The Conversation -- April 28, 2024

Tia Goldenberg, et al., of the AP: The White House on Sunday said U.S. President Joe Biden had again spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as pressure builds on Israel and Hamas to reach a deal that would free some Israeli hostages and bring a cease-fire in the nearly seven-month-long war in Gaza. The White House said that Biden reiterated his 'clear position' as Israel plans to invade Gaza's southernmost city of Rafah despite global concern for more than 1 million Palestinians sheltering there. The U.S. opposes the invasion on humanitarian grounds, straining relations between the allies. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is returning to the Middle East on Monday. Biden also stressed that progress in delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza be 'sustained and enhanced,' according to the statement."

Karen Tumulty of the Washington Post: "Almost from the start of his appearance [at the White House Correspondents' Dinner] in what is traditionally a lighthearted evening, [President] Biden took the kind of personal swipes at his opponent that we have rarely heard from him.... And toward the end, Biden chastised the media: 'I'm sincerely not asking you to take sides. I'm asking you to rise up to the seriousness of the moment. Move past the horse race numbers and the gotcha moments and the distractions, the side shows that have come to dominate and sensationalize our politics, and focus on what's actually at stake.... The stakes couldn't be higher.'... Given [the forces against him], the best option for Biden now -- perhaps his only one -- ... is to start drawing a sharper, no-holds-barred contrast with Trump and what it would mean if he is allowed to return to the White House."

Donald Trump Has Been Asking, "Are You Better Off Than You Were Four Years Ago?" Let's Check. Top News in at NBC News, April 28, 2020: "To the surprise of exactly no one, President Trump resumed his daily coronavirus news briefings on Monday, just two days after tweeting that they were 'not worth the time & effort' and just hours after his own White House officially canceled the planned appearance. The lure of cameras in the Rose Garden proved too hard to resist. For a president who relishes the spotlight and spends hours a day watching television, the idea of passing on his daily chance to get his message out turned out to be untenable despite his anger over his coverage. And so he was back, defending his handling of the pandemic and promising to reopen the country soon.:

~~~~~~~~~~

Zolan Kanno-Youngs, et al., of the New York Times: 'Just minutes into his speech at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner on Saturday, [President] Biden launched into the issues dominating the 2024 election.... 'The 2024 election's in full swing and yes, age is an issue,' Mr. Biden said in a roughly 10-minute speech. 'I'm a grown man running against a 6-year-old.... Donald has had a few tough days lately. You might call it "stormy" weather,' Mr. Biden said.... Outside the gates of the Washington Hilton, however..., many [dinner attendees] were swarmed by pro-Palestinian protesters chanting, 'Shame on you!' Other protesters wearing press vests with the names of more than 100 Palestinian journalists who have been killed in Gaza lay down in front of the dinner venue.... Kelly O'Donnell, a senior White House reporter for NBC News who is also president of the correspondents' association, used her remarks to call attention to journalists who have been captured or killed while doing their jobs.... Colin Jost, the co-anchor of 'Weekend Update' on 'Saturday Night Live' ... spent roughly 23 minutes poking fun at the president.... He ended [his speech] by noting that his grandfather, who recently died, had voted for Mr. Biden in the last election. 'The reason he voted for you is because you're a decent man,' Mr. Jost said." Politico's story is here. ~~~

     ~~~ YouTube video of Colin Jost's set is here.

This week is what governing looks like. Here are ten things Biden just did, from banning non-compete agreements to raising overtime pay to promoting steel and solar production to passing the first Federal privacy law to regulating TikTok. https://t.co/4V0rLsUNzX pic.twitter.com/dLug79u4II

— Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) April 25, 2024

      ~~~ Thanks to RAS for the link.

How Not to Store Top Secret Docs. Alexander Mallin & Katherine Faulders of ABC News: "A coat hanger or 'very tiny screwdriver' could be used to unlock the Mar-a-Lago storage room where ... Donald Trump stored highly classified documents for more than a year, according to a witness in Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation. The account was relayed to FBI agents by an unidentified aide to Trump in January 2023, according to newly released exhibits, and further undercuts claims by Trump that the highly-classified materials he's accused of taking with him after leaving office were secured at all times. The transcript of the interview was released as part of an ongoing effort by Trump and his co-defendants to make additional evidence gathered by Special Counsel Smith public." MB: Just maybe Trump isn't helping himself by insisting on "transparency."

A doctor, a lawyer and a CEO walk into a bar. The punchline: they're all fake electors.

Presidential Race

Neil Vigdor of the New York Times: "... Donald J. Trump is sharpening his attacks on the independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., as new polls show an overlap between their core supporters. In a series of posts on his Truth Social media platform on Friday night, Mr. Trump ... took aim at both Mr. Kennedy and his running mate, Nicole Shanahan, a wealthy Silicon Valley lawyer and investor. 'RFK Jr. is a Democrat "Plant," a Radical Left Liberal who's been put in place in order to help Crooked Joe Biden, the Worst President in the History of the United States, get Re-Elected,' Mr. Trump wrote.... Mr. Trump referred to [Shanahan] as the 'V.P. Candidate that nobody ever heard of' and denigrated her business credentials. 'Her business was doing surgery on her husband's wallet!' Mr. Trump wrote in a post."

Anna Betts, et al., of the New York Times: "Nearly 200 protesters were arrested on Saturday at Northeastern University, Arizona State University and Indiana University, according to officials, as colleges across the country struggle to quell growing pro-Palestinian demonstrations and encampments on campus. More than 700 protesters have been arrested on U.S. campuses since April 18, when Columbia University had the New York Police Department clear a protest encampment there. In several cases, most of those who were arrested have been released." Includes a map pinpointing where protests have occurred and arrests have been made.

