Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff reminds those still on “formerly known as Twitter” that the Proud Boys convicted of seditious conspiracy could have taken plea offers. Seditious conspiracy is notoriously tough to prove, as the the Department of Justice found in the Hutaree Militia case.
The Proud Boys may have betted their seditious conspiracy prosecution would fail too. Except theirs (and the damage they wrought) was so public and so thoroughly documented on thousands of video clips even before prosecutors obtained emails, phone records, and cooperation from witnesses, that there is little comparison to the Hutaree, “almost a gang that couldn’t shoot straight.”
Before trial, USA offered Proud Boys plea deals, revealed yesterday. They passed. Result: Offer | Sentence after trial Tarrio 9-11 yrs| 22 yrs Nordean 6-8 yrs | 18 yrs Biggs 6-8 yrs | 17 yrs Rehl 6-7 yrs | 15 yrs Pezzola 4-5 yrs | 10 yrs /1 pic.twitter.com/OGf0CdRipr
… at least some of disparity is built into sentencing guidelines, which give credit for acceptance of responsibility & saving govt resources—in this case, a 4-mo trial. Also, def Rehl took stand &, in judge's view, lied. Full result chart by @TylerMcBrien & me below. /3 pic.twitter.com/8HDrFWspLT
The “Boys” now have twice as much jail time than they might have to contemplate their miscalculation (if not their sins). And to ponder why that six-foot-three inches and 215 pounds of rippling man-flesh named Trump, to whom they pledged so much allegiance, passed on pardoning them on his way out of the White House.
Jeff Sharlet (“The Undertow: Scenes from a Slow Civil War“) posts in response to a Mike Huckabee monologue, “This is slow civil war: the rhetorical preparation, the simmer of hate, the little violences between individuals that won’t register to wonks as ‘political.’”
Huckabee, likening the Biden administration to a third-world dictatorship (via The Wrap):
“Do you know how political opponents to those in power are dealt with in third-world dictatorships, banana republics and communist regimes?” Huckabee asked during his monologue of Saturday night’s episode. “The people in power use their police agencies to arrest their opponents for made-up crimes in an attempt to discredit them, bankrupt them, imprison them, exile them or all of the above.”
Bullets, not ballots
“Joe Biden is using exactly those tactics to make sure that Donald Trump is not his opponent in 2024,” Huckabee went on before firing off the sort of “or you’re not going to have a country anymore” rhetoric Trump used to inspire a mob to attack police and sack the U.S. Capitol.
For those not keeping current (Huckabee’s audience), Biden has gone out of his way to keep the DOJ prosecutions at arm’s length. He has no say in state prosecutions in New York or Georgia.
“Here’s the problem: If these tactics end up working to keep Trump from winning or even running in 2024, it is going to be the last American election that will be decided by ballots rather than bullets,” Huckabee finished.
Mike Huckabee warns that if Trump's legal problems prevent him from winning in 2024, "it is going to be the last American election that will be decided by ballots rather than bullets." https://t.co/ktwb4fyANopic.twitter.com/0msd1gvD8i
Um, an election decided by bullets is not an election, Mike. But then conservatives such as yourself considered democracy optional long before David Frum in 2018 predicted they’d reject it.
In “The Conspiracy to End America,” I write about how there are five elements always present when democracies slide into autocracy:
-the backing of a major party -financiers -propagandist -Legal theories to justify autocracy -shock troops
Listen to Huckabee. He’s getting the shock troops ready. He is part of the conspiracy to end America.
Goat ropers
I don’t want to minimize warnings from Sharlet or Stevens. Sharlet has been in the field among actual militiamen in Wisconsin. He’s been inside their homes/armories. But Mike Huckabee doesn’t even merit “Honorary Goat Roper.” Why “real men” in MAGAstan (much less Texans) consider Donald Trump anything more is a mystery liberally infused with homo-eroticism.
