The Conversation -- December 10, 2023
Don't know what happened here, but SNL's Weekend Update somehow changed to a Japanese woman teaching children how to color or something. Sweet, but not topical.
Marie: digby posts answers to the central question I had when I read about Hunter Biden's nine-count indictment: how come it included details of how Hunter spent money on frivious and/or illegal things when all tax evaders spend money on things that are not tax payments, some of those other things often being frivolous or even illegal? Former prosecutor Harry Litman answers: "Huge chunks of the 56-page indictment of Hunter Biden are about his 'extravagant lifestyle,' drugs escorts etc. The relevance of this info to non-payment of taxes is tenuous in the extreme. But it certainly dirties him up."
And former prosecutor Shan Wu concludes, "... Weiss' indictment includes gratuitous digs at what can only be construed as Hunter Biden's character rather than his alleged tax evasion.... Weiss' rhetorical flourish seems silly since I suspect most people who fail to pay the taxes also spend their money on things other than paying their taxes. Weiss' focus on the more sensationalistic aspects of the spending seems to be a result of his wanting to play in the echo chamber of the holier-than-thou conservative right. But Biden isn't being prosecuted for being a drug addict or engaging in prostitution. He's being prosecuted for tax evasion." Read the whole post, as the former prosecutors may answer your questions, too, about an indictment that looks to me like a travesty of justice. Thanks to RAS for the link.
Chris Walker of Truthout: "A newly inaugurated school board president in a Philadelphia suburb took an oath of office Monday evening by placing her hand on a stack of books that have been targeted by book bans. Karen Smith, an incumbent member of the Central Bucks School District board, won reelection in November, helping to lead Democrats in taking control of the board from Republicans who had sought to implement restrictions in the district's libraries." One of the banned books: Night, by Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace prize winner Elie Wiesel. MB: Um, isn't it antisemitic to ban a memoir about the horrors of the Holocaust, especially when the narrative covers a period when Wiesel was still a teenager, so, you know, age-appropriate? ~~~
~~~ Marie: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) was wondering on the teevee this morning why Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) is so exercised about antisemitism on campus when she supports a presidential* candidate who dines with a Holocaust denier (Nick Fuentes). And I'm wondering the same thing when you consider that most of the on-the-ground "generals" in the Trump insurrection were white supremacists of the sort who like to chant, "Jews will not replace us." It would seem Rep. Stefanik's "principles" are mighty selective.
~~~~~~~~~~
I became leader when we took the minority [in 2019], and this was a turning point for me. I go into the State of the Union.... And in the State of the Union, one side stands up, and then the other side stands up. I'd just become leader and I'm excited and President Trump's there. And I look over at the Democrats and they stand up. They look like America. We stand up. We look like the most restrictive country club in America. -- Kevin McCarthy, a few months ago
McCarthy was first elected to the House in 2006. It is not entirely clear from his syntax here -- nothing is ever entirely clear from My Kevin's syntax -- but it appears he is saying that the first time he had an inkling that the Democratic party was markedly more diverse than the GOP was a dozen years after he became a Member of Congress. -- Marie Burns (Thanks to RAS for the link.)
Kyle Cheney of Politico: "Special counsel Jack Smith on Saturday sharply rejected Donald Trump's contention that foreign governments may have changed votes in the 2020 election, laying bare new details about his team's extensive probe of the matter and its access to a vast array of senior intelligence officials in Trump's administration. In a 45-page filing, Smith's team describes interviewing more than a dozen of the top intelligence officials in Trump's administration -- from his director of national intelligence to the administrator of the NSA to Trump's personal intelligence briefer -- about any evidence that foreign governments had penetrated systems that counted votes in 2020. 'The answer from every single official was no,' senior assistant special counsel Thomas Windom writes in the filing. The filing was part of the special counsel's opposition to a bid by Trump to access a broad swath of classified intelligence as part of his defense.... Trump has argued that foreign governments fueled his supporters' concerns about election integrity and that some classified evidence revealed potential meddling that justified his own professed fears about fraud.... Windom also contended that Trump's repeated effort to describe partisan bias in intelligence about the election belied that those making the assessments were his own appointees...."
