707 Comments

In deciding to take the immunity case today, with its sweeping, overly broad question and setting a very slow timetable, SCOTUS pretty much assured that Trump won’t go to trial before the election. During the months of delay, he’ll get to continue trying his case in the court of public opinion where he has the main stream media facilitating his doing that. SCOTUS has shown itself in even starker terms to be corrupt, in Trump’s pocket. They know what this delay means that they are effectively declaring Trump immune.

We need to fight back. What are the ways open to us? At the least, we should ALL be writing letters to the Court, our Congress people, the media. Flood them with letters. I would love to hear what others think and what else we can be doing.

It’s so hard to have another battle to fight when we have so many.

We know we have to win -- and win big – at the ballot box, but in the meantime, let’s flood SCOTUS etc with letters of outrage.

Expand full comment

I agree Biden must win (the more overwhelming, the better but any win is a win) or we become a country most people will not want to live. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS doesn't pay attention to "we the people".

Expand full comment

And with all that it isn't only Biden who must win, it's the Dem in every state and local election. A good place to begin would be the race to replace Mitch McConnell.

Expand full comment

The replacement for Minority Leader McConnell lies with the minority party of the Senate. This group is not an ally of democracy, but align solely with trump. This group MUST stay in the minority of the population, and therefore the US Senate.

Expand full comment

True... however those in the Senate are able to chastise and condemn... sanction, I believe is the word. When I wrote the comment I had not checked to see if the Wild Mitch was up for re-election or not, my mistake. It appears the US is going to continue to have the pleasure of his typically Republican selfishness until 2027. Sad.

Expand full comment

Mitch McConnell is not leaving the senate. His term doesn't end until January 2027. We don't get to replace him and when he is replaced he will likely be replaced by a Republican. Kentucky is a very red state.

Expand full comment

If Kentucky is such a red state, why did Governor Andy Beshear, a Democrat, get reelected by a good margin last fall? If there are enough dems to reelect a good dem for governor, surely there are enough dems to elect a good US Senator. Am I wrong? What am I missing?

Expand full comment

You are not wrong. Many of us can send an overwhelming message in just a few days on Super Tuesday by making a huge turnout. Super Tuesday is this coming Tuesday, March 5. If you have a mail in ballot hanging around, fill it out and take it to an official mailbox or City Hall. Too late to mail it. There’s loads of local information at USvotefoundation.org.

Turnouts in states that have voted so far are only in the teens. That’s not how to keep our freedoms. 💙👍🏻💪🏻🇺🇸🙏🏼

Expand full comment

Participating states in 2024: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Massachusetts, Maine, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Virginia

Expand full comment

Thank you for the link, Gigi.

Expand full comment

Yes - VOTE! And ask at least 3 friends or family members to vote, while adding how important it is to let their voice be heard. Then ask them to ask 3 friends or family members to vote…that’s the best way to increase voter turnout. 🇺🇸💙🇺🇸

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

NH already had both parties' primaries on Jan 23. The DNC in their "infinite wisdom" (S/) decided to call our First in the Nation status not "legal" We've been FITN since about 1920 & it was passed by NH Law in 2023. (This was a Write In campaign due to the DNC's action) I did vote and Biden got 63.9% of the Dem votes. Phillips got 19.6%. (he's an ally of the CEO of the "No Labels" dark money group BTB.) Williamson got 4%. Other write ins totaled 8.3 %There were about 10 other Dem candidates; 2 of them had fake names, one of whom was "Vermin Supreme and the other was "Paperboy Prince (!)" Alll of those below Williamson got 2% or less of the votes.

Expand full comment

I’ve already mailed mine in. All blue. From California.

Expand full comment

You are indeed right. I stand corrected. Thank you, Shelia! We will have a chance in Kentucky in 2026 if Democrats are still allowed to vote in 2026.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

Andy Beshear is the exception that proves the rule. He may have won reelection handily, but he 1) only got into office very narrowly 2) by beating likely the most unpopular governor in the country 3) in one of the best cycles for Dems ever 4) largely through virtue of family name recognition. Even he would be unlikely to win a federal election rather than a state one. The governor of Vermont is a Repub, but I don't think we are seriously considering the notion that the Land of Bernie will be a swing state soon.

Expand full comment

Gerrymandering. We had an amazing rep in one district. Very popular. The legislators, knowing that, changed her district before the next election. They ran her against a black man campaigning with Dem points. She did win…..35 votes. It was a big victory.