There are actual violent agents on the right. Domesticterrorists. The world saw that on Jan. 6. Henry “Enrique” Tarrio was just sentenced to 22 years behind bars for coordinating the Proud Boys’ attack on the U.S. Capitol. Then there are the poseurs like Donald Trump, like Mike Huckabee, like Steve Bannon, like Alex Jones. Big, tough talk from the padded-rear-end set about others stepping up and fighting their fantasy revolution for them. Are they more contemptible than pathetic? (Perhaps a poll is in order.)
Once again, this mini rant from my files dates from the second Obama administration (2013), but with a minor edit could still work today:
It sure seems that every time some people are mildly threatened by cultural, political or demographic change in America, they run out and buy more guns and ammo.
They create shortages. There’s of talk of tyranny and rebellion, and how they need their private arsenals to defend the United States of America from internal enemies – meaning their neighbors and the elected government. And they carry AR-15s to rallies to show everybody they can’t be messed with and that they really mean business this time.
Well. There’s Pennsylvania Avenue, pal. And there’s the commie, fascist, Muslim, Kenyan usurper. And there’s your “Don’t Tread On Me” flag and your tri-cornered hat. And your gun safe full of weapons. And your basement full of ammo.
So which way to the revolution, Rambo? Are you really a Minuteman, or is that just what your wife tells her friends?
Special counsel David Weiss intends to seek an indictment against President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, relating to gun charges by the end of the month, the Justice Department said Wednesday.
Hunter Biden had previously reached a deal involving a felony gun possession charge that would have allowed him to avoid prosecution if he met certain conditions over a 24 month period. However, after his plea deal to resolve two tax charges fell apart in court, the future of the gun deal has been in limbo.
“The Speedy Trial Act requires that the Government obtain the return of an indictment by a grand jury by Friday, September 29, 2023, at the earliest. The Government intends to seek the return of an indictment in this case before that date,” the special counsel’s office said in a court filing.
Prosecutors did not say how many charges would be brought.
Hunter Biden’s gun-related legal troubles relate to a firearm he purchased in October 2018. While buying a revolver at Delaware gun shop, he lied on a federal form when he swore that he was not using, and was not addicted to, any illegal drugs – even though he was struggling with crack cocaine addiction at the time of the purchase.
It’s a federal crime to lie on that ATF form or to possess a firearm as a drug user. (Hunter Biden possessed the gun for about 11 days in 2018.) Prosecutors have previously said the statute of limitations for some of these offenses is set to expire in October.
In case you were wondering, Biden didn’t shoot anyone. Neither did he steal classified documents or stage an attempted coup. But just you wait and see, Hunter will end up in jail long before any of the Trumpers.
[A]ccording to newly revealed Justice Department records, the odds of being charged for lying on this form are virtually nonexistent. In the 2019 fiscal year, when Hunter Biden purchased his gun, federal prosecutors received 478 referrals for lying on Form 4473 — and filed just 298 cases, according to data extracted from the U.S. attorneys’ case management system. That’s out of approximately 27 million background checks undertaken in a 12-month period.
The numbers were roughly similar for fiscal 2018 (444 referrals and 271 cases) and fiscal 2020 (433 referrals and 243 cases). The data does not indicate the success rate of the prosecutions.
The crime carries a penalty of 10 years. But nobody who hasn’t committed another crime with the gun or the drugs ever gets prosecuted.
I would be interested to see how they justify this considering their belief in unfettered gun rights — they even defend the rights of terrorists to own guns — except that they are shameless and they won’t have any trouble justifying it in this one case with a big smirk on their faces.
I find that the Bulwark’s JV Last has a dark view of current events that often fits my mood even if I’m actually quite a bit more optimistic in general. (See my earlier posts today exhorting everyone to chill a bit about Biden’s chances.) But there are days that I ponder our situation and feel the blackness descending and I appreciate Last’s analytical prowess as he tries to assess just what the hell is happening here. He doesn’t come to any firm conclusions and neither do it but it’s important to at least try to figure it out.
