadline.

The unnamed film, now under development, will focus on the meteoric rise of Santos, who won his state’s 3rd Congressional District in last November’s midterm elections. Santos became a national name after damning reports that he invented much of his biography, followed by criminal charges of financial fraud.

John Buss @repeat1968

I guess I wasn’t surprised that Santos was supported by Republican Leadership and most of the caucus during the vote to expel him.  Holding power was even more important to them than being hypocritical in their positions on their GLBTQ+ policies and hatred of Drag Queens.  However, we have had record-setting censures coming out of there, including this one for Rep. James Bowman of New York.  This is reported by NBC News. “House censures Rep. Jamaal Bowman for pulling fire alarm. Bowman admitted to activating the alarm in September as Republican lawmakers sought to vote on a government funding measure, but said it was a mistake he made while in a rush to open a door.”

The House voted Thursday to censure Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y., for pulling a fire alarm in a congressional building while the chamber was in session in September to consider a vote to fund the government.

The 214 to 191 vote was largely along party lines, with Democratic Reps. Chris Pappas of New Hampshire, Jahana Hays of Connecticut and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington joining all other Republicans in voting yes.

Democratic Reps. Glenn Ivey of Maryland, Susan Wild and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Deborah Ross of North Carolina and Republican Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland voted present.

Rep. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., on Tuesday introduced the privileged resolution to censure Bowman, giving the House two legislative days to act on it. The House voted down a Democratic motion Wednesday to kill McClain’s resolution in a party-line vote of 201 to 216.

Bowman admitted to pulling the alarm in the Cannon House Office Building in September as Republican lawmakers sought to vote on the spending measure. He said in a statement after the incident that he accidentally activated the alarm after he came across a door that was typically open for votes, but would not open that day.

Bowman pleaded guilty in October to one count of falsely pulling a fire alarm. Under a deferred prosecution agreement, he was ordered to pay a $1,000 fine and write an apology to the U.S. Capitol Police chief, after which prosecutors would dismiss the charge pending no further violations of the law.

Oh!  The Humanity!

The retiring, short-lived Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy has achieved this headline today from the L.A. Times. “Kevin McCarthy uses PAC to lavish cash on high-end resorts, private jets and fine dining.” His inspiration must be Associate Justice Uncle Tom Clarence.

Rambling above the rust-colored cliffs of the Palos Verdes Peninsula, the Terranea Resort is known for its ocean views, world-ranked spa and villas that can command $3,000 a night or more.

The property is less well known as a gathering spot for federal elected officials and the campaign donors they wine and dine.

But one politician was very familiar with the luxurious resort: former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. In 2 ½ years, the Bakersfield Republican’s election committees dropped nearly a quarter of a million dollars at Terranea, with most of the money coming from a thinly regulated leadership PAC, a Times investigation has found.

As he exits Congress two months after his historic ouster as speaker, political obituaries tout McCarthy’s skills as a prolific fundraiser on behalf of Republican candidates. Also setting him apart from other congressional leaders was his roughly decade-long pattern of using his Majority Committee PAC to spend lavishly on hotels, private jets and fine dining establishments, according to a Times analysis of campaign finance records on file with the Federal Election Commission.

From 2012 through last June, McCarthy’s PAC shelled out more than $1 million on hotels, private air travel and eateries, the FEC records show. That’s more than double the combined total spent by the leadership PACs of the seven other lawmakers who’ve held the top House and Senate positions for their parties during all or part of that period, according to the Times analysis..

Now we get a pantomime impeachment while we’re too broke supposedly to back up Ukraine’s defenses against Russia. This is rumored to be a way to take the heat off of Orange Caligula and his incredible number of indictments.  This accompanies the Hunter Biden saga run by Gymbo Jordan. This is from The Hill.  “House GOP releases Biden impeachment inquiry resolution ahead of planned vote.”

The House GOP released a resolution Thursday to formalize its months-long impeachment inquiry into President Biden, with a full House vote planned for next week.