Rashad Simmons of the Hill: "Former President Trumps attorney Alina Habba claimed Friday that her client would take the stand on Monday in his civil fraud trial, despite the judge's gag order and discouragement from his legal team.... The attorney explained that while she didn't want to block the former president from speaking on his behalf, he wouldn't be able to give his testimony 'fully and completely' under the gag order, which bars Trump and his counsel from speaking about the staff of the judge overseeing the case." MB: Gosh, I'm having trouble figuring out why Trump needs to dox & diss the court staff (which is all the so-called gag order prohibits) in order to "fully and completely" defend his dodgy business practices.
Presidential Race 2024
Peter Baker of the New York Times: "When a historian wrote an essay the other day warning that the election of ... Donald J. Trump next year could lead to dictatorship, one of Mr. Trump's allies [-- Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) --] quickly responded by calling for the historian to be sent to prison. It almost sounds like a parody: The response to concerns about dictatorship is to prosecute the author. But Mr. Trump and his allies are not going out of their way to reassure those worried about what a new term would bring by firmly rejecting the dictatorship charge. If anything, they seem to be leaning into it. If Mr. Trump is returned to office, people close to him have vowed to 'come after' the news media, open criminal investigations into onetime aides who broke with the former president and purge the government of civil servants deemed disloyal. When critics said Mr. Trump's language about ridding Washington of 'vermin' echoed that of Adolf Hitler, the former president's spokesman said the critics' 'sad, miserable existence will be crushed' under a new Trump administration....
"Mr. Trump once expressed no regret that a quote he shared on social media came from Mussolini and adopted the language of Stalin in calling journalists the 'enemies of the people.' He told his chief of staff that 'Hitler did a lot of good things' and later said he wished American generals were like Hitler's generals. Last December, shortly after opening his comeback campaign, Mr. Trump called for 'termination' of the Constitution to remove Mr. Biden immediately and reinstall himself in the White House without waiting for another election."
Trump Campaign Worries Voters Will Find Out He Will Be a Dictator. Marianne Levine & Josh Dawsey of the Washington Post: "Top officials in Donald Trump's campaign sought Friday to quell discussions about his possible second term in the White House, amid alarms about authoritarianism and reports about personnel. "... unless a message is coming directly from President Trump or an authorized member of his campaign team, no aspect of future presidential staffing or policy announcements should be deemed official,' Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita said in a written statement to the media.... A Trump campaign official ... said Friday's statement came in response to a report that Axios published the previous day that offered a list of potential members of a second Trump administration.... Trump, however, has at times undercut [his campaign's] message...." (Also linked yesterday.)
Marie: Sorry I missed this: ~~~
Robert Kagan in a Washington Post op-ed (Dec. 7): "Our options today [for avoiding becoming a dictatorship] are harder and fewer because we have passed up so many better and easier alternatives in the past.... Here are several things people could do to save the country but almost certainly won't do, because they selfishly refuse to put their own ambitions at risk to save our democracy. he first step is to consolidate all the anti-Trump forces in the Republican Party behind a single candidate, right now. It is obvious that candidate should be Nikki Haley.... The way to beat Trump is to make him seem unelectable, and the way to make him seem unelectable is to show that he is unacceptable.... [Yet] Haley and other Republicans ... are helping Trump by continually affirming his acceptability as president.... The formula for defeating Trump in November is simple enough: Unite the Democrats, and split the Republicans. That is why all the third-party candidacies now under consideration are disastrous."