~~~~~~~~~~

New Jersey Senate Race. The Talented Mr. Kim. Christopher Maag of the New York Times: Shortly after Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) announced he would not resign from office despite the federal corruption case against him, Rep. Andy Kim (D-N.J.) "posted [an announcement he would seek the seat] on social media...., kicked off perhaps the luckiest Senate campaign in modern New Jersey history. Over the next six months, Mr. Kim went from underdog to front-runner, outmaneuvering Tammy Murphy, the wife of Gov. Philip D. Murphy, who joined the race in November and quickly won the support of New Jersey's powerful Democratic Party machine. In late March, Mr. Menendez said he would not run in the party's primary. Three days later, Ms. Murphy ended her campaign.... [Although there are other candidates in both parties' primaries,] Mr. Kim has now become the odds-on favorite [to win the Senate seat].... Over his six years in Congress, Mr. Kim, 41, has appeared to his constituents as a nerdy and earnest public servant, said Patrick Murray, director of The Polling Institute at Monmouth University in New Jersey. This image went national on Jan. 7, 2021, when he was photographed gathering trash left by rioters in the U.S. Capitol rotunda."

South Dakota. Maegan Vazquez of the Washington Post gathers some reactions to Gov. Kristi Noem's boasting that she shot dead both her young dog and a goat on the same day because they annoyed her, the dog because it killed some chickens and the goat because it smelled like a goat. No thumbs-up in the reactions. Gregory Svirnovskiy of Politico also collects condemnations of Noem's killing spree. ~~~

~~~~~~~~~~

Russia. Reuters: "U.S. intelligence agencies have determined that Russian President Vladimir Putin probably didn't order opposition politician Alexei Navalny killed at an Arctic prison camp in February, the Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday.... The Kremlin has denied any state involvement. Last month, Putin called Navalny's demise 'sad' and said he had been ready to hand the jailed politician over to the West in a prisoner exchange provided Navalny never return to Russia. Navalny's allies said such talks had been under way.... [The Journal] said Washington had not absolved the Russian leader of overall responsibility for Navalny's death however, given the opposition politician had been targeted by Russian authorities for years, jailed on charges the West said were politically motivated, and had been poisoned in 2020 with a nerve agent."

The Conversation -- April 27, 2024

The White House Correspondents' Dinner is tonight. Here, via Deadline, are your many options for watching the festivities, which also begins at various times. President Biden will speak, and Colin Jost, "co-anchor" of SNL's "Weekend Update" will host.

A doctor, a lawyer and a CEO walk into a bar. The punchline: they're all fake electors. ~~~

~~~~~~~~~~

Noah Weiland of the New York Times: "The Biden administration announced expansive new protections on Friday for gay and transgender medical patients, prohibiting federally funded health providers and insurers from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The new rule reverses a policy instituted by the Trump administration and helps to fulfill part of President Biden's vow to restore civil rights protections for L.G.B.T.Q. people that were eliminated by his predecessor."

Michael Birnbaum & Christian Shepherd of the Washington Post: "Chinese and U.S. leaders sought Friday to stabilize their contentious relationship, but Secretary of State Antony Blinken said as he left that there had been no promises on the top U.S. priority of cutting support for Russia's defense industry.... Russia would struggle to sustain its assault on Ukraine without China's support, Blinken said. 'If China does not address this problem, we will,' he added, in a possible reference to sanctions against Chinese businesses involved in the trade with Russia." An AP report is here.~~~

~~~ Ana Swanson & Vivian Wang of the New York Times: "Preserving some semblance of cooperation -- and the difficulty of doing so -- was at the heart of a meeting between Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken and China's leader, Xi Jinping, in Beijing on Friday. It was the latest effort by the rivals to keep communications open even as disputes escalate over trade, national security and geopolitical frictions. Officials in both countries said they had made progress on a few smaller, pragmatic fronts, including setting up the first U.S.-China talks on artificial intelligence in the coming weeks. They also said they would continue improving communications between their militaries and increase cultural exchanges. But on fundamental strategic issues, each side held little hope of moving the other, and they appeared wary of the possibility of sliding into further conflict." (Also linked yesterday.)

The Trials of Trump, Ctd.

Jesse McKinley & Jonah Bromwich of the New York Times: On Friday, witness "David Pecker, who has known Mr. Trump for decades, faced a stern cross-examination from one of the former president's defense lawyers, Emil Bove, who pressed Mr. Pecker about two deals he had reached in 2015 and 2016 with people who were seeking to sell stories about Mr. Trump. Mr. Bove sought to convince the jury of two fundamental points about the stories, which Mr. Pecker bought and then buried: Such arrangements, characterized by prosecutors as 'catch and kill,' were standard for the publisher, and that Mr. Pecker had previously misled jurors about the details of the transactions.... Despite the defense lawyers' aggressive questioning, Mr. Pecker was even-keeled, a small, gray-haired man answering in a quiet monotone.... Rhona Graff, Mr. Trump's former executive assistant ... at Trump Tower, testified about entries from the Trump Organization computer system that contained contact information for Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model, and for a 'Stormy.' The day's last witness was Gary Farro, who was [Michael] Cohen's banker when the former fixer executed financial transactions with First Republic Bank to enable the hush money payment to Ms. Daniels." ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: The consensus among teevee lawyers was that Pecker held his own again Bove, and that during re-direct, the prosecution successfully cleared up any confusion Bove introduced during cross-examination. ~~~