The resolution authorizing the inquiry — released months after former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) declared an impeachment inquiry to be underway in September — comes as a trio of committee leaders overseeing the probes enter a more combative phase of their investigation as they try to wrangle witnesses and documents.

It says the panels are “directed to continue their ongoing investigations as part of the House of Representatives inquiry into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its Constitutional power to impeach Joseph Biden.”

A markup of the resolution is scheduled for Tuesday.

Republicans hope that formally authorizing the inquiry will put more legal weight behind the probe and their ability to compel evidence, particularly if any of those battles end up in court.

While responding to subpoenas and interview requests in November, the White House had argued that the House GOP’s impeachment inquiry was unconstitutional because it had not been formalized with a vote of the whole House.

House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told reporters this week that while the GOP disagreed with that assessment, the White House letter helped push the House GOP to formalize the inquiry.

Just a reminder here.  Jim Jordan is still in contempt of Congress for ignoring a congressional subpoena while asking for one for Hunter Biden.

The threat from House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chair James Comer  (R-Ky.) and House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) comes as the legal counsel for the president’s son, Abbe Lowell, has said that Biden is willing to sit for a public hearing but not for the private questioning.

“Contrary to the assertions in your letter, there is no ‘choice’ for Mr. Biden to make; the subpoenas compel him to appear for a deposition on December 13. If Mr. Biden does not appear for his deposition on December 13, 2023, the Committees will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings,” Comer and Jordan wrote to Lowell on Wednesday.

The letter represents an escalation of the battle between the House GOP and Biden as Comer and Jordan speed into the final stages of a multi-pronged impeachment inquiry probe into President Biden, which they aim to formalize with a vote next week.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.), the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, took a swipe at the House GOP threat by referencing Jordan’s refusal to comply with a subpoena from the Jan. 6 Select Committee in the last Democratic-controlled Congress — another panel that Raskin sat on.

“Hunter Biden will answer questions under oath in front of the world—but unless he testifies in secret so he can be misquoted, @RepJamesComer will hold him in contempt? What a joke. Jim Jordan blew off HIS subpoena. Comer doesn’t want the truth—and can’t handle it,” Raskin said in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Here’s another totally normal thing, right?

Charles Pierce shreds Johnson at Esquire. Constitutional separation of Church and State, anyone?

There is absolutely nothing crazy about this. No, sir. Perfectly normal behavior for a leader in a secular democratic republic. Completely grounded in sanity, especially coming from the guy a couple of offices short of being the president of the United States. I feel confident in saying this. From Right Wing Watch:

Johnson began his remarks by claiming that weeks before he became House Speaker, God began preparing him to lead the nation through “a Red Sea moment.” Johnson said he didn’t know what that meant at the time, but assumed it meant that he was to serve as an Aaron to someone else’s Moses. But, it turned out, God intended for him to be that Moses. “The Lord impressed upon my heart a few weeks before this happened that something was going to occur,” Johnson said. “And the Lord very specifically told me in my prayers to prepare, but to wait.”

“I had this sense that we were going to come to a Red Sea moment in our Republican conference and in the county at large,” he continued. “[God] had been speaking to me about this, and the Lord told me very clearly to prepare and be ready.” Johnson said that once Rep. Kevin McCarthy was removed as Speaker of the House, God began to wake him up in the middle of the night “to speak to me, [telling me] to write things down; plans, procedures, and ideas on how we could pull the [Republican] conference together.”

“At the time, I assumed the Lord was going to choose a new Moses and thank you, Lord, you’re going to allow me to be Aaron to Moses,” Johnson declared. As one candidate after another stepped forward to run for Speaker but failed, Johnson said that “the Lord kept telling me to wait” but “then at the end, when it toward the end, the Lord said, ‘Now, step forward. Me? I’m supposed to be Aaron,” Johnson said. “No. The Lord said, ‘Step forward.’”