Expand full comment

Praying you’re correct

Expand full comment

And very likely a Republican who is even farther right than Mitch is. Fortunately, it probably won't be someone who is as good a gamer.

Expand full comment

By gamer do you mean obstructionist? He has blocked so much legislation that would help the underprivileged and much of the 99%. He is responsible for Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Comey-Barrett becoming Associate Justices and for Merritt Garland becoming AG instead of an AJ.

He has cemented the rules so the minority party has power to control the fate of legislation.

Sure, they could pick a worse minority or majority leader in the Senate, but it's going to take someone like Trump's little Johnson to squeeze under it.

Expand full comment

Allow me to add one name to the ‘he is responsible list..’ trump! Twice Mitch caved when he could have ended the career of the cancerous boil called trump! Two different impeachment trials and he cowered!

Expand full comment

Gary, you have hit it on the head, so to speak, with "Trump's little Johnson!" That may be an even better appellation than "Howdy-Doody" which I fear doesn't speak to most anyone born after 1960.

Expand full comment

Gary, that's the best moniker I've seen in a long, long time...

"Trump's little Johnson" is rich in imagery!

Expand full comment

Certainly Mitch’s obstruction skills stand out. But he has a knack for creative strategies that seldom have negative unforeseen consequences to himself or his party. He just knows how to manipulate the system better than everyone else. He knows the system and he knows the voters. And he’s also a master dissembler, promoting twisted rationalizations as obvious truth. His immediate about face after his initial J6 outrage was a big “of course.” It’s interesting that despite having been such a villain for so long, his party has careened into a course—with denying Ukraine the support it needs—he’s not willing to oversee. He’s still willing to conclude the permanent far right takeover of the government, he’s just not willing to promote allowing Russia to go unchecked. I didn’t know there was a line anywhere he wouldn’t cross.

Expand full comment

Gary, nicely put. I have been looking for a name for the Speaker.

Expand full comment

Cornyn is TX. Reminds me of the Republican in the next car when Kennedy was shot. It’s only appearance, so waiting for reality.

Expand full comment

Maybe not. Look at Georgia, and Tennessee

I think people are fed up,

Expand full comment

A very red state with a Democrat as Governor.

Expand full comment

Very good point, Steve. I stand corrected. Red state, but not quite spilled blood red.

Expand full comment

KY's governor is a Democrat.

Expand full comment

Sadly, the reality is that my beloved and beautiful home state will likely produce a radical MAGA-aligned candidate to replace Mitch in November 2026. There seems to be an endless supply of Comers and Pauls to choose from. But hope springs eternal - we do have a very popular Democrat governor and he was re-elected this past cycle. Whoever his replacement is, though, will not automatically wield the power that Mitch spent decades amassing. That’s a good thing.

Expand full comment

You need to make sure you vote for every Democrat that's running for state office. They can't can't gerrymander those races either. We Dems let Republicans take those seats every election cycle and it drives me to distraction.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Tracy. Down ticket races are so important. I plan to spend my time until election day working in the local Democratic Party headquarters doing whatever is needed to make certain that Democrats in my state maintain their majority in the legislature. Governors, state attorneys general, and sectetaries of state must be Democrats (although those races in many states may not be until 2026). I'll help register voters. I'll volunteer for the League of Women Voters. None of that is glamorous work but it iscessential.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

Thank you, Marcia! I am in Blue California. I phone bank with the Bay Area Coaliton of over 30 activist groups (Swing Left, Indivisible, Sister District et al). I was on a couple of Zoom phone banks to New York (with 80 other phone bankers) to help elect Souzzi to Congressional District 3. He prevailed handily. The work may not be glamorous but it is absolutely essential, and absolutely rewarding!! I am an avid promoter of phone banking. It invariably lifts my spirit to work with like minded activist volunteers and to talk with people in elections that make a difference. There are endless opportunities to help, to have an impact. We all need to plug in where we feel useful wherever we are, and to do so as often as possible. This is not a fire drill. This is the real fire. Folks in blue states can help in the swing states. Onward!

Expand full comment

This is the bottom line. Thank you Tracy. Whether Dems show up and VOTE at his party , in 24> and hold their feet to the fire is the ONLY way. 💙VOTE💙

Expand full comment

It’s really still surprises me , as back in the day - I saw this coming . How to avoid the inevitable was a back-to-the-land hippie manifest ,an ideological movement labeled utopian by many , we threw up our hands and tuned out. Later some turned Yuppies and ‘fought’ for equality as the separation widened. The right . The left. The Right has methodically placed , planned and now persecutes . Pleasing and likely backed by Putinites , some actually admit this and push autocracy. The Left strives to keep equality alive, love our neighbor, fair balances-taxes/table manners/truth/time honored rights.