~~~ New York Times reporters live-updated developments Friday in the Trump 2016 election interference case. See yesterday's Conversation for some entries. Justice Juan Merchan did not make any decision regarding the prosecution's assertions that Trump has violated the gag order multiple times (15, as of yesterday), but said he would hold another hearing next Thursday. New York state law allows only two penalties for violations: a $1,000 fine for each violation or incarcerations up to 30 days. So some teevee lawyers are dreaming up ways the judge might try to deter Trump from repeatedly violating the gag order. Andrew Weissmann suggested the judge could task one of Trump's lawyers with monitoring his posts; Weissmann said that Neal Katyal and suggested the judge could tell Trump he would sentence him for the violations at the end of trial, without revealing of course what the sentence would be. And Weissmann said NYU law professor Ryan Goodman suggested the judge tell Trump that if he is convicted in this case, the judge will consider the gag order violations when he sentences Trump. ~~~

~~~ Kate Christobek & Jesse McKinley of the New York Times: "The second week of Donald Trump's Manhattan criminal trial was dominated by four days of testimony by David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, who detailed his efforts to safeguard Mr. Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.... His testimony also teed up the story of Stormy Daniels, a porn star who claims to have had sex with Mr. Trump in 2006 and received a hush-money payment in the days before the 2016 election, a deal at the center of the case.... Here's what happened during the second week, and eighth day, of Mr. Trump's trial[.]" ~~~

     ~~~ The Washington Post's summary of the week's proceedings, titled "Secrets, Lies & Payoffs Laid Bare...", is here.

Ben Protess, et al., of the New York Times: "... while defendants often offer feedback to their lawyers..., [Donald Trump] could hamstring [his lawyers]. Others might concede personal failings so their lawyers can focus solely on holes in the prosecution's evidence.... But that time-honored tactic is not available to a defendant who is also the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, a man who despises weakness and is allergic to anything but praise from the people around him.... The defense team will need to walk a fine line to appease both of its audiences: 12 jurors and a singular defendant. 'Trying the case to your client's vanity, rather than to the jury, is a losing game,' said J. Bruce Maffeo, a former federal prosecutor....

"Mr. Trump is known to be mercurial and prone to outbursts. In private, he has dressed down lawyers in several of his cases, even questioning their entire strategy just minutes before they were set to appear in court, people who have seen him in action say. And inside the courtroom at two recent civil trials, he badgered lawyers, directing them to object at inopportune moments, muttering grievances into their ears and twice storming away from the defense table. Once, Mr. Trump exhorted his lawyer, Alina Habba, to 'get up' as he banged her arm with the back of his hand. Those cases ended in defeat."

Do these justices know that we can hear them? -- Patrick, in yesterday's Comments ~~~

~~~ Adam Liptak of the New York Times: "Before the Supreme Court heard arguments on Thursday on ... Donald J. Trump's claim that he is immune from prosecution, his stance was widely seen as a brazen and cynical bid to delay his trial. The practical question in the case, it was thought, was not whether the court would rule against him but whether it would act quickly enough to allow the trial to go forward before the 2024 election. Instead, members of the court's conservative majority treated Mr. Trump's assertion that he could not face charges that he tried to subvert the 2020 election as a weighty and difficult question.

"They did so, said Pamela Karlan, a law professor at Stanford, by averting their eyes from Mr. Trump's conduct. 'What struck me most about the case was the relentless efforts by several of the justices on the conservative side not to focus on, consider or even acknowledge the facts of the actual case in front of them,' she said.... Michael Dorf, a law professor at Cornell, said that 'the apparent lack of self-awareness on the part of some of the conservative justices was startling.' He noted that 'Justice Alito worried about a hypothetical future president attempting to hold onto power in response to the risk of prosecution, while paying no attention to the actual former president who held onto power and now seeks to escape prosecution.'... Sending the case back to the trial judge [as the Court seems prepared to do, Prof. Karlan] said, 'to distill out the official from the private acts in some kind of granular detail essentially gives Trump everything he wants, whether the court calls it immunity or not.'"

Wasn't the whole point [of the American Revolutionary War] that the president was not a monarch and the president was not supposed to be above the law? -- Justice Elena Kagan, during oral arguments on Trump's immunity case

~~~ Jesse Wegman of the New York Times: "The right-wing justices seemed thoroughly uninterested in the case before them, which involves a violent insurrection that was led by a sitting president who is seeking to return to office in a matter of months. Instead, they spent the morning and early afternoon appearing to be more worried that prosecuting Mr. Trump could risk future malicious prosecutions of former presidents by their political rivals. And they tried to draw a distinction between official acts, for which a president might have immunity from prosecution, and private acts, for which no immunity would apply.... The justice system is doing its job by trying to hold to account a former president for subverting the last election before he runs in the next one. That is a very important job! And yet the right-wing justices are saying, essentially, not so fast -- and maybe not at all.... Still, the right-wing justices seemed impervious to the urgency of the matter before them. 'I'm not focused on the here and now of this case,' Justice Brett Kavanaugh said. 'I'm very concerned about the future.'" ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: Even the most gullible observer must see that the winger Supremes had two objectives in mind: to act as belated accomplices to the insurrection and to be mighty contributors to Donald Trump's re-election bid. Update: At the end of yesterday's Comments thread, contributor Bill dubbed the Supreme Trump Team the "Supreme Courtesans." Nothing could be more apt vis-a-vis their contributions to the immunity hearing. And I'll be stealing that. ~~~

~~~ Uh, What about the Constitution? Josh Gerstein of Politico: "'The legal approach [right-wing Supremes] seemed to be gravitating toward has no basis in the Constitution, in precedent, or logic,' said Michael Waldman, president and CEO of New York University's Brennan Center for Justice. 'It sure ain't originalism.'... 'There is no immunity that is in the Constitution, unless this Court creates it,' [the attorney for the special counsel Michael] Dreeben declared. 'There certainly is no textual immunity.... I think it would be a sea change to announce a sweeping rule of immunity that no president has had or has needed.'... [Justice Elena Kagan said,] 'The framers did not put an immunity clause into the Constitution. They knew how to. There were immunity clauses in some state constitutions. They knew how to give legislative immunity. They didn't provide immunity to the president.... And, you know, not so surprising. They were reacting against a monarch who claimed to be above the law.'...

