The Conversation -- July 3, 2024

Katie Rogers of the New York Times: "President Biden has told a key ally that he knows he may not be able to salvage his candidacy if he cannot convince the public in the coming days that he is up for the job after a disastrous debate performance last week. The president, whom this ally emphasized is still deeply in the fight for re-election, understands that his next few appearances heading into the holiday weekend must go well, particularly an interview scheduled for Friday with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News and campaign stops in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. 'He knows if he has two more events like that, we're in a different place' by the end of the weekend, said the ally, referring to Mr. Biden's halting and unfocused performance in the debate. The person, who talked to the president in the past 24 hours, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive situation. Andrew Bates, a White House spokesman, said the report was 'absolutely false' and that the White House had not been given enough time to respond."

Theodore Schleifer, et al., of the New York Times: "Wealthy Democratic donors who believe a different nominee would be the party's best chance to hold the White House are increasingly gritting their teeth in silence about President Biden, fearful that any move against him could backfire.... Earlier moves by donors to mount their own campaigns to pressure Mr. Biden to step down as the party's presidential candidate have either fizzled out or prompted pushback from fellow contributors and operatives. The deadlock reflects a broader paralysis within the party about how to handle a fraught situation that could inflame intraparty rifts, alienate key constituencies, damage personal relationships and benefit a Republican candidate most of the donors believe poses a threat to democracy."

Kenneth Vogel of the New York Times: "A group of business leaders is calling on President Biden to step aside and make way for a replacement atop the Democratic Party's presidential ticket. Leadership Now Project, a coalition of 400 politically active current and retired executives who mostly but not entirely lean left, issued a statement on Wednesday urging Mr. Biden to 'pass the torch of this year's presidential nomination to the next generation of highly capable Democrats.' The statement is unsigned, but Daniella Ballou-Aares, the group's founder and chief executive, said that it was supported by an overwhelming majority of the members of Leadership Now Project.... In its statement, Leadership Now Project called the prospect of a second Trump term 'an existential threat to American democracy' and said that at the debate Mr. Biden 'failed to effectively make the case against Trump, and we now fear the risk of a devastating loss in November.'"

Motoko Rich of the New York Times: "... with the United States Supreme Court granting ... presidents legal immunity, analysts in some [U.S.-allied] countries are even more concerned about the reliability of American power. Across Asia and Europe, where allied leaders have grown accustomed to dealing with threats from authoritarian leaders in Russia, North Korea and China, the idea that they might also have to deal with an unfettered American president is an unsettling prospect.... 'This may be rude to the U.S., but it is not that different from Xi Jinping in China,' ... said said Keigo Komamura, a professor of law at Keio University in Tokyo. 'The rule of law has become the rule of power.' Though some give limited immunity to leaders while in office, Japan, South Korea, Australia and Great Britain -- among the United States' closest allies in the world -- offer nothing like the sweeping protections the Supreme Court appears to have granted in its ruling this week. The court's decision to give the president immunity from criminal prosecution for official conduct -- which was itself vaguely defined by the court -- was 'out of line with global norms,' said Rosalind Dixon, a professor of law at the University of New South Wales in Sydney." MB: Not rude, professor; accurate.

Media Matters provides a transcript of remarks by Kevin Roberts, the Heritage Foundation's president to David Brat, a college professor & former righty-right Virginia Congressman: "... the left has taken over our institutions. The reason that they are apoplectic right now, the reason that so many anchors on MSNBC, for example, are losing their minds daily is because our side is winning.... We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be." ~~~

     ~~~ The White People's Revolution. Philip Bump of the Washington Post: "It is true that, particularly of late, [Kevin Roberts'] side has been winning.... The court that made ... changes is one that arose largely despite popular will, not because of it.... This fear of a declining America because of an ascendant left is pervasive on the right.... So much of this is about demography and power.... America has for decades been shifting toward a government in which power is distributed broadly and irrespective of identity. On the right, this is a problem; getting more people to vote, for example, is positioned as 'rigging' elections since those more people are presumed to be Democrats. So we have Roberts, Trump and their revolution. This time, though, the aim ... is ... to largely reverse the trajectory of the first American Revolution, centralizing power in one leader who happens to look a lot like them." ~~~

     ~~~ ** Amanda Marcotte of Salon: "Donald Trump has never been coy about his longing to kill people. [Marcotte gives many examples.] No doubt Trump uses intimidation to keep party members in line. But his real power comes less from scaring people and more from the widespread longing in the GOP ranks for a right-wing dictatorship.... People who are afraid of Trump would not be happy that he's been granted the license to kill by the Supreme Court.... [Speaker Mike] Johnson is hardly alone in expressing his elation over this. Politico described the Republican reaction as "giddy," with prominent politicians using language like 'win' and 'victory.' Right-wing media is also celebrating like it's their birthday, while, like Johnson, lying to their audiences about how much freedom Trump would have to commit crimes in office.... Trump wants to be a dictator. Republicans want that, too." ~~~

     ~~~ Maggie Astor of the New York Times reports on Kevin Roberts' declaration of revolution and on Donald Trump's history of promoting violence. As Patrick points out in today's thread, this is a straight news report, not an opinion piece.

Matthew Chapman of the Raw Story: "Chief Justice John Roberts and his right-wing colleagues on the Supreme Court are projecting their own insecurities and 'hurt feelings' onto women who are calling out their flawed and dangerous rulings, wrote Dahlia Lithwick in a scorching analysis for Slate.... It's hard to swallow this criticism [from Chief Justice Roberts (in his opinion) and right-wing pundits], wrote Lithwick, given that warnings that Roe v. Wade would be overturned were similarly dismissed as'hysterical' including by senators who voted to confirm Trump's Supreme Court Justices, like Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE).... 'This isn't hypothetical. This isn't fearmongering. This is how Trump lives and will continue to live. It is how he governs and how he will continue to govern,' Lithwick concluded -- and people in power should stop laughing off women whenever they voice real fears about their rights and prospects. 'It's almost as if the conservative justices' commitment to originalism requires them to believe that women who raise any objection to their tidy paradigms should be viewed as either empty vessels or scheming witches.'"