Correct?

So how did it get to here?

By NOT voting. By believing our vote didn’t count. By NOT showing up. By believing it didn’t matter.

We WERE #1 in the world ….the stats tell it , have for a decade or more …only 35-40% vote . Wake up started late the question is …too late? The factions controlling have be bought , if you don’t know by whom , that’s a clue ……cause they’re the ones wanting MORE….

The fact the battle is NOW and guaranteed to be long … wiggle room is NONE….and is from complacency

💙💙VOTE ALL THE COMPLICIT OUT💙💙

..the only alternative so far surpasses speculation it’s unthinkable

Expand full comment

Yes, emphasis on the yes. There are no exceptions, every vote counts, every race matters. Red state? Let's see about changing that.

Expand full comment

Mitch has already rigged that. As it now stands, only a R can replace him. If the Democrats would fight the Koch money (The Bluegrass Institute)

Expand full comment

What do you mean? A statewide election is not legitimately riggable, is it?

Expand full comment

Mitch and the MAGAcultists like to think they have it in the bag.... but as long as YOU and YOU and YOU get out the vote, mark your ballot and get everyone you know to vote the Mitch and MAGAkind do not have it locked up. For the R's maybe, but the D's continue to be stronger and more of them.... if the D's would just get out and VOTE!

Expand full comment

Bill, it isn't up to us. It will be one that the Trump Party, formally GOP, will chose.

Expand full comment

and that belief is true.... if YOU and YOU and YOU allow it! It is and as long as we have a democracy it always will be up to us. And you got it, I'm pointing my finger at YOU Linda!

Expand full comment

Agreed! the voting to replace the MAGA and their cult leader must start at the very bottom. County or borough councils, Commissioners, parashes leaders, state legislators, governors... all the way from the bottom up the chain to the very top... get out the vote. And VOTE!

Expand full comment

Elections at a local level determine who is in the Senate and House. At an even more local level are the people who institute abortion bans, dumbing of education, and discrimination. All levels must be addressed.

Expand full comment

A Biden win would be empty without the Senate and House, especially. The Libertarian extremists there exalt in their destruction of our laws and democracy. Biden alone can’t overcome those forces, as we have witnessed. We have to boot them all out to such a degree that we can expand the Supremely biased Court in ‘24.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

A Biden win would be [absolutely necessary and a joyous relief to the world, if not cause for the transformative change we crave] without the Senate and House, especially.

FIFY. (but agree with the rest).

Expand full comment

I totally agree with you. I misspoke that it would be empty. It’s essential!! And for the sake of world sanity, we urgently need a Dem Senate and House to complete the resurrection of our country before it’s too late. We can’t take another four years of inept GOP obstruction and lies.

Expand full comment

If the SCOTUS gives a POTUS immunity, Biden could just go all autocrat. He would not, but he could.

Expand full comment

Although I have zero faith in this SCOTUS to do the right thing, from what I've been reading and hearing, it's highly likely they'll not rule in trompy's favor. This charade is all about a thumbs-on-the-scale delay to avoid a trial this year, giving trompy a bit of an edge come election day, so that Thomas and Alito can retire in 2025. Trompy would get 2 more picks (at least.) How shamefully craven.

Expand full comment

Our only saving course of action is to defeat Trump soundly, electing Biden. Otherwise, all hope for saving the USA from self-induced political and economic destruction is lost.

Expand full comment

That was brought up last night on MSNBC. (One has to wonder if TFG or other U.S. oligarchs gave them some money to delay the hearing ...especially considering how much they've been given by other ultra rich friends.

Expand full comment

I for one don't have to wonder if the SC is corrupt, I predicted just what happened. The details of the corruption is up for grabs, sure. Legal experts in general have felt a need to be less outspoken on their predictions if corruption, but everything I know I "read in the papers". We here can maybe afford more outspokenness. Will Rogers and the papers are now fond memories.

Expand full comment

Have you also heard that with the courts in several states faced with immunity claims, there might be conflict between states and thus the SCOTUS decided to hear the case to set precedent for all states to follow?

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

Kathy, aren't you confusing the SC cases? Yesterday's decision to hear the immunity case is different than the CO insurrection case which is also before the Court. The latter one does have applicability, in my understanding, to Maine, Illinois etc. -- i.e., whether a State can declare that a candidate is disqualified from federal elective office. The former deals with post-presidential immunity.