Meryl Kornfield, et al., of the Washington Post: "Democrat Dean Phillips is accusing President Biden of being a threat to democracy, as the long-shot primary challenger ramps up attacks that have exasperated some Biden allies anticipating a 2024 showdown with Donald Trump.... A wealthy entrepreneur who flipped a Minneapolis suburban congressional district in 2018 and had previously backed Biden, Phillips has sharpened his denunciations after gaining little traction against an incumbent heavily favored to win renomination.... Phillips's attacks this week are part of a broader escalation against Biden, as Phillips has increasingly spoken out against Biden's handling of issues where he's struggled with younger and liberal voters. In remarks arguing the necessity of a cease-fire in Gaza and the hypocrisy of continued marijuana criminalization, Phillips has sought to set himself apart, although he has consistently voted for Biden's legislative agenda." MB: Phillips' claim about Biden's threat to democracy is that the Democratic party has rejected New Hampshire's early primary and has not initiated a Democratic primary election at all in Florida.
Marie: Why do most Republicans so blatantly oppose democracy? Why do they limit the votes of minorities, deprive women of bodily autonomy (and mock "feminism" in general), exacerbate the inequities inherent in the Constitutional framework (like the decidedly undemocratic Senate where Wyoming and California hold equal power). Or why so many reactionary jurists described themselves as "originalists": serious, scholarly folks who mean to interpret the Constitution as its "original" authors intended. This citation by Tom Sullivan in Hullabaloo of a book by Robert Calhoon helps answer those questions: "'Historians' best estimates,' [Calhoon] wrote, 'put the proportion of adult white male loyalists [to the British Crown] somewhere between 15 and 20 percent,' a figure not far removed from the Republican base. As many as 500,000 colonists among a population of 2.5 million never bought the founders' 'created equal' nonsense. They remained committed to a system of government by hereditary royalty and landed gentry. Powdered wigs supported by loyal subjects also carries echoes today. Even after the Treaty of Paris, most loyalists remained on these shores. Their progeny and like-minded continentals who arrived later are with us still. It is a personality type committed to maintaining the 'natural' order." Thanks to RAS for the link.
Stephanie Saul & Alan Blinder of the New York Times: "The president of the University of Pennsylvania, M. Elizabeth Magill, resigned on Saturday, four days after her testimony at a congressional hearing in which she seemed to evade the question of whether students who called for the genocide of Jews should be disciplined. The announcement, in an email sent to the Penn community from Scott L. Bok, the chairman of the board of trustees, followed months of intense pressure from Jewish students, alumni and donors, who claimed that she had not taken their concerns about antisemitism on campus seriously." The AP's story is here. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ CNN ran a liveblog about the crisis at UPenn: "Scott Bok, chairman of the board of trustees at the University of Pennsylvania, submitted his resignation effective immediately.... In his statement, Bok acknowledged that Magill erred during her disastrous testimony, describing a 'dreadful 30-second sound bite' following a lengthy hearing. 'Former President Liz Magill last week made a very unfortunate misstep -- consistent with that of two peer university leaders sitting alongside her -- after five hours of aggressive questioning before a Congressional committee,' Bok said.... 'She is not the slightest bit antisemitic.... Worn down by months of relentless external attacks, she was not herself last Tuesday,' Bok said. 'Over prepared and over lawyered given the hostile forum and high stakes, she provided a legalistic answer to a moral question, and that was wrong.'" Clearly, the presidents could have used advice from a few lawyers with less elitist creds. When your inquisitors are scoundrels, get you a scoundrel lawyer. Not for nothing, in an article on the origins of the term "white shoe," the Economist wrote in 2010, "he term used to hint at WASPishness, the kind of place that didn't promote Jews...." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Marie: Bok is probably right. Lauren Hirsch of the New York Times: "Two of the school presidents, Claudine Gay of Harvard and Elizabeth Magill of Penn, prepared separately for the congressional testimony with teams from [white-shoe law firm] WilmerHale.... WilmerHale also had a meeting with M.I.T.'s president, Sally Kornbluth.... Lawyers for WilmerHale sat in the front row at the hearing on Tuesday.... Steven Davidoff Solomon, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, said that the college presidents appeared to be 'prepared to give answers in the court -- and not a public forum.' But the responsibility of university presidents, Mr. Solomon said, is 'not to give legal answers, it's to give the vision of the university.'" (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Marie: Maureen Dowd of the New York Times hit on exactly the same point I did the other day in assessing the performances of the three Ivy League presidents who flunked Congress 101. But she goes on to make a larger point: "I don't understand why I have to keep making the case on matters that should be self-evident. Why should I have to make the case that a man who tried to overthrow the government should not be president again? Why should I have to make the case that we can't abandon Ukraine to the evil Vladimir Putin? Why should I have to make the case that a young woman -- whose life and future ability to bear children are at risk -- should not be getting persecuted about an abortion by a shady Texas attorney general? Why should I have to make the case that antisemitism is abhorrent?" IOW, What Is wrong with you people??? (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
New York Times: "On Tuesday, the presidents of three leading American universities -- Claudine Gay of Harvard, Sally Kornbluth of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Elizabeth Magill of the University of Pennsylvania -- were at the center of a contentious congressional hearing on antisemitism on college campuses. In one of the most notable exchanges, the leaders of the schools were pressed on whether they discipline students calling for the genocide of Jews. Their responses -- 'It is a context-dependent decision,' Ms. Magill answered at one point -- drew widespread criticism. But the administrators faced a barrage of other pointed questions at the hearing of the House Education and Workforce Committee, mainly from Republicans, who adopted a prosecutorial tone as they pushed for more definitive answers. Here are some of those exchanges[.]" (Also linked yesterday.)
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: The ACLU will represent the National Rifle Association in a First Amendment case coming before the Supreme Court. MB: I have been making substantial contributions to the ACLU over the past several years. I wrote to them and told them why they should not expect a penny from me this year.
~~~~~~~~~~
Texas. David Goodman of the New York Times: "John Whitmire, a moderate Democrat who has served in the Texas State Senate since 1983, won a runoff election on Saturday to become mayor of Houston, according to The Associated Press, defeating Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, a prominent congressional Democrat, in the nonpartisan race. Mr. Whitmire had been considered a front-runner from the moment he entered the race last year, prevailing in a city known for its diversity by creating a coalition that included Republicans and moderate white Democrats as well as Hispanic and Asian voters. He made public safety the focus of his messaging, following a strategy that has proved successful for moderate Democrats in recent big city mayoral races around the country." The Texas Tribune's report is here.
~~~~~~~~~~
Israel/Palestine. CNN's live updates of developments Sunday in the Israel/Hamas war are here: "Qatar's PM says he is not seeing the 'same willingness' in Israel or Hamas as before last month's week-long truce to resolve the war. He was speaking as fierce fighting raged in Khan Younis, southern Gaza's main city. The Israel military has urged residents to evacuate much of Khan Younis. It wants them to move to Al-Muwasi, a strip of land along the coast that aid agencies warned cannot function as a safe zone. Israel's national security adviser Tzachi Hanegbi said Israel has so far killed 7,000 Hamas fighters, calling it a 'minimal estimate'. But Palestinian PM Mohammad Shtayyeh said Israel's goal of destroying Hamas was 'not going to happen.' In the past 24 hours, Israel's military said it struck more than 250 targets, including a military communications site. The Hamas-run Ministry of Health in Gaza says about 17,700 people have been killed since the conflict began." ~~~
~~~ The New York Times' live updates for Sunday are here.
News Lede
Washington Post: "Six people were killed and nearly two dozen injured after tornadoes touched down around Nashville on Saturday, according to local authorities, who feared the death toll could rise as rescue efforts continued late Saturday night." CNN's report is here.
Share Article 
Reader Comments (5)
Marie,
Thanks for the NRA alert. After reading the piece from the Times, I haven't decided if I will follow your lead, but I now do have questions about what the ACLU might be thinking and I will seek some clearer answers before I write the next check.