Texas. Anumita Kaur & Maria Paul of the Washington Post: "A state district court judge blocked Texas's attempt to shutter a decades-old migrant shelter network near the U.S.-Mexico border Tuesday, calling Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton's actions 'outrageous and intolerable.' Paxton earlier this year demanded that Annunciation House, which operates several shelters serving migrants and refugees, turn over records showing the names of those it housed. The nonprofit filed a lawsuit asking a judge to rule on the request; the attorney general responded with a countersuit seeking the closure of the shelters and accusing the nonprofit of violating smuggling laws. Judge Francisco X. Dominguez of the 205th District Court shot down the effort in a pair of rulings, writing that Paxton's allegations were unfounded and his request for documents violated the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches. Thus, his ruling said, it was void and unenforceable."

~~~~~~~~~~

Presidential Race

Michael Shear of the New York Times: "President Biden acknowledged on Tuesday that he 'fell asleep on the stage' during his disastrous debate last week, blaming his performance on the fact that he had traveled 'around the world a couple times' in the two weeks before the face-off with ... Donald J. Trump. 'I wasn't very smart,' Mr. Biden, 81, told donors at a fund-raiser in Virginia.... 'It's not an excuse but an explanation,' he said. White House officials have blamed Mr. Biden's having a cold at the time for his disjointed debate performance. Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, repeated that explanation at a briefing for reporters on Tuesday afternoon."

Peter Baker, et al., of the New York Times: "In the weeks and months before President Biden's politically devastating performance on the debate stage in Atlanta, several current and former officials and others who encountered him behind closed doors noticed that he increasingly appeared confused or listless, or would lose the thread of conversations.... In interviews, people in the room with him more recently said that the lapses seemed to be growing more frequent, more pronounced and more worrisome.... The recent moments of disorientation generated concern among advisers and allies alike. He seemed confused at points during a D-Day anniversary ceremony in France on June 6. The next day, he misstated the purpose of a new tranche of military aid to Ukraine when meeting with its president. On June 10, he appeared to freeze up at an early celebration of the Juneteenth holiday. On June 18, his soft-spoken tone and brief struggle to summon the name of his homeland security secretary at an immigration event unnerved some of his allies at the event...." (Also linked yesterday.)

Catie Edmondson, et al., of the New York Times: "Democratic anxiety over President Biden's fitness to run for re-election erupted into the open on Tuesday in a spike of panic, as the first sitting member of Congress called on Mr. Biden to withdraw and a slew of other prominent officials who have backed the president vented their concerns. One Democratic senator openly asked for assurances from the White House about Mr. Biden's 'condition' -- 'that this was a real anomaly and not just the way he is these days,' Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island told a local television station, where he said he had been 'horrified' by the president's debate performance. Another, Senator Peter Welch of Vermont, scolded the Biden campaign for 'a dismissive attitude towards people who are raising questions for discussion,' in an interview with Semafor."

Lisa Lerer, et al., of the New York Times: "President Biden and his advisers rushed to stem the first serious defections inside the Democratic Party since his shaky debate last week, as leading Democrats lent legitimacy to questions about his mental acuity and raised the specter of replacing him atop the ticket.... [Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), t]he key Black lawmaker whose endorsement helped lift Mr. Biden to the nomination in 2020, said he would back the vice president if Mr. Biden 'were to step aside.'... Two Democratic lawmakers who represent some of the most contested swing districts in the country -- Representatives Jared Golden of Maine and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington -- both offered public predictions that Mr. Trump would win the election.... A majority of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters said the party would have a better chance at winning if the nominee were someone other than Mr. Biden, according to the poll.... The spate of early defections and diminished support in surveys demonstrates the scale of the crisis still gripping the Democratic Party.... Mr. Biden ... has spent much of the past three days out of the public eye, emerging only to give brief remarks on Monday evening, and has not taken questions from reporters.... Most Democratic governors have not had direct contact with Mr. Biden since the debate, a fact that has caused exasperation and prompted continued questions about his health."

Tyler Pager & Michael Scherer of the Washington Post: "Former president Barack Obama has privately told allies who have reached out to him that President Biden's already-tough path to reelection grew more challenging after his shaky debate performance on Thursday -- a harsher assessment of the presidential race than his public comments, according to several people familiar with his remarks.... Obama has long harbored worries about his party defeating Donald Trump in November, repeatedly warning Biden in recent months about how challenging it will be to win reelection. Just before the debate, Obama conveyed to allies his concerns about the state of the race.... On Friday, Obama appeared at a fundraiser in New York for House Democrats, where he expressed continued support for Biden."

Rebecca Shabad of NBC News: "Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Tuesday that it's valid for people to ask whether President Joe Biden's poor performance at the debate Thursday night was just 'an episode' or part of a 'condition.'... 'Both candidates owe whatever test you want to put them to, in terms of their mental acuity and their health -- both of them,' she added. Asked for further clarification, Pelosi spokesperson Ian Krager said that she 'has full confidence in President Biden and looks forward to attending his inauguration on January 20, 2025.'"

Farnoush Amiri of the AP: "A House Democratic lawmaker has become the first in the party to publicly call for President Joe Biden to step down as the party's nominee for president, citing Biden's debate performance against Donald Trump failing to 'effectively defend his many accomplishments.' Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas said in a statement Tuesday..., 'My decision to make these strong reservations public is not done lightly nor does it in any way diminish my respect for all that President Biden has achieved,' Doggett said. 'Recognizing that, unlike Trump, President Biden's first commitment has always been to our country, not himself, I am hopeful that he will make the painful and difficult decision to withdraw. I respectfully call on him to do so.'" (Also linked yesterday.) The Texas Tribune story is here; thanks to laura h. for the link.

Liz Goodwin, et al., of the Washington Post: ""As panic and confusion over President Biden's faltering debate performance swept the ranks of Democratic lawmakers late last week, Sen. Joe Manchin III informed a few key allies that he would soon break with Biden in an interview on a Sunday news show, a high-profile defection that would underscore the president's weakness.... But he didn't. Senior Democrats heard of Manchin's plans and started making calls to the independent-minded senator.... The 'full-court press' was quickly assembled to help dissuade Manchin from appearing on the show...." (Also linked yesterday.)

Jeremy Barr of the Washington Post: "Over the past 3½ years, liberal hosts on MSNBC reliably provided support for ">President Biden and trained fire on his adversaries, notably Donald Trump. But in the days since Biden's halting debate performance, there has been a different reality on the network that employs two of his former top aides. MSNBC's marquee names have issued harsh reviews; some have even raised questions about his campaign and fitness for office. 'It was not a good performance,' Symone Sanders-Townsend, a former Biden White House senior adviser turned MSNBC host and pundit, said Tuesday morning.... 'No one who watched with their eyes thought that was a good performance,' said Jen Psaki, Biden's former press secretary, who also hosts a show on the network. The new dynamic started immediately after Thursday’s debate, when a panel of MSNBC luminaries took an even harder edge.... Perhaps the most significant shift occurred on the network's morning show 'Morning Joe,' which has reliably trumpeted Biden.... [Host Joe] Scarborough predicted that Trump would win reelection in November 'unless things change.'"

Bloody Biden Buddy Bunker. Eli Stokols, et al., of Politico: "Over the course of his presidency, Joe Biden's small clutch of advisers have built an increasingly protective circle around him, limiting his exposure to the media and outside advice -- an effort to manage public perceptions of the oldest person to ever hold the office and tightly control his political operation. But inside the White House, Biden's growing limitations were becoming apparent long before his meltdown in last week's debate, with the senior team's management of the president growing more strictly controlled as his term has gone on.... Following the debate, the pervasive view throughout much of the party is of Biden's inner circle as an impenetrable group of enablers who deluded themselves about his ability to run again even as they've assiduously worked to accommodate his limitations and shield them from view." (Also linked yesterday.)

Polling Data Predict a Trump Landslide. Alex Griffing of Mediaite: "Puck's Peter Hamby got his hands on a 'confidential polling memo' put together by Democratic data firm OpenLabs that showed President Joe Biden's debate performance has put once solid blue states up for grabs in November. Hamby wrote the memo 'circulating among anxious Democrats is confirming some of their worst fears,' as the data showed that Biden's disastrous debate against Trump has led to him slipping in the polls even more. 'Biden's diminished standing is now putting previously noncompetitive states like New Hampshire, Virginia, and New Mexico in play for Donald Trump,' Hamby wrote.... The data also [show] that Biden is no longer the strongest candidate to run against Trump, as alternatives now poll better.... Vice President Kamala Harris, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, California Governor Gavin Newsom, and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg 'polled ahead of Biden in every battleground state.'"

National Crime Blotter

** Ben Protess, et al., of the New York Times: "The judge in Donald J. Trump's Manhattan criminal case delayed his sentencing until Sept. 18 to weigh whether a new U.S. Supreme Court ruling might imperil the former president's conviction, the judge said Tuesday in a letter to prosecutors and defense lawyers. The judge, Juan M. Merchan, may ultimately find no basis to overturn the jury's verdict, but the delay was a surprising turn of events in a case that had led to the first conviction of an American president. With the election on the horizon, the sentencing might be the only moment of criminal accountability for the twice-impeached and four-time-indicted former president whose other cases are mired in delay." This is an update of a story linked earlier. (Also linked yesterday.)

Devlin Barrett & Perry Stein of the Washington Post: "Justice Department officials plan to pursue the criminal cases against Donald Trump past Election Day even if he wins, under the belief that department rules against charging or prosecuting a sitting president would not kick in until Inauguration Day in January, according to people familiar with the discussions.... The plan to continue filing motions, seeking court hearings, and potentially conducting a trial between Election Day and Inauguration Day underscores the highly unusual nature of prosecuting not just a former president, but also possibly a future one.... Current officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity..., [said] that if Trump wins the election, the clock on the two federal cases against him would keep ticking until Jan. 20, when he would be sworn in as the 47th president."

** Ian Millhiser of Vox: "The Court's six Republicans handed down a decision on Monday that gives Donald Trump such sweeping immunity from prosecution that there are unlikely to be any legal checks on his behavior if he returns to the White House. The Court's three Democrats dissented. Trump v. United States is an astonishing opinion. It holds that presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution -- essentially, a license to commit crimes -- so long as they use the official powers of their office to do so.... [It is] a blueprint for dictatorship." Millhiser goes on to explain the Court's decision, with nuggets like this: "... Roberts does concede that the president may be prosecuted for 'unofficial' acts. So, for example, if Trump had personally attempted to shoot and kill then-presidential candidate Joe Biden in the lead-up to the 2020 election, rather than ordering a subordinate to do so, then Trump could probably be prosecuted for murder. But even this caveat to Roberts's sweeping immunity decision is not very strong." (Also linked yesterday.)

Joyce Vance is a good explainer, too. Besides hitting all the low points, she adds, for instance, "The majority opinion closes with a section where the Chief Justice, in a most decidedly uncollegial fashion, criticizes the Justices who dissent. He starts by calling out the dissents for striking 'a tone of chilling doom that is wholly disproportionate to what the Court actually does today.' Sit down, little ladies, the Chief Justice says." And, "It's remarkable that the Court is able to go on for 43 pages without acknowledging that Donald Trump tried to undo our democracy." (Also linked yesterday.)

Judd Legum of Popular Information: "The Supreme Court invented this new kind of presidential immunity 235 years after the Constitution was ratified. And it lacks any grounding in the Constitution's text.... In Federalist No. 69, Alexander Hamilton wrote that the President would be 'liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law.' This, Hamilton wrote is the key distinction between the 'King of England,' who was 'sacred and invulnerable,'" and the 'President of the United States.'" (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: I recall reading Federalist No. 69 when I was a college freshman. Hamilton's words were still true when I read No. 69 in 1963. This, a young girl supposed, is what made the United States great. As of yesterday, Hamilton's words are not true anymore. Update: Last night Rachel Maddow said the immunity decision seemed to her "like a complete inversion of the American ideal." I'll sign onto that.

Kate Shaw in a New York Times op-ed: "It is increasingly clear that this court sees itself as something other than a participant in our democratic system. It sees itself as the enforcer of the separation of powers, but not itself subject to that separation.... The court ... has removed a major check on the office of the presidency at the very moment when Mr. Trump is running for office on a promise to weaponize the apparatus of government against those he views as his enemies.... The court in this case announces that an important mechanism of accountability, criminal charges under statutes passed by Congress, is almost entirely unavailable in the context of former presidents.... Justice Samuel Alito [made a] statement last July to The Wall Street Journal about Congress and the court:... 'No provision in the Constitution gives them' -- meaning Congress -- 'the authority to regulate the Supreme Court -- period.' Sub in 'president' for Supreme Court, and that's Monday's opinion in a nutshell. The court's reasoning here is also in line with what Chief Justice John Roberts said to the Senate.... Roberts's brusque refusal [to meet with senators] invoked broad 'separation of powers concerns' that he claimed 'counsel against such appearances.' It is now clear that the Roberts court believes the separation of powers means that both presidents and courts stand beyond the reach of the law." (Also linked yesterday.)

Philip Marcelo of the AP: "Rudolph Giuliani, the former New York City mayor, federal prosecutor and legal adviser to Donald Trump, was disbarred in New York on Tuesday after a court found he repeatedly made false statements about Trump's 2020 election loss. The Manhattan appeals court ruled Giuliani, who had his New York law license suspended in 2021 for making false statements around the election, is no longer allowed to practice law in the state, effective immediately." (Also linked yesterday.)