It's hard to keep up with all his court cases.

Expand full comment

Excellent point! He could order the imprisonment of the amoral orange creature! Perhaps send trump to Guantanamo!

Expand full comment

I like him in a cage prominently displayed in front of the Capitol Building. Preferably gagged and bound so his tongue and tweets are silenced.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

I agree and refuse to leave office...like tfg would do! Only then we would be an autocrat democracy! Do unto others as they would do unto you! Right!

Expand full comment

Speaking of Libertarians, I never hear never trumpers talk about how they cozied up to Libertarians before trump. They apologize for trump but not for that move.

Expand full comment

I should add as I always say, is never, never, never vote for a republican!

Expand full comment

CONservative. Conservatism today IS NOT the conservatism of the past.

Expand full comment

There was a time when a "conservative" and a "liberal" could walk into a bar and have a heated exchange about such things as tax policy and the size of government - whether our social safety nets were crutches or essentials. The voice volume could get loud. But then one of them would crack a joke and the other would order another round. The conversation could flow to family stuff and probably sports. They could be best friends and loyal neighbors.

And then the "movement" cons infiltrated. Newt and Rush rolled a snowball that became an avalanche of hate and fascism.

Expand full comment

We finally know what they want to ‘conserve’…white supremacy and white nationalism!

Expand full comment

Don't forget the so called religious Hypocrites

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

I really like the moniker one of the earlier commenters came up with for the Speaker, (who is one of that ilk): Trump's little Johnson!)

Expand full comment

As McConnell said, white faces like the Republican Party, or was it the other way around?

Expand full comment

Except for Republican Governor Phil Scott in Vermont. He continues to try to prevent the General Assembly from driving Vermonters to the poorhouse.

Expand full comment

So there is no longer a SCOTUS, rather is there another Trump-created belligerent to beware of and certainly not to expect justice from. It can be restored, but that's going to take more time than is available.

Expand full comment

Fortunately, SCOTUS doesn't control what is happening in New York.

New York and other states can still sue Trump in civil litigation as can private citizens like the Capitol police.

But the best news is that TFFG is obviously getting more and more demented by the day. Won't a debate be fun when they ask him to recall an event and he has absolutely no idea who the people involved in the event are. And even if he does, will be get their name right.

As Biden quipped to Seth Meyers the other night - "At least I know my wife's first name."

Expand full comment

In such a debate, Biden could smile a lot and roll his eyes as Donald Word Salad embarrasses himself. But those shows are not really debates. They are ranting performances with zero control by the moderators. If they had any plans to keep the event civil and balanced, the mute button would be a simple timer.

Best to skip the whole idea of a "debate". They are more like a cage match and just feed the stupid horse race approach to our election processes. JMO.

Expand full comment

Reminds me of the sneering comment by Reagan, ‘cheerleader in chief’, during the debate with the real saint President Carter!…’there you go again!’ Chided grade B actor Ronnie!

Expand full comment

Bill- You are right. Savannah Guthrie did the best job of controlling TFFG and make him appear to be an ignorant stalker. Otherwise, TFFG will wander around the stage like a wrestler in a cage match. The mute button would help but TFFG would be ready for it.

Expand full comment

Mute button and sudden outage would help even more.

Expand full comment

You're right. Last time is fresh in memory. Biden, rolling eyes, snort of laughter, "Oh, come ON, man!" And then of course the on-stage stalking of Hillary, as she spoke confidently and brilliantly.

Expand full comment

But the media will report such happenings as "Biden walked slowly to the podium, his voice weak, although his responses to questions posed by Kristian Welker were carefully, if slowly, phrased. Trump's presence loomed large on the stage as his voice bellowed his grievances..."

Expand full comment

Sadly you are 100% accurate, Doug.

Expand full comment

Well, we see that all the time. Pre-prepared set of adjectives and qualifiers. We're about to get a spectacle in Texas.

Expand full comment

Does Trump have to debate Biden? He wasn't involved with his party's debate.

Expand full comment

Rethugs don't have to do anything. And you can bet drumpf will weasel out. Rembrandt the stand back and stand by exhortation?

He would show how insane he is. Biden is wise and skilled and would have drumpf foaming at the mouth in minutes. More popcorn.

Expand full comment

Which neither party understood - they neither stood back nor by. He'd already promised them, "Be there. Will be wild." Now, that's a leader.

Expand full comment

TFFG will weasel out of any and all debates.