Anyway, here’s today’s dark missive:
1. Decadence
We’re going to keep doing this and I’m sorry. Here are some tidbits from yesterday’s Wall Street Journal poll:
By an 11-point margin, more voters see Trump rather than Biden as having a record of accomplishments as president—some 40% said Biden has such a record, while 51% said so of Trump. By an eight-point margin, more voters said Trump has a vision for the future. And by 10 points, more described Trump as mentally up to the presidency. Some 46% said that is true of Trump, compared with 36% who said so of Biden.
What?
Trump has more of a record of “accomplishment” in office than Biden?
I would pay a lot of money to sit down with that 51 percent of respondents and ask them to tell me five things Trump accomplished in office. I’d even spot them the first four: A tax cut; the appointment of three SCOTUS judges; the killing of Qasem Soleimani; Operation Warp Speed.
Meanwhile, whatever you think about voting for Biden for another term, just on the basis of balls and strikes, this has been one of the more successful first terms most of us have lived through:
-Beating COVID -American Rescue Plan -Bipartisan gun reform -Bipartisan infrastructure -Inflation Reduction Act -CHIPs -Killing of Ayman al-Zawahiri -Managing the allied support of the war in Ukraine
I would add the withdrawal from Afghanistan which was always going to be a mess but Biden had the guts to do it and we are out. It’s pathetic that people who love Trump and Obama (for different reasons, obviously) are so critical of Biden for doing it. He was forced to follow Trump’s withdrawal plan but understood that if he was going to do it, he would have to do it early and he did it. And Obama never followed through.
As for being mentally up for the presidency, again, I understand people who have doubts about Joe Biden. Fair enough.
But they think Trump is up to the job, mentally?
This guy?
This guy?
This guy?
I do not understand how anyone who has been awake for the last seven years could see Trump as “mentally up for the presidency” if Joe Biden is not.
But wait. It gets worse.
Here’s one more piece of data from that WSJ poll:
[N]early three in four say inflation is headed in the wrong direction.
So 74 percent of those polled say that inflation is “headed in the wrong direction.”
Here is the reality:
Inflation has been headed in the right direction, by a lot, for more than a year. That’s just the objective truth.
This is the part I think is interesting to ponder. When did we become such a nation of whiners?
The People seem hell-bent on being unhappy these days. They complain about the price of gas. When gas prices are down, they complain about the cost of eggs. When egg prices are down, they complain about the cost of real estate. When real estate prices stabilize, they complain about the rise in mortgage rates.
On the one hand, these complaints are annoyingly stupid. On the other hand, they’re a real problem.
That’s because a populace determined to be dissatisfied isn’t capable of self-government in the long run. It will continually seek change. Over time, it will become open to ever more extreme changes. It will lose the ability to make rational, outcome-based choices. And it will become susceptible to strongmen and demagogues because these figures create scapegoats and targets for dissatisfaction.
Historically speaking, strongmen and demagogues have arisen in times of stress, calamity, and desperation. It is an example of American exceptionalism that our own confrontation with authoritarianism has emerged during a time of peace and almost unimaginable prosperity.
I’m not sure what that says about us, but I suspect it says something important. And not good.
2. Decadence
Why would this be? 2020s America is not Weimar Germany. We are not reeling from a Great Depression. Our recent wars have been—by all historical measures—small scale.
We are in the opposite position: 2020s America is a place of almost inconceivable prosperity. Not everywhere and not for everyone. We do not live in utopia. There are real problems: income inequality and stagnant middle-class wages. Poverty exists. Upward economic mobility is not as easy as it should be, and downward economic mobility is real and scary.
But by historical measures? This is about as fat and happy as a society gets.
So why now? Let’s posit a few options and then you can discuss in the comments.
(1) People are stupider. I’m predisposed to this argument. Obviously.
But are they really? Probably not. Even if “education” was better at the top level at some other time in American history—which I doubt—more Americans are better educated today than at any time in history.
And while lots of people believe stupid things today (Qanon, Flat Earthers, etc.), is that any different than during the ’70s? Or the 1930s? Or the 1850s? Is information in the media less reliable? Again: I doubt it.