~~~~~~~~~~

Mississippi. Shoot the Messenger. Ken Dilanian & Laura Strickler of NBC News: "When Anna Wolfe won the Pulitzer Prizefor her dogged reporting on Mississippi's welfare fraud scandal, she had no inkling she was soon going to have to contend with the possibility of going to jail. But just over a year after she secured journalism's top award for exposing how $77 million in federal welfare funds went to athletes, cronies and pet projects, she and her editor, Adam Ganucheau, are contemplating what to pack for an extended stay behind bars. Sued for defamation by the state's former governor [Phil Bryant (R)] -- a top subject of their reporting -- they have been hit with a court order requiring them to turn over internal files including the names of confidential sources. They say the order is a threat to journalism that they will resist.... Mississippi Today. Bryant -- who has not been charged with a crime ... -- claims the online news organization wrongly accused him of criminal conduct." ~~~

~~~ Mississippi. Robert Klemko of the Washington Post: Civil rights lawyer Jill Collen Jefferson took on the (allegedly!) corrupt Lexinton, Miss., police force, and they arrested & jailed her. "Lexington, seat of Holmes County, drew the Biden administration's attention mostly because of Jefferson. Twice she went to Washington to lobby officials and lay out her case. She had collected claims of rampant abuses allegedly committed by the small department's chiefs and officers: that they were targeting Black people for prosecution; falsifying or destroying evidence; committing assaults, including of a young disabled woman; and coercing Black women into sex." MB: Sounds like a made-for-Netflix movie. Yes, Mississippi is still Mississippi.

Virginia. "Very Fine People" Must Pay Up. Ellie Sullivan of the Washington Post: "A federal appeals court on Monday restored more than $2 million of damages that a jury said some of the nation's most prominent white supremacists and hate groups owed for their role in 2017's deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville. A federal judge had previously slashed the $24 million a jury awarded eight plaintiffs in total to $350,000, citing a decades-old state law. But in a unanimous ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ordered that instead of splitting the $350,000, each plaintiff was entitled to that amount, totaling $2.8 million. This ruling allows plaintiffs to collect -- nearly three years after a jury said they were entitled to relief for the physical harm and emotional distress they incurred when white supremacists descended on Charlottesville in a weekend of hate. Among the defendants was a neo-Nazi who rammed his car into a crowd of counterprotesters, killing 32-year-old Heather Heyer and striking four of the plaintiffs. In total, including compensatory and punitive damages, attorney's fees, and costs, the defendants owe $9.7 million."

~~~~~~~~~~

Israel/Palestine, et al. The New York Times is live-updating developments Wednesday in the Israel/Hamas war here.

U.K. Ishaan Tharoor of the Washington Post: "After 14 years in power, Britain's Conservatives appear headed for a historic defeat. Various projections surrounding Thursday's general election show the opposition Labour Party -- led by Keir Starmer, a mild center-left politico -- on the precipice of a potential parliamentary supermajority.... Not for nothing, some pundits and analysts have cast the election as a possible 'extinction-level' event for the Tories, who have presided over an astonishing period of political and economic turbulence since winning power in 2010 under then-party leader David Cameron. In that time, Britain has had five prime ministers, multiple financial shocks, a pandemic, and the dramatic rupture and rolling, years-long crisis of Brexit."

News Lede

New York Times: "As Hurricane Beryl headed toward Jamaica and the Cayman Islands late Tuesday as a powerful Category 4 storm, a clearer picture emerged of the devastation it had caused on two small islands in Grenada, with that country's leader calling the destruction 'unimaginable' and 'total.' 'We have to rebuild from the ground up,' Grenada's prime minister, Dickon Mitchell, said at a briefing after visiting the islands of Carriacou and Petite Martinique, which were ravaged by Beryl on Monday. Officials said about 98 percent of the buildings on the islands, where about 6,000 people live, had been damaged or destroyed, including Carriacou's main health facility, the Princess Royal Hospital, and its airport and marinas. As of Tuesday night, there was no electricity on either island, and communications were down. Crops had been ravaged, and fallen trees and utility poles littered the streets."