"Sometimes, the court has found the absence of such language to be of great import. Writing for five conservative justices in the earth-shaking abortion case two years ago, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Justice Samuel Alito referred to the notion of guaranteed access to abortion as 'an asserted right that is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution.'" MB: Funny, innit? ~~~

~~~ The Last Word. Paul Campos in LG&$: "Donald Trump tried to steal the 2020 presidential election. This is a simple historical fact. It's all anyone knows or needs to know about the matter for the purposes of whether one ought to make him president again.... A criminal trial on the question of whether Trump tried to steal the election is an attempt on the part of the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump violated certain highly technical federal statutes in regard to election fraud and related issues.... The last thing we need is to set up an interpretive frame in which a verdict, or the failure to reach a verdict, in a criminal trial, has any salience to the actual historical record, which is unambiguous to anyone with eyes and ears." Thanks to RAS for the link. MB: This should be the bottom line. Full stop. Instead, we get poll after poll that asks the hoi polloi, "Would you vote for Donald Trump if he was convicted of trying to overturn the last presidential election?" If there's going to be any sort of survey about the insurrection it should be along the lines of, "Would you vote for Donald Trump knowing he tried to stage a coup against his own government?"

Charles Homans of the New York Times in the Times Magazine: "No major American presidential candidate has talked like he now does at his rallies -- not Richard Nixon, not George Wallace, not even Donald Trump himself. Before November 2020, his speeches, for all their boundary crossings, stopped short of the language of 'vermin' and 'enemies within.' When I asked the political historian Federico Finchelstein what he made of the speech, he replied bluntly: 'This is how fascists campaign.'"

Conservative Bill Kristol in the Bulwark throws in the towel: "God, we need a healthy and vigorous liberalism here in America. Conservatism can no longer cut it. American conservatism was once at least in part committed to the defense of liberal democracy. Now conservatism has degenerated into rabble-rousing populism in politics, anti-intellectualism in ideas, and Know-Nothingism in civic life. Accordingly, originalism in the courts has become sophism. A real case for democratic capitalism has become the mere defense of oligarchic power and economic privilege. A necessary critique of mindless progressivism has become hostility to anything emerging from any liberal precinct, reasonable or not. A mostly healthy fighting spirit has become a partisanship that knows no bounds and that acknowledges no enemies to the right. In foreign policy, hostility both to American world leadership and to free nations around the world has replaced a commitment to a tough-minded defense of liberty. Or, to put it more simply: American conservatism has died in Trumpism."

James Pollard, et al., of the AP: "Students protesting the Israel-Hamas war at at universities across U.S., some of whom have clashed with police in riot gear, dug in Saturday and vowed to keep their demonstrations going, faculty at several schools condemned university presidents who have called in law enforcement to remove protesters. As Columbia University continues negotiations with those at a pro-Palestinian student encampment on the New York school's campus, the university's senate passed a resolution Friday that created a task force to examine the administration's leadership, which last week called in police in an attempt to clear the protest, resulting in scuffles and more than 100 arrests."

Presidential Race

Tit for Tat. Sam Stein of Politico: "If Nebraska Republicans changed their electoral college rules to help Donald Trump this November, a top Maine Democrat said her party would try to do a similar move to counteract the impact. The state House majority leader, Maureen Terry, said in a statement on Friday that the Democratic-controlled Legislature would 'be compelled to act in order to restore fairness,' should Nebraska's Republican governor sign legislation that made the state a winner-take-all election in 2024."

Amy Wang, et al., of the Washington Post: "President Biden said Friday that he will debate ... Donald Trump ahead of their expected November election rematch. Biden made the comment during a lengthy live interview with radio host Howard Stern. 'I am, somewhere,' Biden said when asked if he would debate Trump. 'I don't know when. I'm happy to debate him.' Trump later wrote on social media that he would debate 'ANYWHERE, ANYTIME, ANYPLACE.'" This is a liveblog, dated Friday. A CNN story is here.

Bullying the Bully. Katie Rogers of the New York Times: "This week, one presidential candidate has called the other a loser, made fun of him for selling Bibles, and even poked fun at his hair. That kind of taunting is generally more within the purview of ... Donald J. Trump.... But lately, the barbs have been coming from President Biden, who once would only refer to Mr. Trump as 'the former guy.'... 'We'll never forget lying about Covid and telling the American people to inject bleach in their arms,' Mr. Biden said at a fund-raiser on Thursday evening.... 'He injected it in his hair,' Mr. Biden said. He is coming up with those lines himself [according to a campaign spokesman]." ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: The difference between Biden's "bullying" and Trump's bullying, which Rogers doesn't address, is that Biden is gently calling attention to a bully's own failings by telling affable jokes about him. Trump, by contrast, viciously picks on people -- often vulnerable people -- by attacking them with lies or by making fun of conditions the people cannot change, like their race or their appearance or their physical limitations.

Chris Cameron of the New York Times: "The Republican Party sent a letter to the Secret Service on Friday urging the police agency to keep protesters farther away from the venue for the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee in July.... Todd R. Steggerda, counsel to the Republican National Committee..., argued that convention attendees would be forced to pass by the protesters on their way into the venue, raising the potential for confrontations.... The R.N.C. did not propose an alternative location for the demonstration zone in the letter, instead suggesting that the Secret Service expand the security perimeter to move protesters away from the area." The park currently designated as the place protesters may gather is about a quarter mile from the convention arena.

New York Times: "The Wall Street Journal reports that allies of Donald Trump are devising ways of watering down the central bank's independence if he is re-elected president. If true, that change would represent the biggest shake-up in U.S. monetary policy in decades. But it also raises questions about whether such a plan is possible -- or whether Trump's Wall Street supporters would back it.... Among the most consequential would be asserting that Trump had the authority to oust Jay Powell as Fed chair before Powell's term is up in 2025. While Trump gave Powell the job in 2017, he has since soured on his pick for raising rates, and has publicly said he wouldn't give Powell a second term." (Also linked yesterday.)

Donald Trump Has Been Asking, "Are You Better Off Than You Were Four Years Ago?" Let's Check. Top News in at NBC News, April 26, 2020: "Prescriptions for two antimalarial drugs jumped by 46 times the average when the president promoted them on TV. There's no proof they work against Covid-19.... The extraordinary change in prescribing patterns reflects, at least in part, the outsize reach of the Trump megaphone, even when his pronouncements distort scientific evidence or run counter to the recommendations of experts in his own administration. It also offers the clearest evidence yet of the perils of a president willing to push unproven and potentially dangerous remedies to a public desperate for relief from the pandemic." (Also linked yesterday.)

Marie: A Washington Post article is headlined on the site's front page" "He threatened Marjorie Taylor Greene amid a mental health crisis...." My visceral reading of the headline was that the person suffering the mental health crisis was MTG. Seems reasonable. Then I read a bit of the story itself, and this phrase, too, confused me: "... including several of his two children...." If you have only two children, how can there be several among them? The English language is confusing.