The whole free speech thing does present progressives with one conundrum after another. Just how free should a freedom be?
Only this week a progressive university president tripped over the issue and fell on her face, and now we have an organization we support seeming to side with killers.
I recall the last time I stopped writing checks to the ACLU in protest. I wrote at least two letters to Anthony Romero (I think that was his name) explaining why I could not support an organization that was so confused about the proper extent of free speech that it thought money was tantamount to talking and writing. The fallout from that "Citizens United" decision has poisoned our politics ever since and I'm still pissed about it.
However....I did return to the ACLU fold eventually, and like many increased my support during the Pretender years. Now you have me wondering if I should discontinue it again.
But I'm also wondering, now that "Citizens United" is again on my mind, why if "corporations are people too," governments, especially duly elected ones, are also not people and should hence be afforded the same rights to speak freely? Seems only logical, in a Spock-ian sense if not in a legal one.
As all can see, I'm not a lawyer. I still find it hard to locate the proper boundaries we should assign to speech's freedom.
But I do think that despite the ACLU's proud history of defending the freedoms of all speech, even that of avowed Nazis, in this fight they might have chosen to observe from the safety of the sidelines.
.
"A Sleazy Indictment"
Harry Litman and Shan Wu discuss the David Weiss indictment's salacious details. Reminds me of the John Durham speaking indictments, only this one actually an actual crime being (over)charged.
@Ken Winkes: I give enough that I get occasional "real phone calls" and "real emails" from an ACLU rep. Here's what I wrote to her this morning, which I thought was pretty mild-mannered and not my usual high-dudgeon hoohah:
I will not be contributing to the ACLU this year because of its decision to defend the NRA in a free-speech matter.
As you know, I live in a state with remarkably weak gun control laws. I do my grocery shopping at 6 am in the hopes that the mass murderers are still in bed. I'm afraid to see my doctor because her waiting room leaves patients vulnerable to anyone sauntering in with an AR-15. I don't go to social events where there is drinking because some trigger-happy nut might shoot me. A couple of weeks ago, I drove right by a potential mass-shooting situation (the gunman fatally shot a security guard, after which a state trooper shot & killed the gunman). The NRA is destabilizing my life every single day.
It's one thing to defend Rush Limbaugh. The NRA? No way. Please pass this along to whoever it is in your organization who thinks the NRA's free-speech rights top my reasonable expectations of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
John Devine one of the Texas judges holding up Kate Cox's medical care was arrested 37 in the 80s protesting at abortion clinics. And "In 2008, Devine and his wife, Nubia, showed everyone just how committed they were to the pro-life position when her seventh pregnancy endangered her life and that of the baby. The Texas Observer‘s Emily DePrang wrote about a video his campaign put out called “Elizabeth’s story.”
It documents the birth of his seventh child, Elizabeth, which his wife carried to term despite the fact that the fetus had a condition likely to kill her. She survived, and the baby died an hour later. The video opens, “What if your beliefs were so powerful, they allowed you to fearlessly risk your life for the life of your unborn child?” and concludes, “Though Elizabeth died only an hour after she was born, her life began at conception.”"
Typical Republican of a choice for me, but not for anyone else.
Satirist Alexandra Petri got a hold on a Trump job application.
"1. What is your political philosophy?
(a) “It’s a republic, not a democracy”-anism
(b) Autocracy
(c) Thinking about ancient Rome *wink emoji* [snip]
2. Name one living public policy figure you greatly admire and why. Note: Henry Kissinger no longer counts, although “perfect, golden ratio of war crimes committed to black-tie party invitations” is still a possible answer.
4. What thinkers have inspired you? (Points will be subtracted for anyone French. Edmund Burke doesn’t count as a thinker anymore; too liberal.)
5. What do you think of the Constitution?
(a) Big fan of the boat; can take or leave the document
(b) I like the version of it that exists in Leonard Leo’s head"