The Conversation -- July 2, 2024

Philip Marcelo of the AP: "Rudolph Giulian, the former New York City mayor, federal prosecutor and legal adviser to Donald Trump, was disbarred in New York on Tuesday after a court found he repeatedly made false statements about Trump's 2020 election loss. The Manhattan appeals court ruled Giuliani, who had his New York law license suspended in 2021 for making false statements around the election, is no longer allowed to practice law in the state, effective immediately."

Peter Baker, et al., of the New York Times: "In the weeks and months before President Biden's politically devastating performance on the debate stage in Atlanta, several current and former officials and others who encountered him behind closed doors noticed that he increasingly appeared confused or listless, or would lose the thread of conversations.... In interviews, people in the room with him more recently said that the lapses seemed to be growing more frequent, more pronounced and more worrisome.... The recent moments of disorientation generated concern among advisers and allies alike. He seemed confused at points during a D-Day anniversary ceremony in France on June 6. The next day, he misstated the purpose of a new tranche of military aid to Ukraine when meeting with its president. On June 10, he appeared to freeze up at an early celebration of the Juneteenth holiday. On June 18, his soft-spoken tone and brief struggle to summon the name of his homeland security secretary at an immigration event unnerved some of his allies at the event...."

Farnoush Amiri of the AP: "A House Democratic lawmaker has become the first in the party to publicly call for President Joe Biden to step down as the party's nominee for president, citing Biden's debate performance against Donald Trump failing to 'effectively defend his many accomplishments.' Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas said in a statement Tuesday..., 'My decision to make these strong reservations public is not done lightly nor does it in any way diminish my respect for all that President Biden has achieved,' Doggett said. 'Recognizing that, unlike Trump, President Biden's first commitment has always been to our country, not himself, I am hopeful that he will make the painful and difficult decision to withdraw. I respectfully call on him to do so.'"

Liz Goodwin, et al., of the Washington Post: "As panic and confusion over President Biden's faltering debate performance swept the ranks of Democratic lawmakers late last week, Sen. Joe Manchin III informed a few key allies that he would soon break with Biden in an interview on a Sunday news show, a high-profile defection that would underscore the president's weakness.... But he didn't. Senior Democrats heard of Manchin's plans and started making calls to the independent-minded senator.... The 'full-court press' was quickly assembled to help dissuade Manchin from appearing on the show...."

Bloody Biden Buddy Bunker. Eli Stokols, et al., of Politico: "Over the course of his presidency, Joe Biden's small clutch of advisers have built an increasingly protective circle around him, limiting his exposure to the media and outside advice -- an effort to manage public perceptions of the oldest person to ever hold the office and tightly control his political operation. But inside the White House, Biden's growing limitations were becoming apparent long before his meltdown in last week's debate, with the senior team's management of the president growing more strictly controlled as his term has gone on.... Following the debate, the pervasive view throughout much of the party is of Biden's inner circle as an impenetrable group of enablers who deluded themselves about his ability to run again even as they've assiduously worked to accommodate his limitations and shield them from view."

** Ben Protess, et al., of the New York Times: "The judge in Donald J. Trump's Manhattan criminal case delayed his sentencing until Sept. 18 to weigh whether a new U.S. Supreme Court ruling might imperil the former president's conviction, the judge said Tuesday in a letter to prosecutors and defense lawyers. The judge, Juan M. Merchan, may ultimately find no basis to overturn the jury's verdict, but the delay was a surprising turn of events in a case that had led to the first conviction of an American president. With the election on the horizon, the sentencing might be the only moment of criminal accountability for the twice-impeached and four-time-indicted former president whose other cases are mired in delay." This is an update of a story linked earlier.

** Ian Millhiser of Vox: "The Court's six Republicans handed down a decision on Monday that gives Donald Trump such sweeping immunity from prosecution that there are unlikely to be any legal checks on his behavior if he returns to the White House. The Court's three Democrats dissented. Trump v. United States is an astonishing opinion. It holds that presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution -- essentially, a license to commit crimes -- so long as they use the official powers of their office to do so.... [It is] a blueprint for dictatorship." Millhiser goes on to explain the Court's decision, with nuggets like this: "... Roberts does concede that the president may be prosecuted for 'unofficial' acts. So, for example, if Trump had personally attempted to shoot and kill then-presidential candidate Joe Biden in the lead-up to the 2020 election, rather than ordering a subordinate to do so, then Trump could probably be prosecuted for murder. But even this caveat to Roberts's sweeping immunity decision is not very strong."

Joyce Vance is a good explainer, too. Besides hitting all the low points, she adds, for instance, "The majority opinion closes with a section where the Chief Justice, in a most decidedly uncollegial fashion, criticizes the Justices who dissent. He starts by calling out the dissents for striking 'a tone of chilling doom that is wholly disproportionate to what the Court actually does today.' Sit down, little ladies, the Chief Justice says." And, "It's remarkable that the Court is able to go on for 43 pages without acknowledging that Donald Trump tried to undo our democracy."

Judd Legum of Popular Information: "The Supreme Court invented this new kind of presidential immunity 235 years after the Constitution was ratified. And it lacks any grounding in the Constitution's text.... In Federalist No. 69, Alexander Hamilton wrote that the President would be 'liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law.' This, Hamilton wrote is the key distinction between the 'King of England,' who was 'sacred and invulnerable,'" and the 'President of the United States.'" ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: I recall reading Federalist No. 69 when I was a freshman in college. Hamilton's words were still true when I read No. 69 in 1963. This, a young girl supposed, is what made the United States great. As of yesterday, the words are not true anymore. So the United States is no longer great. MAGA = Make America God-Awful.

Kate Shaw in a New York Times op-ed: "It is increasingly clear that this court sees itself as something other than a participant in our democratic system. It sees itself as the enforcer of the separation of powers, but not itself subject to that separation.... The court ... has removed a major check on the office of the presidency at the very moment when Mr. Trump is running for office on a promise to weaponize the apparatus of government against those he views as his enemies.... The court in this case announces that an important mechanism of accountability, criminal charges under statutes passed by Congress, is almost entirely unavailable in the context of former presidents.... Justice Samuel Alito [made a] statement last July to The Wall Street Journal about Congress and the court:... 'No provision in the Constitution gives them' -- meaning Congress -- 'the authority to regulate the Supreme Court -- period.' Sub in 'president' for Supreme Court, and that's Monday's opinion in a nutshell. The court's reasoning here is also in line with what Chief Justice John Roberts said to the Senate.... Roberts's brusque refusal [to meet with senators] invoked broad 'separation of powers concerns' that he claimed 'counsel against such appearances.' It is now clear that the Roberts court believes the separation of powers means that both presidents and courts stand beyond the reach of the law."

Israel/Palestine, et al. The New York Times is live-updating developments Tuesday in the Israel/Hamas war here.

~~~~~~~~~~

As the Nation Falls

Adam Liptak of the New York Times: "The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that ... Donald J. Trump is entitled to substantial immunity from prosecution, delivering a major statement on the scope of presidential power. The ruling will almost surely delay the trial of the case against him on charges of plotting to subvert the 2020 election past the coming election in November. The vote was 6 to 3, dividing along partisan lines. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, said Mr. Trump had at least presumptive immunity for his official acts. He added that the trial judge must undertake an intensive factual review to separate official and unofficial conduct and to assess whether prosecutors can overcome the presumption protecting Mr. Trump for his official conduct. That will entail significant delays, and the prospects for a trial before the election seem vanishingly remote." ~~~

     ~~~ Here's the decision, concurring opinions and dissents, via the Court. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~

~~~ From the New York Times liveblog:

Charlie Savage: "The Supreme Court has ruled 6 to 3 that former presidents have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts in office.... The Supreme Court has remanded the case to the Federal District Court judge overseeing the matter, Tanya Chutkan, to determine the nature of the acts for which former President Trump has been charged -- which are unofficial ones he undertook in his personal capacity and which are official ones he undertook as president."