The Speaker of the House of Representatives believes he was in contact with the Eternal, who has taken what I consider an unhealthy interest in the doings of the Republican majority. I mean, what could the Almighty have against Kevin McCarthy? The Lord told Mike Johnson to be…Moses? Does that mean that the Republicans now will wander 40 years in the wilderness? (We can only hope.) Does that mean that, one day, Johnson will strike Matt Gaetz on the head and water will spring forth? What’s manna going for in the House cafeteria these days?

Mike needs to check himself into a mental hospital if he’s really hearing voices.  And resign.  If he really wants to be old-fashioned, he’d do that. But, back to Gymbo.

That’s some real overreach.  This is from CNN.  The thing that makes it even more outrageous is that these folks act like the country has cash to burn when they want to put on a performance for Dumpf. “House Judiciary Committee launches inquiry into Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis.”

The Republican-led House Judiciary Committee has opened a congressional investigation into Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, a development that was first reported by CNN and comes the same day Trump is slated to surrender at the county jail after being charged for participating in schemes to meddle with Georgia’s 2020 election results.

The committee sent a letter to Willis on Thursday asking whether she communicated or coordinated with the Justice Department, who has indicted Trump twice on two separate cases, or used federal dollars to complete her investigation that culminated in the fourth indictment of Trump. The questions from Republicans about whether Willis used federal funding in her state-level investigation mirrors the same line of inquiry that Republicans used to probe Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who indicted Trump in New York earlier this year for falsifying business records to cover up an alleged hush money scheme.

In the letter to Willis, House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican, laid out why he believes his panel has jurisdiction over the state-level probe and accused Willis of being politically motivated, noting she set up a new campaign fundraising website days before the indictment came down and complained that she required mugshots for those charged – including Trump – which had not been the practice in his previous three indictments.

“You did not bring charges until two-and-a-half years later, at a time when the campaign for the Republican presidential nomination is in full swing,” Jordan wrote. “Moreover, you have requested that the trial in this matter begin on March 4, 2024, the day before Super Tuesday and eight days before the Georgia presidential primary.”

Jordan gave Willis a September 7 deadline to hand over any documents or communication related to their request.

The Fulton County DA’s office declined to comment. But Willis has previously denied that she coordinated with Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office and has consistently defended her investigation against accusations that it was politically motivated.

Here’s another reminder of Gymbo’s moral turpitude from The Guardian back in October.  “Ex-Ohio State wrestlers say Jim Jordan unfit for speakership for ignoring sexual abuse scandal.  Former athletes say Jordan, as assistant coach, ignored sexual abuse at university and ‘does not deserve to be House speaker’.”  Shouldn’t he resign and go into rehab?

Let’s not leave DeSantis off the crazy train list. This is from NBC. “At the GOP debate, Ron DeSantis calls Middle Eastern garb ‘man dresses’.”  What does it take to get rid of all this prejudice against Jewish and Muslim adherent? I really don’t want to go into the debate but the entire thing was a crazy train.

During the fourth Republican presidential primary debate on Wednesday, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, citing his time serving in the Middle East, referred to the clothing worn by Al Qaeda as “man dresses.”

DeSantis was answering a question at the debate, hosted by NewsNation, about his past remarks that he’d authorize shooting drug smugglers coming across the southern border.

“When I was in Iraq, the Al Qaeda wasn’t wearing a uniform. You’d see anyone walking down the street, they all had man dresses on. You didn’t know if they had a bomb, an IED, attached or not,” DeSantis said.

It wasn’t the first time DeSantis has used the term “man dresses” in an apparent reference to a thobe. He has used the term on the stump, including in Iowa and South Carolina.

The Florida governor has come under fire in the past for his comments about Muslims.

Let me end with signs of sanity coming from the Judicial Branch.

This is written by Hugo Lowell for  The Guardian. Georgia prosecutors predict jail sentences in Trump 2020 election case.”

Exclusive: Fulton county prosecutors say in emails their legal careers will continue long after defendants go to jail

Fulton county prosecutors have signaled they want prison sentences in the Georgia criminal case against Donald Trump and his top allies for allegedly violating the racketeering statute as part of efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, according to exchanges in private emails.