~~~~~~~~~~

Michigan Senate Race. Neil Vigdor of the New York Times: "Peter Meijer, a Republican who voted to impeach ... Donald J. Trump when he was a member of the House, announced on Friday that he was dropping out of the Republican primary race for U.S. Senate in Michigan. 'The hard reality is the fundamentals of the race have changed significantly since we launched this campaign,' Mr. Meijer said in a post on Facebook, adding that he did not have a 'strong pathway to victory.' He was facing a crowded primary field featuring another high-profile Republican: Mike Rogers, who served seven terms in the House and rose to become the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.... The seat is being vacated by Senator Debbie Stabenow, the state's senior senator and a Democrat, who announced last year that she would not seek a fifth term.... The Republican nominee is likely to face Representative Elissa Slotkin, the most prominent Democrat seeking to succeed Ms. Stabenow." CNN's report is here.

South Dakota. Kristi Shoots Her Pets Dead if They Displease Her. Phillip Nieto of Mediaite: "South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R), who is being eyed as a potential running mate to Donald Trump, admitted to shooting and killing a puppy she called 'less than worthless' -- along with her 'disgusting' goat -- in her new book." Read on for details. And here Gail Collins was so upset about Mitt's traveling with his dog on the roof of the car.

News Lede

CNN: "Destructive tornadoes gutted homes as they plowed through Nebraska and Iowa, and the dangerous storm threat could escalate Saturday as tornado-spawning storms pose a risk from Michigan to Texas."

The Conversation -- April 26, 2024

The New York Times is live-updating developments in the Trump 2016 election interference case:

Jonah Bromwich: "... the judge, Juan Merchan, makes a scheduling clarification, saying that another hearing to determine whether Trump violated a gag order that bars him from attacking witnesses and others four additional times will be held next Thursday morning. We are still waiting for the outcome of an earlier hearing on the gag order, in which prosecutors asked that Trump be held in contempt and fined at least $10,000."

Bromwich: "one of the defenses lawyers, Emil Bove, resumes his cross examination of David Pecker. Bove apologizes for making it seem yesterday as if Pecker had lied in a conversation with federal prosecutors about whether Hope Hicks had been present for a meeting in Trump Tower. Prosecutors have described the meeting, which occurred in 2015, as central to a conspiracy at the heart of this case. Bove blames himself, saying, 'this was my fault.'"

Bromwich: "Bove now asks Pecker to describe the negative stories that The National Enquirer ran about Trump's 2016 Republican opponents, including Ben Carson, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.... Bove is still trying to convince the jury that Pecker didn't have some special arrangement with Trump: Instead, his publication was doing what it had always done."

Maggie Haberman: "... it's worth calling back to something Trump said when one of the negative Enquirer stories about Ted Cruz, one of his rivals, came out in 2016: 'I did not know about it, and have not, as yet, read it,' Trump said at the time. 'Likewise, I have nothing to do with the National Enquirer and unlike Lyin' Ted Cruz I do not surround myself with political hacks and henchman and then pretend total innocence.'"

Jesse McKinley: "Prosecutors repeatedly object to the defense team's use of 'President Trump' to refer to a conversation in June 2016, pointing out that Trump wasn't president at that point. Justice Merchan sustains."

Bromwich: "Though it's difficult to follow, Bove is making an important point right now about an agreement that The National Enquirer made with Karen McDougal, the former Playboy model whose story about an affair with Trump the tabloid purchased and sought to bury. Prosecutors had tried to suggest that the agreement -- which included a number of different benefits for McDougal -- was made to disguise a $150,000 hush money payment. But Bove is pointing out that it was not a mere disguise: that Ms. McDougal actually did receive the benefits of the agreement.... Bove then seeks to emphasize that McDougal's primary focus was not cash, but the desire to restart her career."

Bromwich: "Emil Bove's voice just got very sharp as he asked Pecker about whether Pecker had made an error yesterday when he said Trump thanked him for catching and killing the doorman's story. 'Was that another mistake?' the lawyer asked, loudly. 'Do you believe that President Trump said that to you as you sit here right now?' Pecker answered so quietly that I couldn't be sure what he said.... Bove is suggesting that Pecker testified inconsistently: in 2018, according to the F.B.I.'s notes, he told agents that Trump had not thanked him at the Jan. 6 meeting. That contradicts what he said yesterday. Pecker had been resisting the implication that he contradicted himself but here, he agrees. Bove is satisfied he's made his point and the jurors are excused for a break."

Bromwich: "David Pecker just did prosecutors a big favor. Emil Bove has been trying to get him to admit that his testimony contradicted something his lawyers told state prosecutors in 2019. The statement in question concerns the all-important meeting at Trump Tower four years earlier, in which Pecker agreed to help suppress negative stories about Trump.... [But Pecker clarified the matter, demonstrating that what his lawyer had said in 2019 was consistent with his own testimony this week.] We've now had several of these exchanges, in which the defense lawyer Emil Bove has tried to catch David Pecker in a contradiction. But Pecker is not playing along, and he is repeatedly disagreeing with Bove. He is fighting back against these attacks and seeming a bit more like the tough tabloid publisher that he used to be. It's hurting the effectiveness of the points the defense is trying to land, confusing matters more than clarifying them."

Bromwich: "Bove concludes his cross-examination, asking Pecker about his obligations in cooperating with the prosecution at this trial. 'To be truthful,' Pecker says, still seemingly in a fighting mood. Then the former publisher adds, 'I've been truthful to the best of my recollection.' Bove sits down."

Bromwich: [On redirect,] "Joshua Steinglass, the prosecutor, uses Emil Bove's repetition of the phrase 'standard operating procedure' against him, as he points out all the parts of the agreement with Karen McDougal that were not so standard. Pecker agrees with Steinglass throughout as he asks him these questions, hurting the defense's argument."