Expand full comment

If there were still any rules, he wouldn't have to. And let's remember that according to the Big Lie, he's already on his second presidency .

Expand full comment

(And which wife - when it gets up to three a little confusion is understandable in an elderly man)

Expand full comment

I would be shocked out of my toe socks if there is a “debate.” Please don’t hold your breath!

Expand full comment

I hate to say it, because I like Biden, but his leadership in the Senate's Judiciary Committee has responsibility for allowing Thomas to sit on SCOTUS. How naïve were they to let the pubic hair on the coke can slide?? Why in the HELL did the Senate allow drunk sexual abuser Kavanaugh wear the robe? What were they thinking when the Senate took his and Coney Barrett's word that they would respect precedence? Are they all secret concerned Senator Collinses?

Expand full comment

Keeping Bork from the seat on SCOTUS was the most important consideration, as I remember. As for Kavanaugh, don’t we look at Republicans and the Heritage Foundation? That’s another institution that must be brought to heel. How do we fight Leo and all that money? How do we get fair taxation? Time for a blue Congress to undo Putin/Trump.

Expand full comment

My suspicion, but I need to keep it to myself for now.

Expand full comment

Why do you need to stay mum? Does Susan Collins read your blog? None of my business, just curious.

Expand full comment

I don't want to say anything, here or anywhere, that might lead to a Dem vote being lost, that's all.

Expand full comment

Let’s start this Tuesday if you live in a Super Tuesday state. You will get the media’s attention with a huge turnout instead of the usual 10% Usvotefoundation.org

or your local town official website has tons of info. Turn in your mail in ballot today. Think of your children and grandchildren.

Expand full comment

The bigger the win, the better. We already know Trump and his minions will claim they actually won the election, but a huge win -- HUGE -- makes that harder for "the silent majority" to believe their lies. Don't forget that 70% of All Republicans believe Biden won in a not-quite-kosher election. 70% of All Republicans.

Biden needs a blow-out.

Expand full comment

Biden has to win big. Remember, Hilary won 3 million more popular votes than Trump, but he still won.

Expand full comment

Nor the Constitution.

Expand full comment

We are fast becoming a country who reneges on their pledges. We assured Ukraine assistance if attacked. Now what is happening? I would not want to have the republican party as a partner in war. When the tough gets going, they would leave me hanging. They do not have my back.

Expand full comment

I am astonished that my fellow peeps in the reality-based community keep falling into this trap. Remember how Superman of Integrity Robert Mueller was going to vanquish the monster for us? (Didn't happen. Wasn't gonna happen.) The legal system and rule of law not going to save us. We are going to save the rule of law. Remember, the saying is: "A republic, if you can keep it." Not: "A Republic, if you can keep it, unless you don't trust your fellow citizens enough and would like an easy Hollywood way out, in which case Jack Smith and his crack team of Super Lawyers will save it for you through sheer smarts!"

The current Supreme Court should always be counted on to do the wrong thing. Every single time. Any exceptions are a red herring. If you actually thought they weren't gonna mess this one up because it was so obvious, I dunno what to tell y'all.

Expand full comment

Will, Contrary to your view, my understanding is that the Founders sought to establish structures of government and to balance their powers in a way meant to protect the country from the misdeeds and machinations of any one branch. It is of note that they understood the need for constant checks and balances against the excesses of any one power center and enacted such. Regrettably, one thing they didn’t anticipate was a Congress and judiciary subsumed under the dictates of a presumptive presidential nominee eager to consolidate power, wherein the rule of law could be subjugated to an individual.

Admittedly, given said fatal weakening of American civic institutions, despite our founders best efforts to enlist guardrails, we’re all we have left to try and protect the remnants of democracy we’ve managed to preserve.

Expand full comment

All true. No one anticipated an Impeachment Trail so crooked that the Articles Impeachment did not stand a chance of an open and fair hearing. Not once but twice. A DOJ afraid of its own shadow. Then a Supreme Court packed with Right Winged Justices. In the meanwhile, Republican Congressional Leaders saying the Judicial System will sort the Trump mess out. Guess not. Too much for one branch of government to untangle.

We got fat, dumb and happy and now our way of life, the shining citadel on the hill, may live in darkness until we vote democracy back in power. They say we are sleepwalking into Fascism. For many it’s a nightmare unfolding before our very eyes. Congress members washing their hands of the mess they dodged and now blaming others.

Handwashing and blame shifting has only but begun. This is only going to get uglier and uglier until MAGA draws its last breath and vacates their offices of political power.