“We have a long road ahead,” the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, wrote in one email last month. “Long after these folks are in jail, we will still be practicing law.”

The previously unreported emails, between Willis and defense lawyers, open a window on to the endgame envisioned by prosecutors on her team – which could inform legal strategies ahead of a potential trial next year, such as approaches toward plea deal negotiations.

Prosecutors are not presently expected to offer plea agreements to Trump, his former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and his former election lawyer Rudy Giuliani, but left open the possibility of talks with other co-defendants, the Guardian previously reported.

This is from Daniella Silva at NBC News.Texas judge grants pregnant woman’s request to get an abortion. A Dallas-area mother found out that her fetus has trisomy 18, a genetic condition that can cause stillbirth or death of a newborn. The court order allows her to end the pregnancy.” This hit home hard with me having lived through a high risk pregnancy along with my youngest daughter’s experience in October.  Can you imagine the added trauma of asking a judge for urgent healthcare?

A Texas judge on Thursday granted an emergency order allowing a pregnant woman whose fetus has a fatal diagnosis to get an abortion in the state.

Late last month, Kate Cox, a 31-year-old Dallas-area mother of two who is about 20 weeks pregnant, found out that her developing fetus has trisomy 18, a rare chromosomal disorder likely to cause stillbirth or the death of the baby shortly after it’s born.

Texas law prohibits almost all abortions with very limited exceptions. So on behalf of Cox, her husband and her doctor, lawyers with the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a request for a temporary restraining order that would block the state’s abortion bans in Cox’s case and enable her to terminate her pregnancy.

Joyce Vance had this insight in her SubStack Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance. “What Jack Smith Says  —  The Special Counsel files his 404(b) notice.”

Jack Smith has filed his 404(b) notice, advising the Court and Trump of other crimes and bad acts committed by Trump that he intends to offer as evidence when the D.C. election interference case goes to trial. The notice is nine pages long, you can read the whole thing here. It contains a tremendous amount of new information about the case Smith intends to make against Trump. This is the best window we’ve had in on his strategy since the four count indictment was unsealed in August.

Smith starts about by advising the court that he intends to provide it with “extensive advance notice” of the evidence he’s going to introduce at trial in pleadings, including exhibit and witness lists, pre-trial motions, and his trial brief (a detailed layout prosecutors file in advance of trial discussing their evidence and issues they believe might come up during the trial). This is good news for all of us—it means we’ll have access to much if not all of this information as well.

You’ll recall that in “The Week Ahead” we took a look at Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), which required Smith to file this notice. This rule tells prosecutors they can’t offer evidence that a defendant committed bad acts or crimes beyond what’s charged in the indictment to try and show that the defendant has a propensity to commit crimes, that he’s a bad guy. But the rule permits prosecutors to use the evidence for other purposes. Jack Smith tells the court that all of the evidence he’s going to introduce at trial is “intrinsic to the charged crimes”—in other words, admissible without the need to resort to Rule 404(b) because it’s part of the conduct Trump is charged with in the indictment. But, hedging his bets, Smith advises the court that in the alternative, any evidence the court might deem “extrinsic” is still admissible under 404(b) to prove “motive, intent, preparation, knowledge, absence of mistake, and common plan.”

This is important. As much as getting the case to trial and getting a conviction matters in the first instance, making sure that conviction gets affirmed on appeal is paramount in the larger scheme of things. So prosecutors like to have multiple independent arguments to justify a ruling by the appellate court that what happened at trial was proper.

Smith sets that up here, and the judge, who has broad discretion to determine what evidence is admissible at trial, will put on the record whether she is admitting evidence as intrinsic, extrinsic under 404(b), or as Smith suggests, admissible as both. Good judges make a clear record for the court of appeals to consider, and Chutkan has shown she is very good at doing this, most recently as she ruled against Trump on his presidential immunity motion.

So, that’s enough for today.  My posts keep getting longer and longer!

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?