Alan Feuer: "... one of the practical effects of it on Trump;s federal election case in Washington is that he will now enjoy immunity from any allegation in the indictment concerning his dealings with the Justice Department. Recall that one of the main accusations was that Trump sought to install a loyalist, Jeff Clark, as acting attorney general in order, the indictment says, to do his bid in claiming there was fraud in the election.... Another practical effect on the ruling; The justices have ordered that the trial judge, Tanya Chutkan, will have to determine whether Trump is immune from prosecution on allegations related to his pressure campaign on ... Mike Pence."

Savage: "As Justice Sotomayor's appalled dissent makes clear, this ruling is a dramatic expansion of presidential power -- not just for Trump but for all presidents. She cites the notorious World War II ruling that upheld the internment of Japanese Americans on the West Coast. '... The court effectively creates a law-free zone around the president, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the founding.... "

Savage: “In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas questioned the legitimacy of the appointment of the special counsel, Jack Smith: 'If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people.' That is an issue that the judge in the Trump classified documents case, Aileen Cannon, just held a hearing about. Notably, none of the other eight justices joined his concurring opinion."

Maggie Haberman: "Trump posted a victorious message on his social media site, Truth Social: 'BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!'"

Feuer: "Chief Justice Roberts's ruling expresses skepticism that Trump could be prosecuted for the speech he gave on Jan. 6 or any of his tweets that day. Roberts notes that 'most of a president's public communications are likely to fall comfortably within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities.' But he leaves open the possibility that Trump could face charges for his words if they were delivered as 'a candidate for office'."

Adam Liptak: "Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., rejecting calls for their disqualification, participated in the decision on the scope of ... Donald J. Trump's immunity from prosecution. Experts in legal ethics have said that the activities of the justices' wives raised serious questions about their impartiality."

Simon Levien: "In a call with reporters, the Biden campaign is using the decision to sound an alarm. 'They just handed Donald Trump the keys to a dictatorship,' Quentin Fulks, the deputy campaign manager, said. 'We have to do everything in our power to stop him.'"