(2) Decadence. Maybe people are less “serious” today. By which I mean that people are so comfortable that they can make choices based on self-actualization rather than managing their daily reality. For example:
Only someone safe in the understanding that no serious harm can come to them is liberated to live at odds from reality. That’s a good-enough definition of decadence.
(3) Failure of liberalism. Maybe we’ve reached the end of history and discovered that Donald Trump is actually the Last Man.
By which I mean: Perhaps liberalism is not an end-state, but a transitory period that contains the seeds of its own destruction. The appearance of illiberalism across much of the developed world over the last decade would support this thesis.
(4) Racism. Or maybe the problem is a uniquely American one tied to race. We’ve undergone a rapid demographic transition since 1980.
Even though this transition has coincided with enormous gains in prosperity, racial majorities do not (historically) welcome such changes with arms wide open.
(5) Reaction. If you asked conservatives this question, they might explain that the current friendliness to demagogues is a natural reactionary movement in response to overreach from progressive ideological successes. This is “The Cathedral” argument from the nat-con right, and it shouldn’t be dismissed just because many of the people making it are cranks.
Obviously this is a partial list. You can probably come up with other theories. And the real explanation will be some combination of many factors.
Why did the tensions, conflicts, and economic dislocations of the 1940s lead to FDR, and the problems of the 1970s to Reagan—but the peace and prosperity of the 2000s led to Trump and the elevation of demagoguery?¹
The comments to the column feature a lively discussion if you are a Bulwark subscriber.
I can think of some reasons that have to do with the rapid adaption of technology that’s created epic changes faster than we can deal with. And I think our media environment creates a sense of chaos and dissonance. But honestly, you’ve got me. Let’s just say that I’ve certainly noticed this phenomenon and can see it in myself.
In August 2022, James O’Keefe needed to get to Maine for a sailing trip. Rather than take a commercial flight for roughly $200, the conservative undercover-video activistdirected his employees to book a $12,000 helicopter flight direct from New York to the seaside town of Southwest Harbor, using funds donated to Project Veritas, the nonprofit he founded, according to a draft of a private internal audit conducted by an independent law firm.
When bad weather forced the helicopter to make an unscheduled landing in Portland, O’Keefe booked a $1,400 black car for the three-hour drive from the helipad to the sailboat. O’Keefe justified the expenses by saying that he had a meeting near the dock, the audit stated. Two Project Veritas staffers described the person he met with to The Washington Post as a low-level donor.
It wasn’t the first time O’Keefe had covered personal expenses with funds from the donor-supported nonprofit whose self-described mission is investigative journalism, according to the report compiled by Dorsey & Whitney, a firm hired by the Project Veritas board in the wake of its founder’s departure in February. A copy of the report was shared with The Post.
There was $208,980 worth of luxury black-car travel over a two-year period. There was a $600 haul of bottled water during one hotel stay in San Antonio. There was even a $2,500 set of DJ equipment;O’Keefe dreamed of playing a set at Coachella, according to two former employees, and was irritated when his staff couldn’t get him booked at the legendary California music festival.
The audit report raises questions about whether O’Keefe complied with laws that prohibit nonprofit leaders from using the organization’s funds for their personal benefit. The Westchester County, N.Y., district attorney’s office has said it is investigating O’Keefe, as first reported by the Nation.
Before he left Project Veritas in February, under pressure from its board of directors, O’Keefe was surrounded by a “cult of personality” that enabled him to behave as if he were “untouchable,” the audit concluded. The report states that it was based on interviews with 35 current and former Project Veritas staffers conducted by Dorsey & Whitney. O’Keefe did not respond to The Post’s requests for comment.
Hannah Giles, a onetime O’Keefe ally who is now the CEO of Project Veritas, compared O’Keefe’s spending habits to the mega-wealthy financier antihero on the Showtime television series“Billions.”
“If you’re Bobby Axelrod from ‘Billions,’ it’s fine to live like that,” Giles saidin an interview with The Post. “When you’re paying your bills from a little old lady’s Social Security checks, we’re going to have problems.”