Haberman: "Steinglass is systematically getting Pecker to lay out the ways in which The Enquirer's arrangement with Trump was sui generis."

Haberman: "... Steinglass ... asks David Pecker about the overlap between The Enquirer's readership and Trump's political base. 'All that base loved reading positive stories about Donald Trump,' Pecker says. 'And when he announced his presidency, going from The Apprentice to running for the president of the United States, our sales increased....' Steinglass sums up their back and forth: 'Running stories about Mr. Trump appealed to your readership.' Steinglass then makes the point that it was not in The Enquirer's best interest to kill the McDougal story, because it would have sold well. But they killed it because doing so helped Trump. 'Yes,' Pecker says."

Bromwich: [After some additional questioning by both Steinglass & Bove, Pecker leaves the stand.] "Susan Hoffinger, the head of the district attorney's investigations division, will question [Rhona] Graff, who is the second witness. Graff was Trump's former assistant at the Trump Organization. Hoffinger, along with Joshua Steinglass, led the team that convicted Trump's company two years ago."

Haberman: "Rhona Graff says she worked at the Trump Organization for 34 years. Her understanding was that Donald Trump owned the company and she worked directly for him.... Graff says her lawyers are being paid by the Trump Organization. This is a running theme with some witnesses close to Trump -- he or his political-action committee have continued to pay their legal fees. Michael Cohen flipped on Trump, partly because the Trump Organization stopped paying his legal fees."

Christobek: "We are now looking at redacted entries from the Trump Organization's computer system that contain contact information for Karen McDougal and 'Stormy.'"

Haberman: "Susan Hoffinger, the prosecutor, is asking Graff to verify that she compiled records of various items like emails, contact lists and calendar entries.... Rhona Graff testifies that she saw Stormy Daniels at Trump Tower, in the waiting area of the 26th floor, where Trump's office is located."

Bromwich: [Gary Farro is called to the stand.] "Farro was a banker at First Republic when Michael Cohen was seeking to arrange the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels. Cohen, seeking to get the money together, was contacted by Farro's assistant at First Republic Bank.... First Republic Bank, Gary Farro reminds the jurors, no longer exists. It was seized and sold by regulators last year, one of several banks that were the casualties of bank runs after interest rate hikes."

Christobek: "This material is dry but the prosecutor, Rebecca Mangold, is questioning Gary Farro slowly and deliberately. Farro said that Michael Cohen was eager to connect with him and wanted to open a limited liability company immediately. Farro then took steps to open an account for him and specified with his team that Cohen didn't want addresses on the checks.... At the conclusion of his testimony today, Gary Farro referenced a document showing that Michael Cohen opened a limited liability company called Essential Consultants L.L.C., and indicated that it was a real estate consulting company. The company was later used to pay Stormy Daniels the hush money."

Bromwich: "And now we're adjourned for the day. Trump looks utterly spent as he rises at the end of the long first week of testimony in his criminal trial. As he passes reporters, he grimaces, then glares, putting on a braver face as he leaves the courtroom."

Ana Swanson & Vivian Wang of the New York Times: "Preserving some semblance of cooperation -- and the difficulty of doing so -- was at the heart of a meeting between Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken and China's leader, Xi Jinping, in Beijing on Friday. It was the latest effort by the rivals to keep communications open even as disputes escalate over trade, national security and geopolitical frictions. Officials in both countries said they had made progress on a few smaller, pragmatic fronts, including setting up the first U.S.-China talks on artificial intelligence in the coming weeks. They also said they would continue improving communications between their militaries and increase cultural exchanges. But on fundamental strategic issues, each side held little hope of moving the other, and they appeared wary of the possibility of sliding into further conflict."

New York Times: "The Wall Street Journal reports that allies of Donald Trump are devising ways of watering down the central bank's independence if he is re-elected president. If true, that change would represent the biggest shake-up in U.S. monetary policy in decades. But it also raises questions about whether such a plan is possible -- or whether Trump's Wall Street supporters would back it.... Among the most consequential would be asserting that Trump had the authority to oust Jay Powell as Fed chair before Powell's term is up in 2025. While Trump gave Powell the job in 2017, he has since soured on his pick for raising rates, and has publicly said he wouldn't give Powell a second term."