Feuer: "Here's one of the sleeper holdings in the court's ruling: The decision finds not only that a president can't be charged for any official acts, but also that evidence involving official acts can't be introduced to bolster accusations made about unofficial acts. If I'm reading this right, Chief Justice Roberts has reversed himself from his position during oral arguments." (Also linked yesterday.)

~~~ CNN's liveblog is here.~~~

From Justice Sotomayor's "scathing" dissent, joined by Kagan & Jackson: "Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority's message today. Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law. Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.... With fear for our democracy, I dissent.'" (Also linked yesterday.)

Marie: One thing justices do when there is disagreement on a decision is "talk to" each other in their opinions and dissents. As an example, in the NYT liveblog of the decision, Charlie Savage pointed to Amy Coney Barrett's concurrence in which "She disagreed with the majority's holding that the Constitution does not permit prosecutors to tell a jury about an ex-president's official actions that are relevant to some private action being charged.... [So] In a footnote of the majority opinion, Chief Justice Roberts addressed Justice Barrett's example.... He disagreed that the court's ruling meant prosecutors could not mention any official act, saying 'of course' prosecutors could point to the public record to show that a president performed the official act in question."~~~

     ~~~ BUT THEN. Andrew Weissmann pointed out that Roberts made no attempt to answer or refute Justice Sotomayor's catalogue of horrors: "... the President is now a king above the law. Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune." That is, Roberts tacitly admits that Sotomayor is right: the president can do whatever he wants, exactly what Trump himself infamously asserted when he said he "had an Article II." ~~~

     ~~~ Update. Weissmann is not quite right. As Patrick Marley of the WashPo notes in a story linked below, &"The dissenters, Roberts wrote, were engaging in 'fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals.'" Gosh, Johnnie boy, your reassurance would be a tad more convincing if Trump had not already proposed (see linked story below) military tribunals to prosecute a boatload of federal officlals and former officials for treason. Not an "extreme hypothetical," Chief, but a real thing proposed by the very real reprobate to whom you have granted immunity in this disastrous opinion. And, you know, if you don't keep on toeing the line, Johnnie-O, you could find yourself in the dock, too.

Philip Bump of the Washington Post: This decision came about "largely because of the systematic advantages Republicans have enjoyed in the Senate and thanks to the electoral college." Bump does the arithmetic. MB: I suppose it's ironic that the U.S.'s form of democracy has failed again because it is inherently not democratic but privileges minorities, well, to a fault. The attempt to appease the minority was surely the cause of the 1860 Civil War. It was only a matter of time, perhaps, before that same flaw ruptured the constitutional order again.

** Scott Lemieux in LG&$: "The incredibly cynical and lawless two-step the Republican Party engaged in -- Trump shouldn't be impeached because he can be prosecuted, and he can't be prosecuted because he could have been impeached -- has been enshrined into 'constitutional law.'... This is enough to make Roberts the 21st century Taney in itself.... Much of Roberts's opinion ... provides an indefensible answer to a question it didn't need to ask to address this case in the first place."

Michael Shear of the New York Times: "President Biden warned on Monday that the Supreme Court's decision on presidential immunity meant that there were 'virtually no limits on what the president can do' and urged voters to prevent ... Donald J. Trump from returning to the White House freed from the constraints of the law.... 'I know I will respect the limits of the presidential powers, as I have for three and a half years,' Mr. Biden said on Monday night. 'But any president, including Donald Trump, will now be free to ignore the law.' Mr. Biden said he agreed with Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who wrote that 'with fear for our democracy, I dissent.' Mr. Biden echoed her language as he concluded his remarks. 'I dissent,' he said. 'May God bless you all and may God help preserve our democracy.'"

Patrick Marley of the Washington Post: "The court's decision raised fears [among scholars] that a future president will be able to act with impunity because official acts of the president have been deemed off limits from prosecution.... They warned of future presidents unbound from the rule of law who could freely engage in criminal activity. And they pointed to the prospect of a second term for Donald Trump -- the man whose indictment on charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election prompted the Supreme Court to weigh in -- as a moment when their worst fears could be realized.... In an all-caps post on social media, Trump praised the ruling as a 'BRILLIANTLY WRITTEN AND WISE' decision that would causes charges against him to disappear or 'WITHER INTO OBSCURITY.'"

Jamelle Bouie of the New York Times: "Yesterday, in a 6-3 decision along partisan lines, the Supreme Court affirmed Nixon's bold assertion of presidential immunity.... This time when the president does it, it really won't be illegal.... Ruling on the federal prosecution of Donald Trump for his role in the effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that the president has 'absolute immunity' for 'official acts' when those acts relate to the core powers of the office.... And while the majority might say here that the president is still subject to criminal prosecution for 'unofficial acts,' Sotomayor aptly notes that the chief justice has created a standard that effectively renders nearly every act official if it can be tied in some way, however tenuously, to the president's core powers."

Marie: As shocking, backward-looking & disruptive as Dobbs is, yesterday's ruling is even worse. Our government provides a mechanism to reverse Dobbs. Congress can override it. But Congress cannot reverse Trump. Yesterday, I described the U.S. as the world's biggest banana republic. But it's worse than that. Most so-called banana republics have constitutions and laws which require their leaders to behave lawfully. Their practices, not the letter of their laws, allow for corrupt official behavior. But the United States now has a formal legal document condoning, encouraging & inviting presidential* corruption. There are no legal means to reverse what six unscrupulous judges have wrought. We are watching the free-fall of the United States. ~~~

     ~~~ Update: It occurs to me that the one way to get rid of a lawless president* would be to impeach & convict him. But we now know that even when the president*'s men physically attack members of Congress, the Senate cannot muster 67 votes to impeach him & disqualify him from running for re-election. So even though impeachment is a theoretical possibility for a quick resolution to a presidential* crisis, it turns out not to be a realistic solution, even in the most dramatic and violent of circumstances. (And the president* could still refuse to leave office, with the aid of military forces he had commandeered.) ~~~

     ~~~ Oh, I see Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez has found another good use for impeachment: ~~~

     ~~~ Zachary Leeman of Mediaite: "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) announced on Monday she intends to file articles of impeachment following the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity. 'The Supreme Court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control,' she wrote on X. 'Today's [Monday's] ruling represents an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture. I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return.'... Impeaching a Supreme Court Justice would be quite an uphill climb...." It isn't clear who-all AOC has in mind to impeach.

Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post: "The risk is no longer just that Donald Trump will evade responsibility for his actions as president, though that seems close to foreordained by Monday's [Supreme Court] ruling. It is that he will be emboldened by the protection the court just gave him to behave even more unconscionably in a second term.... Before Monday's ruling, no previous president imagined that he had immunity from criminal prosecution -- and they somehow managed to engage in plenty of ​'bold and unhesitating action.'" Read on if you have a WashPo subscription. Marcus lays out the extent of the permanent get-out-of-jail-free card the Supremes have issued presidents*.

Ben Protess & William Rashbaum of the New York Times: "Donald J. Trump began an effort on Monday to throw out his recent criminal conviction in Manhattan and postpone his upcoming sentencing, citing a new Supreme Court ruling that granted him broad immunity from prosecution for official actions he took as president, according to a person with knowledge of the matter. In a letter to the judge overseeing the case, Mr. Trump's lawyers sought permission to file a motion to set aside the verdict, doing so just hours after the Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling involving one of Mr. Trump's other criminal cases. The letter will not be public until Tuesday at the earliest, after which prosecutors will have a chance to respond. The move from Mr. Trump's lawyers came 10 days before the judge was set to sentence the former president for his crimes in Manhattan, where a jury convicted him on 34 felony counts related to his cover-up of a sex scandal in the run-up to the 2016 election." The NBC News story is here. ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: Not sure how signing checks to pay off a porn star is an "official act," but I'm certain John Roberts can find a way.

Chris Cameron of the New York Times: "... Donald J. Trump over the weekend escalated his vows to prosecute his political opponents, circulating posts on his social media website invoking 'televised military tribunals' and calling for the jailing of President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, Senators Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer and former Vice President Mike Pence, among other high-profile politicians. Mr. Trump, using his account on Truth Social on Sunday, promoted two posts from other users of the site that called for the jailing of his perceived political enemies. One post that he circulated on Sunday singled out Liz Cheney..., and called for her to be prosecuted by a type of military court reserved for enemy combatants and war criminals. 'Elizabeth Lynne Cheney is guilty of treason,' the post said. 'Retruth if you want televised military tribunals.'

"A separate post included photos of 15 former and current elected officials that said, in all-capital letters, 'they should be going to jail on Monday not Steve Bannon!' Those officials included Mr. Biden, Ms. Harris, Mr. Pence, Mr. Schumer and Mr. McConnell -- the top leaders in the Senate -- and Representative Nancy Pelosi, the former House speaker. The list in the second post also had members of the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, including Ms. Cheney and the former Illinois congressman Adam Kinzinger, another Republican, and the Democratic Representatives Adam Schiff, Jamie Raskin, Pete Aguilar, Zoe Lofgren and Bennie Thompson, who chaired the committee." ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: These sham trials would be "official acts," so all perfectly legal. It's true that it would not be the president* who carried out these military tribunals but other officials, so you might think those officials would be afraid of being prosecuted for participating in extra-legal tribunals. But no. As Patrick noted in yesterday's thread, the president* can -- and would -- pardon these officials.

Lindsay Whitehurst & Susan Haigh of the AP: "Longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon was taken into custody Monday after surrendering at a federal prison to begin a four-month sentence on contempt charges for defying a subpoena in the congressional investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack. Bannon arrived at the Federal Correctional Institution in Danbury, Connecticut, around noon and was formally taken into federal custody, the Bureau of Prisons said. Speaking to reporters, Bannon called himself a 'political prisoner,' said ... Donald Trump was 'very supportive' of him and slammed Democrats, including Attorney General Merrick Garland. 'I am proud of going to prison,' Bannon said, adding he was 'standing up to the Garland corrupt DOJ.'" (Also linked yesterday.)

Jenny Gathright of the Washington Post: "Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) was charged with a weapons violation Friday at Dulles International Airport after security officers found an unloaded handgun in her carry-on bag, authorities said. A spokesperson for Spartz, 45, on Monday acknowledged the incident and said that the congresswoman had been able to proceed to an international flight." CNN's report is here.

Anna Phillips of the Washington Post: "The Occupational Safety and Health Administration proposed a rule Tuesday outlining steps employers must take to protect indoor and outdoor workers from the risk of heat illness, the first major regulation aimed at preventing heat-related deaths on the job. The rule, if finalized, could add protections for 35 million workers nationwide. But it will face opposition from industry groups and major hurdles beyond that, including the possibility that Donald Trump could win a second term and block the rule from becoming final." ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: Oh, it's worse than that. Last week the Supremes decided that the courts would curb the decisions of regulatory agencies like OSHA. So let's put Neil Gorsuch (who wrote the anti-deference opinion) on OSHA's case. We already know he thinks workers should literally freeze to death if that's what their companies demand, so we don't have to ponder how he feels about requiring corporations not to let workers die of heat stroke.

Idiocracy Rules. Maxine Joselow of the Washington Post: "A federal court on Monday blocked the Biden administration's pause on approving new facilities that export liquefied natural gas, dealing another legal blow to the president's ambitious climate agenda. In a decision issued late Monday, U.S. District Judge James D. Cain Jr. ruled in favor of Louisiana and 15 other Republican-led states that had challenged the move. The judge, who was appointed by Donald Trump, wrote that the pause 'is completely without reason or logic and is perhaps the epiphany of ideocracy [sic].'" MB: Maybe Cain means "ideology"? If it's any consolation, I'm not sure he knows what "epiphany" means, either; in context, it seems misplaced.

Presidential Race

Shane Goldmacher of the New York Times: "Around [President] Biden, a siege mentality has set in for a team that remembers -- and is fond of repeating -- how it outlasted the doubters four years ago to win the nomination in the first place.... Mr. Biden has visibly aged, as most presidents do. But as early as late 2021, the White House physician had noticed a change, observing more frequent and severe 'throat clearing' and a gait that was 'perceptibly stiffer' than a year earlier.... Mr. Biden's handlers insisted he could handle a re-election campaign even as their handling of him gave hints otherwise. He began using the shorter stairs to board Air Force One after his tripping went viral. He has done fewer news conferences than his predecessors. He passed on a pregame Super Bowl interview. His events have become intentionally shorter, too."

Dan Balz of the Washington Post: "... the drubbing that French President Emmanuel Macron's party took in elections on Sunday should come as a warning to President Biden, his campaign and the whole of the Democratic Party.... The National Rally is led by Marine Le Pen. It is a hard-right, nationalistic, anti-immigration party with antisemitic roots.... Macron bet that he could force voters to confront the prospect of Le Pen's party in power and that they would recoil from that future.... He pushed every possible button to rally voters to reject what Le Pen's party offers.... In the first of two rounds of voting, he lost in spectacular fashion.... For Biden and the Democrats, one lesson from Sunday's voting in France seems clear. Trying to scare voters with grim predictions of what a Trump victory would mean for the future of American democracy might not be sufficient to win in November."

Tim Miller in the Bulwark takes apart Democratic gaslighting of President Biden's debate performance. No, it was not "just a bad night" similar to those Presidents Obama & Reagan had in their first presidential debates of the year. Thanks to laura h. for the link. (Also linked yesterday.)

Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times: "Though Joe Biden's debate performance last week was among the most painful things I've ever witnessed, it at least seemed to offer clarity. Suddenly, even many people who love this president realized that his campaign has become untenable.... Since then, several news reports have made it clear that the Biden we all saw onstage is familiar to those who see him behind the scenes.... As long as there's time to replace Biden, Democrats should not allow themselves to be bullied into fatalism and complacency."

"Lady MacBiden." Jacob Bernstein of the New York Times: "The August cover of Vogue featuring Dr. Jill Biden was released online Monday -- four days after the big debate -- and brought with it a fresh round of scrutiny over her role as a die-hard campaigner for her husband, who is locked in a nail-biting campaign for re-election.... Dr. Biden took center stage after Mr. Biden struggled to finish his sentences during a dismal debate performance on Thursday against ... Donald J. Trump. Afterward, The New York Times reported that Dr. Biden was the first person he had turned to: 'The first lady's message to him was clear: They'd been counted out before, she was all in, and he -- they -- would stay in the race.'... Soon after the magazine posted the cover image to its Instagram account on Monday, the comments were overwhelmingly negative." ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: If I were Vogue editor Anna Wintour, I would have rushed another cover story to print: maybe Steve Bannon with his lovely layered-shirts look (perfect for summer!) and the question of what-all he will be wearing under his orange jumpsuit. Really, people who run things should leave more decisions to me.

Marie: It takes a lot to get Jim VandeHei & Mike Allen of Axios concerned about the dim prospects for Western liberal democracy in the U.S., but darned if Trump and the Supremes didn't do it: "Former President Trump, if re-elected, plans to immediately test the boundaries of presidential and governing power, knowing the restraints of Congress and the courts are dramatically looser than during his first term, his advisers tell us.... It's not just the Supreme Court ruling on Monday that presidents enjoy substantial legal immunity for actions in office. Trump would come to office with a Cabinet and staff pre-vetted for loyalty, and a fully compliant Republican coalition in Congress -- devoid of critics in positions of real power.... Trump promises an unabashedly imperial presidency -- one that would turn the Justice Department against critics, deport millions of people in the U.S. illegally, slap 10% tariffs on thousands of products, and fire perhaps tens of thousands of government staff deemed insufficiently loyal. He'd stretch the powers of the presidency in ways not seen in our lifetime. He says this consistently and clearly -- so it's not conjecture." Read on.