Project Veritas gained the admiration of major conservative donors as well as small-dollar grass-roots contributors with undercover videos exposing supposed bias or wrongdoing by journalists, labor leaders and liberal advocates. In 2021 alone, it raised $21,958,641 in contributions, according to the most recent available tax forms.
But the group laid off 25 of its 40 staff members last month, Project Veritas acknowledges.In an Aug. 18 meeting, board chairman Joe Barton told staffers he was concerned that the audit, if made public, could trigger an IRS investigation or even a forced shutdown, according to a recording of the meeting that was shared with The Post.
Barton told The Post his comments reflected the opinion of the larger board. He declined to comment further on the audit.
Last year, two Florida residents pleaded guilty in connection to an FBI probe into the theft of a diary belonging to Ashley Biden that ended up in the possession of Project Veritas during the 2020 campaign. During that investigation, agents searched O’Keefe’s Mamaroneck, N.Y., home and seized electronic equipment, but O’Keefe was not charged with a crime. (Project Veritas never ran a story about the diary, and both O’Keefe and the nonprofit have said they acted legally as journalists.)
O’Keefe, 39, was more than the founder of Project Veritas. He was also the face of the organization, styling himself as a citizen journalist crusading against perceived corruption, hypocrisy or bias in media or liberal politics. Now, though, the nonprofit is suing him over his messy departure, which came amid questions about the group’s finances, and the board-commissioned audit includes vivid accounts of profligate spending as well as what it calls his “volatile” workplace behavior, highlighting O’Keefe’s role in the downfall of the organization.
O’Keefe declined to speak with the auditors, according to the document.
This made me laugh out loud:
In September 2021, according to the report, Hurricane Ida floodwaters threatened to destroy the Project Veritas office in Mamaroneck. The staff scrambled to save equipment and their own lives — one elderly employee was briefly pulled underwater and had to be rescued by colleagues. But O’Keefe had already left the scene, asking employees to prioritize his own evacuation so he could make it to Virginia for a performance of the musical “Oklahoma!” in which he had the lead role, according to staffers cited by the audit.
The fact that James O’Keefe believed he was going to leverage his rat-fucking operation into being a Broadway musical star is just hilarious to me. Fortunately for theatre goers, he is spectacularly untalented and it would never happen. But more importantly, unfortunately for America he has done much damage to individuals and institutions.
God willing, we have seen the last of him. But don’t bet on it. I have two words for you: Roger Stone. Zombie ratfuckers never die.
Of the 50 donors who gave at least $160,000 in the years leading up to his 2022 reelection campaign, only 16 — less than a third — provided funds to the super PAC Never Back Down, which can receive unlimited contributions, through the end of June. Eight other major donors gave directly to his presidential campaign but not the super PAC.
The top 50 list includes five donors who are now financially supporting rival presidential candidates. And of those who are giving money to the DeSantis campaign or his super PAC, five are splitting their funds with other candidates.
The inability of DeSantis to convert more of his gubernatorial donors into presidential ones is emblematic of a larger shortcoming of his current campaign. And it presents particular problems for the governor precisely because his operation has leaned so heavily on the super PAC to perform basic campaign functions.
Trailing former President Donald Trump by wide margins in Republican primary polls — some of which show him struggling to keep his second-place status — many former contributors to the Florida governor are looking to other candidates or keeping their wallets shut entirely.
“Ron DeSantis outraised both Biden and Trump last quarter, and we continue to see overwhelming enthusiasm from grassroots and major supporters chipping in to help our campaign,” said Andrew Romeo, a DeSantis campaign spokesperson. “We look forward to continued fundraising success this quarter as we capitalize on his strong debate performance and momentum in the early states.”
The funds Never Back Down has raised, however, are overwhelmingly drawn from an $82 million transfer from the Florida-based political committee that backed DeSantis’ reelection bid.