Donald Trump Has Been Asking, "Are You Better Off Than You Were Four Years Ago?" Let's Check. Top News in at NBC News, April 26, 2020: "Prescriptions for two antimalarial drugs jumped by 46 times the average when the president promoted them on TV. There's no proof they work against Covid-19.... The extraordinary change in prescribing patterns reflects, at least in part, the outsize reach of the Trump megaphone, even when his pronouncements distort scientific evidence or run counter to the recommendations of experts in his own administration. It also offers the clearest evidence yet of the perils of a president willing to push unproven and potentially dangerous remedies to a public desperate for relief from the pandemic."

~~~~~~~~~~

The Trials of Trump, Ctd.

The Supreme Accomplices. Adam Liptak of the New York Times: "The Supreme Court's conservative majority appeared ready on Thursday to rule that former presidents have some degree of immunity from criminal prosecution, a move that could further delay the criminal case against ... Donald J. Trump on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election. Such a ruling would most likely send the case back to the trial court, ordering it to draw distinctions between official and private conduct. It would amount to a major statement on the scope of presidential power.... There were only glancing references to the timing of the trial and no particular sense of urgency among the more conservative justices at Thursday's argument. Instead, several of them criticized what they suggested was a political prosecution brought under laws they said were ill suited to the case at hand."

Marie: The consensus seems to be that the Dirty Rotten Scoundrels will twiddle their thumbs till they eventually come up with a ruling that (1) sends the case back through the lower courts and into Trumpy Limbo Land AND (2) eliminates at least some of the charges against Trump. Democracy dies in darkness? Well, only if you figure "darkness" = the Supreme Court's edict against cameras in federal courtrooms. As far as I know, the lights were on at the Supreme Court Thursday morning, and democracy still took a nosedive. My suggestion: the D.C. Metropolitan Police pick up the winger Supremes and charge them with aiding and abetting a massive crime spree. And hold them in the D.C. jail with the other J-6 prisoners. Maybe they can join the choir; I'm sure Alito has a lovely singing voice. And Clarence! That baritone!

MSNBC hosts got to the crux of the hearing in a two-hour special last night. Here's a segment to give you the flavor of the hearing:

Oval Office = U.S. Crime Center. Brent Griffiths of Business Insider, republished in Yahoo! News: "Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was animated on Thursday when she discussed the potential of what could happen to the presidency if the Supreme Court were to grant presidents the sweeping immunity ... Donald Trump is seeking. 'The most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority could go into office knowing there would be no potential penalty for committing crimes,' Jackson said during oral arguments. 'I'm trying to understand what the disincentive is from turning the Oval Office into, you know, the seat of criminal activity in this country.'... Jackson appeared alarmed that some of her colleagues, especially some of the court's conservatives, seemed more afraid of limiting presidential immunity ... [than of limiting a president's freedom to commit crimes without consequence]."

Rick Hasen: "After a couple of hours of oral argument, it appears that the Supreme Court is unlikely to embrace either Donald Trump's extreme position -- that would seem to give immunity for a president who ordered an assassination of a rival or staged a coup -- or the government's position that a former president is not absolutely immune even for his or her official acts. Conservatives on the Court are going to make it hard to prosecute a former president for most crimes. But they are likely to reject some of the most extreme, insane, authoritarian arguments that were made by Trump's lawyer. The final opinion will likely come closer to the government's position, but it will almost certainly result in a divided set of opinions (which take more time to draft) and a lot of work on remand to rework the results of the case. The bottom line is that Trump is likely to get what he wants -- a further delay of this election subversion case...."

digby: "Today's Supreme Court argument on presidential immunity was profoundly depressing. It really sounded like the majority is persuaded that they must protect criminal president Donald Trump (and any like him in the future) from any kind of accountability for his crimes.... It appears that this court has not been chastised at all by the country's reaction to their radical actions in Dobbs or anything else. So, if they do what it looks very likely they will do, which is to at least give Trump the delay he seeks and possibly upend the constitutional order at his behest, he could get off scott free whether he wins or loses.... Trump is a narcissistic sociopathic criminal. He will gather power-mad zealots with an ax to grind all around him. Don't kid yourself. He will have no limits." ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: You thought it was bad when the Supremes picked president George W. Bush by stopping the Florida recount? Now they're the David Peckers of 2024, picking the president* before the election by putting their thumbs on the scale. And if, as in 2000, the election is close in a state or states that would decide the national election, what do you think the same Supremes will do? Play fair? Ha!

Ian Millhiser of Vox: "Thursday's argument in Trump v. United States was a disaster for Special Counsel Jack Smith, and for anyone who believes that the president of the United States should be subject to prosecution if they commit a crime. At least five of the Court's Republicans seemed eager to, at the very least, permit Trump to delay his federal criminal trial for attempting to steal the 2020 election until after this November's election. And the one GOP appointee who seemed to hedge the most, Chief Justice John Roberts, also seemed to think that Trump enjoys at least some immunity from criminal prosecution. Much of the Court's Republican majority, moreover, seemed eager not simply to delay Trump's trial until after the election, but to give him extraordinarily broad immunity from criminal prosecution should he be elected once again. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, for example, argued that when a president exercises his official powers, he cannot be charged under any federal criminal statute at all, unless that statute contains explicit language saying that it applies to the president." (Also linked yesterday.)

Here's the New York Times liveblog of the Supreme Hearing on the Supreme Immunity of Our Supreme Ruler. (Also linked yesterday.)

Charlie Savage & Alan Feuer of the New York Times have some takeaways from the hearing that will leave you will a sick feeling.

See Akhilleus' entry near the top of yesterday's Comments thread, in which he cites a Rolling Stone article. From the Stone piece: "We already pulled off the heist," says a source close to Trump, noting it doesn't matter to them what the Supreme Court decides now...."

Jonah Bromwich, et al., of the New York Times: "Over nearly six hours of testimony on Thursday, [National Enquirer publisher David] Pecker described how he had helped quash three scandalous stories about Mr. Trump, including by setting in motion a hush-money deal with a porn star, Stormy Daniels. That payment is central to the prosecution's case: Prosecutors have charged Mr. Trump with 34 felonies, accusing him of covering up the payoff to Ms. Daniels.... Mr. Pecker introduced the jury to a dark art in the world of supermarket tabloids, the practice known as 'catch and kill' -- buying the rights to a story with no intention of publishing it. The National Enquirer used the tactic to silence [Karen] McDougal [who has said she had a relationship with Trump] and the doorman with his account of an out-of-wedlock child, which turned out to be false....

"In a powerful moment for the prosecution, Mr. Pecker acknowledged a clear-cut motive for keeping the model's story under wraps: protecting Mr. Trump's chance of winning the White House.... He also acknowledged that it is unlawful for a corporation to spend money that way to influence the election, another pivotal moment in the early days of the trial. (The Federal Election Commission later punished The Enquirer's parent company with fines of $187,000; Mr. Trump's campaign was not sanctioned.)"

The New York Times' liveblog of proceedings Thursday in the Trump 2016 election interference case is here. See yesterday's Conversation for some detailed observations.

Aaron Katersky of ABC News: "A federal judge in New York on Thursday rejected ... Donald Trump's bid for a new trial in a defamation case brought by writer E. Jean Carroll. The ruling upheld the jury's $83.3 million damage award. 'Contrary to the defendant's arguments, Ms. Carroll's compensatory damages were not awarded solely for her emotional distress; they were not for garden variety harms; and they were not excessive,' Judge Lewis Kaplan wrote. 'Mr. Trump's malicious and unceasing attacks on Ms. Carroll were disseminated to more than 100 million people,' he added. 'They included public threats and personal attacks, and they endangered Ms. Carroll's health and safety.'" (Also linked yesterday.)

Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff, et al., of the Washington Post: "Arrests at pro-Palestinian protests that expanded Thursday to colleges across the country brought the total number of people detained in a week of demonstrations to more than 500, with officials struggling to quell the unrest by clearing encampments and closing buildings. A tumultuous scene and dozens of arrests late Wednesday at the University of Southern California pushed its administration to cancel the school's main commencement ceremony May 10, citing new safety measures that have been put in place after protests there.... In one of the most dramatic clashes, police officers in Atlanta disrupted an encampment at Emory University and faced off with demonstrators while attempting to clear the area. An officer deployed a stun gun at a protester who was being restrained, according to social media video.... The Atlanta Police Department said officers used chemical irritants but denied using rubber bullets in making arrests." ~~~