~~~~~~~~~~

France. The Center Did Not Hold. Roger Cohen of the New York Times: "An era has ended in France. The seven-year domination of national politics by President Emmanuel Macron was laid to rest by his party's overwhelming defeat in the first round of parliamentary elections on Sunday. Not only did he dissolve Parliament by calling a snap vote, he effectively dissolved the centrist movement known as 'Macronism.' The far-right National Rally, in winning a third of the vote, did not guarantee that it will win an absolute majority in a runoff six days from now, although it will likely get close. But Mr. Macron, risking all by calling the election, did end up guaranteeing that he will be marginalized, with perhaps no more than a third of the seats his party now holds."

News Lede

Washington Post: "Hurricane Beryl is now a 'potentially catastrophic' Category 5 hurricane, the earliest ever to reach that strength in the Atlantic. The storm, fueled by record-warm waters, made landfall on Grenada's Carriacou Island on Monday as an 'extremely dangerous' Category 4 hurricane with winds that had increased to 150 mph. Grenada and the nation of St. Vincent and the Grenadines were reeling from a storm that probably will be the region's most intense hurricane on record."

The Conversation -- July 1, 2024

Marie: Donald Trump now has an Article II that lets him do whatever he wants. This is an embarrassing and shameful country. My generation and the next have so failed the nation that it probably will never recover. Even if recovery is possible, we won't climb out of this hole for a century. If the purpose in life is to leave the world better than it was when we entered it, we have failed spectacularly. Radical right-wingers have nothing to crow about; they are the perps, the barbarians who scaled the gates, the monsters in the horror story. Welcome to the World's Biggest New Banana Republic; we are all Carmen Miranda now.

Adam Liptak of the New York Times: "The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that ... Donald J. Trump is entitled to substantial immunity from prosecution, delivering a major statement on the scope of presidential power. The ruling will almost surely delay the trial of the case against him on charges of plotting to subvert the 2020 election past the coming election in November. The vote was 6 to 3, dividing along partisan lines. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, said Mr. Trump had at least presumptive immunity for his official acts. He added that the trial judge must undertake an intensive factual review to separate official and unofficial conduct and to assess whether prosecutors can overcome the presumption protecting Mr. Trump for his official conduct. That will entail significant delays, and the prospects for a trial before the election seem vanishingly remote. If Mr. Trump prevails at the polls, he could order the Justice Department to drop the charges." ~~~

     ~~~ Here's the decision, concurring opinions and dissents, via the Court. ~~~

~~~ From the New York Times liveblog:

Charlie Savage: "The Supreme Court has ruled 6 to 3 that former presidents have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts in office.... The Supreme Court has remanded the case to the Federal District Court judge overseeing the matter, Tanya Chutkan, to determine the nature of the acts for which former President Trump has been charged -- which are unofficial ones he undertook in his personal capacity and which are official ones he undertook as president."

Alan Feuer: "... one of the practical effects of it on Trump's federal election case in Washington is that he will now enjoy immunity from any allegation in the indictment concerning his dealings with the Justice Department. Recall that one of the main accusations was that Trump sought to install a loyalist, Jeff Clark, as acting attorney general in order, the indictment says, to do his bid in claiming there was fraud in the election.... Another practical effect on the ruling; The justices have ordered that the trial judge, Tanya Chutkan, will have to determine whether Trump is immune from prosecution on allegations related to his pressure campaign on his vice president, Mike Pence."

Savage: "As Justice Sotomayor's appalled dissent makes clear, this ruling is a dramatic expansion of presidential power -- not just for Trump but for all presidents. She cites the notorious World War II ruling that upheld the internment of Japanese Americans on the West Coast. '... The court effectively creates a law-free zone around the president, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the founding.... "

Savage: :In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas questioned the legitimacy of the appointment of the special counsel, Jack Smith: 'If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people.' That is an issue that the judge in the Trump classified documents case, Aileen Cannon, just held a hearing about. Notably, none of the other eight justices joined his concurring opinion."

Maggie Haberman: "Trump posted a victorious message on his social media site, Truth Social: 'BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!'"

Feuer: "Chief Justice Roberts's ruling expresses skepticism that Trump could be prosecuted for the speech he gave on Jan. 6 or any of his tweets that day. Roberts notes that 'most of a president's public communications are likely to fall comfortably within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities.' But he leaves open the possibility that Trump could face charges for his words if they were delivered as 'a candidate for office'."

Adam Liptak: "Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., rejecting calls for their disqualification, participated in the decision on the scope of ... Donald J. Trump's immunity from prosecution. Experts in legal ethics have said that the activities of the justices' wives raised serious questions about their impartiality."

Simon Levien: "In a call with reporters, the Biden campaign is using the decision to sound an alarm. 'They just handed Donald Trump the keys to a dictatorship,' Quentin Fulks, the deputy campaign manager, said. 'We have to do everything in our power to stop him.'"

Feuer: "Here's one of the sleeper holdings in the court's ruling: The decision finds not only that a president can't be charged for any official acts, but also that evidence involving official acts can't be introduced to bolster accusations made about unofficial acts. If I'm reading this right, Chief Justice Roberts has reversed himself from his position during oral arguments."

~~~ CNN's liveblog is here.~~~

From Justice Sotomayor's "scathing" dissent, joined by Kagan & Jackson: "Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority's message today. Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law. Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.... With fear for our democracy, I dissent.'"

Marie: During oral arguments Justice Jackson worried the Oval Office could become a "crime center." Done.

Lindsay Whitehurst & Susan Haigh of the AP: "Longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon was taken into custody Monday after surrendering at a federal prison to begin a four-month sentence on contempt charges for defying a subpoena in the congressional investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack. Bannon arrived at the Federal Correctional Institution in Danbury, Connecticut, around noon and was formally taken into federal custody, the Bureau of Prisons said. Speaking to reporters, Bannon called himself a 'political prisoner,' said ... Donald Trump was 'very supportive' of him and slammed Democrats, including Attorney General Merrick Garland. 'I am proud of going to prison,' Bannon said, adding he was 'standing up to the Garland corrupt DOJ.'"