And in recent weeks, some of DeSantis’ biggest past donors have come out publicly to say they are holding back on writing checks to the super PAC. That includes hotel and aerospace executive Robert Bigelow, by far the biggest individual contributor to Never Back Down and to DeSantis’ reelection campaign. Last month, Bigelow told Reuters that he would not give further donations to the super PAC unless DeSantis adopted more moderate policies and “until I see that he’s able to generate more [contributions] on his own.”
And keep in mind that DeSantis and his super PAC have been spending money like drunken sailors. It’s likely that they’ve run through a good bit of what they had banked.
We’ve seen some massive flame outs in politics before, especially on the Republican side. This one looks more and more like for the books. Let’s just hope it’s enough to end his political career altogether. Remember, Scott Walker withdrew from the 2016 race early and then ran for a third term as Wisconsin — and he lost. We haven’t been burdened with him since. Fingers crossed that DeSantis has the same fate.
Following up on my post below, here’s Obama vet Jim Messina on the same topic. And he makes a point I failed to make: the real problem isn’t Biden’s age, it’s the possibility of losing because of third party gadfly campaigns. It’s happened before …
MESSINA TO DEMS: CHILL OUT — Every day, it seems, there’s new fodder for Democrats looking to freak out about President JOE BIDEN’s reelection prospects: Sagging public views of the economy. Persistent voter concerns about Biden’s age. And erosion in the president’s standing among key minority groups, to name a few.
The man who put the last Democratic president back into the White House — JIM MESSINA, manager of BARACK OBAMA’s 2012 reelect — is back with a reassuring message for his fellow Dems, delivered in a new 22-slide presentation exclusively obtained by Playbook: Relax.
We caught up with Messina last night, and he made it clear he doesn’t see the election through rose-colored glasses. Multiple times he pointed out that (1) no matter who the Republican is, it’ll be a close election and (2) the most likely GOP nominee, DONALD TRUMP, has a strong base and can absolutely win.
But the deck makes a compelling, data-driven case that the sky isn’t falling just yet — with one major caveat, which we’ll get to in a moment.
“I thought it was important to say to my friends and clients and other people, let’s just take a step back and try to be really number-specific and really sort of who has what cards in their poker hand,” Messina told Playbook. “And you would just rather be Joe Biden than Donald Trump.”
“Historically, we’re fucking bedwetters,” he added. “We grew up in the ’80s and ’90s when Republicans won elections all the time. Democrats had their hearts deeply broken when HILLARY [CLINTON] lost and people didn’t see that coming. And so, you know, we continually believe every bad thing people say.”
THE KEY POINTS from the deck, titled “Off to the Races,” and our chat with Messina:
— The economic fundamentals are strong. The “misery index,” a bellwether economic measure that combines unemployment and inflation, is now lower than it was ahead of RONALD REAGAN, BILL CLINTON and Obama’s successful reelections. Messina also gives credit to Biden and team for consistently selling “Bidenomics” to voters, even as voter views remain stuck — likening it to the challenges Obama faced in 2012 as the economy slowly emerged from the Great Recession: “People thought we were crazy to go as early as we did with economic messaging.”
— Abortion is a major X factor. Democrats have long played defense on so-called culture war issues, but after the Dobbs ruling, Messina said, Democrats have an issue to rally voters around unlike anything he’s seen in modern politics. And its staying power, he added, is only buoyed by a Republican primary where a national abortion ban is continuingly put forward as a litmus test.
— The election is a choice, not a wish. Pressed on the dismal voter views of Biden, Messina said he is confident the qualms will wash away as the horse race takes shape. “It’s a choice between two parties, two ideologies, between two people,” he said. “And that choice matters. … People didn’t see the Democratic turnout in 2022 coming.” And while Messina assumes it’s a Biden-Trump rematch, he argues that even another GOP nominee can be painted as extreme and Trump-y.
AND THE BIG CAVEAT is whether that choice gets muddied: Messina is joining many other Democrats and some anti-Trump Republicans in fingering third-party candidates as a underappreciated threat to Biden.