~~~ Molly Hennessy-Fiske & Patrick Svitek of the Washington Post: On Thursday, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R), called out more than 100 state troopers to clear out protesters planning to occupy a lawn at the UT-Austin campus. "... that decision ... led to dozens of arrests amid dramatic video of riot-clad troopers on campus.... Critics were quick to note ... that Abbott proudly signed a law in 2019 that aimed to protect free speech on college campuses by guaranteeing anyone can protest in common outdoor areas as long as they are not breaking the law or disrupting the regular functioning of the school. That is precisely what those arrested Wednesday were doing, they said." ~~~

~~~ Stephanie Saul of the New York Times: "Columbia University's faculty senate, fearing the repercussions of a censure vote against the school's president, Nemat Shafik, plans instead to vote on a watered-down resolution expressing displeasure with a series of her decisions, including summoning the police last week to arrest protesting students on campus. Senators worried that a censure vote could result in Dr. Shafik's removal at a time of crisis. And some feared that such a vote would be perceived as yielding to Republican lawmakers who had called for her resignation, according to interviews with several members of the senate who attended a closed-door meeting on Wednesday, some of whom requested anonymity to talk about a private meeting. The senate is scheduled to meet again on Friday to vote on a resolution."

Eric Levenson of CNN: "The New York Court of Appeals on Thursday overturned the sex crimes conviction against Harvey Weinstein, the powerful Hollywood producer whose downfall stood as a symbol of the #MeToo movement. The court, by a 4-3 vote, ordered a new trial. 'We conclude that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes because that testimony served no material non-propensity purpose,' the ruling, written by Judge Jenny Rivera, states. 'The court compounded that error when it ruled that defendant, who had no criminal history, could be cross examined about those allegations as well as numerous allegations of misconduct that portrayed defendant in a highly prejudicial light. The synergistic effect of these errors was not harmless.'" (Also linked yesterday.)

~~~~~~~~~~

Florida. Tara Suter of the Hill: "Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) said Thursday his state 'will not comply' with recently unveiled changes to Title IX by the Biden administration. 'Florida rejects [President Biden';s] attempt to rewrite Title IX,' DeSantis said in a video posted to the social platform X. 'We will not comply, and we will fight back.'... The Biden administration on Friday unveiled a final set of changes to Title IX that add protections for transgender students to the federal civil rights law on sex-based discrimination. The changes will take effect in early August."

Maryland. Lilly Price of the Baltimore Sun: " Pikesville High School's athletic director was arrested Thursday morning in connection with an artificial intelligence-made audio clip of the school's principal having a fake, racist conversation. Dazhon Darien, 31, is charged with disrupting school activities after Baltimore County Police say he created the falsified audio recording of Eric Eiswert in January. The audio clip using the principal's voice went viral and was swiftly condemned by the Baltimore County community. The school was inundated with outraged calls and needed an increased police presence and additional counselors.... Billy Burke, head of the union that represents Eiswert, said the principal's family was being harassed and threatened.... Eiswert has been on leave since the audio recordings went public. Pikesville High School has been run by district staff since Eiswert left and the plan remains to keep those temporary administrators on the job through the end of the school year...." ~~~

     ~~~ Jaclyn Diaz of NPR: "For just a few dollars, anyone can harness artificial intelligence to make audio and visual deepfakes. Stakes are high, but deepfake detection software doesn't always get it right." MB: IOW, we're all vulnerable to this kind of hoax.

Texas. You Have to Punish the Black Ladies. Sam Levine of the Guardian: "A Texas prosecutor will appeal against a court ruling tossing out a five-year prison sentence for a woman who unintentionally tried to vote while ineligible in the 2016 election, an unexpected move that continues one of the most closely watched voting prosecutions in the US. Last month, the second court of appeals, which is based in Fort Worth, threw out the 2018 conviction of Crystal Mason, a Black woman who submitted a provisional ballot in 2016 that ultimately went uncounted. Mason was on supervised release for a federal felony at the time she voted and has said she had no idea she was ineligible. The panel said prosecutors had failed to prove Mason actually knew she was ineligible.But the Tarrant county district attorney, Phil Sorrells, a Republican, announced on Thursday he was appealing to the Texas court of criminal appeals, the highest criminal court in Texas."

Washington. Danny Westneat of the Seattle Times: "The Republican base, it turns out, is now opposed to democracy.... After the candidates left [the state's GOP convention], the convention's delegates got down to crafting a party platform. [Among their decisions:] A resolution called for ending the ability to vote for U.S. senators. Instead, senators would get appointed by state legislatures, as it generally worked 110 years ago prior to the passage of the 17th Amendment in 1913. 'We are devolving into a democracy, because congressmen and senators are elected by the same pool,' was how one GOP delegate put it to the convention. 'We do not want to be a democracy.'... Then ... they passed a resolution calling on people to please stop using the word 'democracy.'... The resolution sums up: 'We ... oppose legislation which makes our nation more democratic in nature.'... When people say 'democracy itself is on the ballot' in this election, though, I think this is what they're talking about." Thanks to RAS for the link. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: Westneat seems to be making light of the rubes' dislike of democracy, at least to some extent, but read it in the context of Robert Kagan's WashPo essay, also linked yesterday, and you see how these particular rubes are exactly the people the Founders worried about: those who lacked "public virtue" and had little or no appreciation for "natural rights."