Tim Miller in the Bulwark takes apart Democratic gaslighting of President Biden's debate performance. No, it was not "just a bad night" similar to those Presidents Obama & Reagan had in their first presidential debates of the year. thanks to laura h. for the link.

~~~~~~~~~~

Presidential Race -- No Job for Old Men

Jim Rutenberg & Adam Nagourney of the New York Times: "Barely seven weeks before Democrats gather in Chicago to formally nominate [President] Biden for a second term, the Democratic Party is in crisis.... [How that happened] is a complicated mix of historical circumstance and structural deficiencies, a party struggling with ideological and generational fissures, and an aging Democratic president who spent his life battling for this job.... Interviews with top party strategists, office holders and people close to Democrats seen as possible presidential hopefuls suggest that, just as crucially, party leaders were lulled into complacency or pressed to step in line at crucial moments when they might have persuaded Mr. Biden to step aside.... Candidates who might have considered challenging Mr. Biden, after reviewing his weaknesses, yielded in the face of the threat of backlash from a party united behind its president."

Katie Rogers & Peter Baker of the New York Times: "President Biden's family is urging him to stay in the race and keep fighting despite last week's disastrous debate performance, even as some members of his clan privately expressed exasperation at how he was prepared for the event by his staff, people close to the situation said on Sunday. Mr. Biden huddled with his wife, children and grandchildren at Camp David while he tried to figure out how to tamp down Democratic anxiety. While his relatives were acutely aware of how poorly he did against ... Donald J. Trump, they argued that he could still show the country that he remains capable of serving for another four years.... One of the people informed about the situation said 'the entire family is united' and added flatly that the president was not getting out of the race and had not discussed doing so.... The anger among Democrats was made evident on Sunday when John Morgan, a top Democratic donor who is close to Mr. Biden's brother Frank, publicly blamed the advisers who managed the president's debate preparations, citing by name Ron Klain, Anita Dunn and Bob Bauer....

"A new poll by CBS News found strong sentiment among Democratic voters for Mr. Biden, 81, to cede the way to a younger nominee. Forty-five percent of Democrats said they wanted a different candidate to take on the battle with Mr. Trump. Among voters overall, just 27 percent think Mr. Biden has the mental and cognitive health to serve as president, down from 35 percent before the debate."

     ~~~ Marie: Sorry, but the Biden family and his close advisers are living in some kind of fantasy world where they refuse to see what's right in front of them. And they're engaging in what amounts to elder abuse as they push Joe to perform beyond his abilities. Anybody can have a cold and a bad night, but not like what we saw and heard. Shame on all of them. ~~~

~~~ A Family in Denial. Jonathan Lemire & Lauren Egan of Politico: "Members of Joe Biden's family privately trashed his top campaign advisers at Camp David this weekend, blaming them for the president's flop in Thursday's debate and urging Biden to fire or demote people in his political high command.... Among the family's complaints about the debate practice: that Biden was not prepared to pivot more to go on the attack; that he was bogged down too much on defending his record rather than outlining a vision for a second term; and that he was over-worked and not well-rested. The blame was cast widely on staffers, including: Anita Dunn, the senior adviser who frequently has the president's ear; her husband, Bob Bauer, the president's attorney who played Trump in rehearsals at Camp David; and Ron Klain, the former chief of staff who ran point on the debate prep and previous cycles' sessions." ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: Wait, Wait. You think he's capable to run a nation of 333 million people, but he can't run his own debate prep? Nearly everybody close to Joe Biden shares the blame for this disaster, and the family is perpetuating the crisis.

Tyler Pager of the Washington Post: "President Biden's debate prep went fine. In the sessions, the president still spoke haltingly. He sometimes confused facts and figures. He tripped over words and meandered. Debate prep would not fix his stutter or make him appear any younger, aides knew... The president, they said, was prepared and would perform well.... So aides were bewildered by his performance. Many felt they had never seen him collapse so dramatically.... The president did not just stumble over words. He appeared to lose his focus and often was unable to finish sentences. His voice was raspy and thin, and when the debate concluded, first lady Jill Biden appeared to help her husband down the stairs." ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: I do not find it believable that a gang of seasoned politicos spent a week prepping President Biden for the debate and none of them noticed that he was far from able to perform. If some hadn't seen him for a while so didn't realize how much he'd slipped, they surely knew it several days into debate prep. There is no excuse for their pushing that old man out on the stage where they had to no he would fall flat on his face.

Fritz Farrow, et al., of ABC News: "President Joe Biden's campaign on Saturday night, in a fundraising appeal to supporters, said the president dropping out would only 'lead to weeks of chaos' and leave the eventual replacement weakened ahead of a November faceoff with ... Donald Trump. 'The bedwetting brigade is calling for Joe Biden to "drop out." That is the best possible way for Donald Trump to win and us to lose,' Biden deputy campaign manager Rob Flaherty argued in the email to supporters." MB: An ignorant, partisan, shortsighted, negative POV. The Democratic convention could be the most exciting party convention in our lifetimes, and it would turn into "chaos" only if Biden and other party leaders and convention organizers planned it to be chaotic. The eventual winner should be ushered in like a hero on a white horse, saving the country from disaster. If Democrats can do anything right. (Also linked yesterday.)

Alex Thompson of Axios: "Joe Biden's close aides have carefully shielded him from people inside and outside the White House since the beginning of his presidency.... Current and former White House aides are feeling whiplash -- and now questioning whether Biden could fulfill a second term.... Biden's behavior stunned many in the White House in part because Biden's closest aides -- often led by Jill Biden's top aide, Anthony Bernal, and deputy chief of staff Annie Tomasini -- took steps early in his term to essentially rope off the president. Even the White House's residence staff, which serves the first family in the mansion's living quarters, has been kept at arm's length."

Alexandra Marquez of NBC News: "Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., on Sunday acknowledged that there are 'very honest, and serious and rigorous conversations taking place' in the Democratic Party following President Joe Biden's dismal performance at the presidential debate on Thursday. Raskin's remarks are a break from what most top Democrats have said publicly in their defense of the president.... But privately, NBC News reported Saturday, top Democrats are concerned about Biden's campaign. 'We're having a serious conversation about what to do,' Raskin said in an interview with MSNBC's Ali Velshi on Sunday morning...."

~~~~~~~~~~

Nevada. Isabelle Taft of the New York Times: "Nevada residents will vote on whether to protect the right to abortion in the state this November, as abortion rights groups try to continue their winning streak with measures that put the issue directly before voters. The Nevada secretary of state's office certified on Friday the ballot initiative to amend the State Constitution to include an explicit right to abortion after verifying the signatures required. The group behind the measure, Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom, submitted 200,000 signatures in May, nearly 100,000 more than needed."

~~~~~~~~~~

France. Roger Cohen of the New York Times: "The National Rally party on Sunday won a crushing victory in the first round of voting for the French National Assembly, according to early projections, bringing its long-taboo brand of nationalist and anti-immigrant politics to the threshold of power for the first time. Pollster projections, which are normally reliable and are based on preliminary results, suggested that the party would take about 34 percent of the vote, far ahead of President Emmanuel Macron's centrist Renaissance party and its allies, which took about 22 percent to end in third place. A coalition of left-wing parties, called the New Popular Front and ranging from the moderate socialists to the far-left France Unbowed, won about 29 percent of the vote boosted by strong support among young people, according to the projections. Turnout was high at about 67 percent.... The two-round election will be completed with a runoff on July 7 between the leading parties in each constituency." The BBC's story is here.

News Lede

New York Times: "Beryl developed into a record-breaking Category 4 hurricane on Sunday -- the earliest in a season that a storm has reached such strength -- as forecasters warned it would continue to rapidly intensify while moving west toward the Caribbean Sea. Before Beryl, the earliest Category 4 hurricane on record was Hurricane Dennis on July 8, 2005. The first hurricane of the 2024 season, Beryl is expected to bring 'life-threatening winds and storm surge' to the Windward Islands, southeast of Puerto Rico and north of Venezuela, the National Hurricane Center said on Sunday."