“I don’t care what they do. I don’t care how much money they spend. I don’t care who their nominee is. They’re going to get zero electoral votes. The question is who do they take the votes from?” Messina said. “You just can’t split away votes if you want to beat Donald Trump. And I just cannot overstate how crucial it is to make sure that we don’t create a vehicle that takes enough votes up to elect Donald Trump.”
“He’s looking for more evidence of the big grift,” he explained. “We laid this out in great detail during one or more of our hearings and it is outlined in the report. A lot of people were profiting from this false narrative that the election was stolen. Save America PAC raised $250 million after the election by telling people that the election was stolen. Sidney Powell set up a nonprofit and legal defense fund in which those same lies led to a lot of people giving money.”
Wallace played a clip of the House committee’s hearing showing screen captures of over 25 email solicitations that the Trump campaign sent out in a single day. There was also an America First Foundation, which raised money and has hired many of the former Trump staff.
It’s all fraud, Heaphy believes:
“If somebody says, ‘If you give me money, I’ll use it to do the following: I’ll give it to refugee resettlement in our community.’ But you don’t use it for refugee resettlement, you use it for other purposes beyond that which you indicated. That is fraud. Wire fraud, mail fraud are crimes that broadly criminalize any scheme that is meant to deprive people of their money based on deception, based on falsity. That’s one of the many things that the special counsel may very well be looking at here.”
Gee, that’s awfully familiar, isn’t it? Former Trump adviser, Steve Bannon, will stand trial next May “on charges that he duped donors who gave money to build a wall along the U.S. southern border” in his “We Build the Wall” campaign:
Bannon, 69, pleaded not guilty last September following his indictment on state money laundering, conspiracy, fraud and other charges. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg took up the case after Bannon’s federal prosecution was cut short by a Trump pardon. Presidential pardons apply only to federal crimes, not state offenses.
Bannon is accused of falsely promising donors that all money given to the We Build the Wall campaign would go toward building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Instead, prosecutors allege that the money was used to enrich Bannon and others involved in the project.
Like cult leader, like cult follower. And the grift goes on.
A federal court struck down Alabama’s congressional map on Tuesday, after GOP state lawmakers refused the court’s mandate to draw a second majority-Black district.
The three-judge panel wrote that it was “deeply troubled” that the state legislature declined to draw two majority-Black districts. The same court ruled last year that it should draw a second majority-Black district to comply with the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court affirmed the ruling from the lower court earlier this year.
We do not take lightly federal intrusion into a process ordinarily reserved for the State Legislature. But we have now said twice that this Voting Rights Act case is not close. And we are deeply troubled that the State enacted a map that the State readily admits does not provide the remedy we said federal law requires.
We are disturbed by the evidence that the State delayed remedial proceedings but ultimately did not even nurture the ambition to provide the required remedy.
A court-appointed special master has about three weeks to submit proposals for a new Alabama congressional map after a panel of federal judges Tuesday struck down the district lines drawn by state lawmakers, finding that the plan didn’t fix a likely violation of civil rights law.
The ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama directed the special master to file three proposed remedial maps by Sept. 25.
The decision by the three-judge panel comes months after the Supreme Court ruled that Alabama’s previous district lines likely diluted the electoral power of Black voters in the state. The panel included one circuit judge and two district judges.
Alabama, a state with a Black population of more than 25 percent, has one district represented by a Black Democrat and six districts where white voters predominantly elect Republicans.
And now drawing the maps is out of the GOP’s hands. Alabama fought the law and the law won. Except Alabama will of course appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court hoping for a Trump judge to tip the court in its favor.
Special master? North Carolina’s been there, done that.
This is Republicans’ game. How many times have I said it? Ten years or more? This is the Republican M.O.: Find the line. Step over it. Dare someone to push them back. No pushback? New line. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
Even then? Elections run on regular cycles. Delay long enough in court and eventually their illegal districts survive another election. There are no longer permanent, 10-year districts. The permanent campaign meets permanent redistricting.