Expand full comment

Joe, Your synopsis of how we got here, however painful, also could be instructive, amplifying that no one any longer can just sit and wait and watch. Instead, we must train ourselves, acquire enough knowledge and strength to resist falling prey to the adage There’s nothing to be done because nothing can be done.

Expand full comment

Agreed & Thank You. So much is at stake and the ticking clock of the electoral calendar favors another go at a federal general election. Here is hoping democracy wins over fascism once again. 🙏🙏🙏

Expand full comment

Joe, As for hope, I take heart from the presence of virtually every participant in this forum. I am grateful for the daily reminder that none of us is alone in this fight.

Expand full comment

CONservatives have always reacted very badly when the justice department comes after them. The DOJ was founded to combat the KKK. When it has gone after congressional members, it has always been vilified. Read PREQUEL, where seditionists in congress walked.

Expand full comment

"For many it is a nightmare unfolding before our very eyes."

Expand full comment

While I agree with you BJK in terms of the ideals of the framers of the structure of government in the Constitution, that structure, and Democracy itself (which the actually did not want, btw), has always been dependent on (as Blanche Dubois said) "the kindness of strangers." What I mean by that is that the judiciary has been coopted by the Forces of Evil numerous times in the 250 or so years of the USA--Dred Scott? Silence or agreement with the Indian Removal Acts? The entire era of Andrew Jackson? Virtually all the antebellum laws governing enslaved people? The anti-humanist, anti-egalitarian, anti-female, anti-democracy systems were embedded in our country from its inception by people who really preferred an oligarchy to a true democracy, and used everyone's reverence for the Roman Republic (which was an oligarchy, make no mistake about that) as a way of introducing antidemocratic systems into the mix. And the life-term judiciary is an excellent example of that. The only way those systems get dragged, kicking and screaming, into modernity is through the action of citizens, who vote out the totalitarians, the bigots, the misogynists, and replace them with others, DESPITE a rampantly reactionary judiciary. We have been unfortunate in that our electorate is now significantly less well educated (TFG "loves the poorly educated") and far less savvy about what is actually going on, than at any other time in our history. Despite the lower access to public education in the past, the educational systems in place 50 years ago and farther back actually taught stuff. That changed under Shrubby Bush. So now we are dependent on the actions of people we hope desperately will figure it out and show these [4 syllable expletive] the door. But we also know that many of them will remain in place to do their dirty work.

There is a good reason why the "Cato Institute" calls itself that, although claiming to be "Libertarian" is an oxymoron, as Cato was anything but a libertarian. He was the model for 20th-century Italian fascism. Rome was not a "democracy" of any kind. The word "democracy" comes from the Greek demos=people and cratos=rule. Republic comes from Latin: res=stuff (literally: things, stuff, business), publica=out in the open, public. So it doesn't refer to an actual political structure you can hang your hat on. It means the stuff people (read: men of a certain elite social class) do in public. That can be anything. So that is where we are.

Expand full comment

Linda, I learn so much from your comments. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Linda, great synopsis. Thank you for that assessment of how we got where we are, and acknowledging that our foundation is based in oligarchy, not democracy. We've tried like heck to make it democratic, but the oligarchs are winning.

Expand full comment

Sigh. Alas, yes. And there was no Cornelia (mother of the Gracchi and daughter of Scipio Africanus) to smack people upside the head for being dumbasses, although Abigail Adams did try. There was a very good reason why Cato hated her (and her sons).

Expand full comment

Linda, While I don’t dispute your knowledgeable and well-reasoned commentary, overall, we do hold different views of a then-revolutionary promise of a Republic convened in 1787. My understanding is that its founders, generally speaking, desperately desired representative government by popular consent, albeit initially white male property owners. As for its evolution, as with virtually all of America’s historical movements that have met with repeated frustration and failure, one idea wherein our roots have remained fundamentally grounded is that we can be better.

Hence, however bad things are at any given moment, I bank on our galvanizing a critical mass to work as well as we can to shape a more generous common future.

Expand full comment

Thomas should recuse himself from any discussion based on his conflict of interest with his low-life wife. And why hasn't Thomas been indicted for tax evasion? He should have declared the written off loan with Crowe as income.

Expand full comment

Gary, While holding Thomas accountable is necessary, because we’re so far down the rabbit hole, said remedies are not nearly sufficient. Accordingly, I’m beyond expecting anyone but ourselves to resuscitate the roots of our democracy.

Expand full comment

he will never recuse. NEVER.

Expand full comment

Where's my laugh emoji? Thomas recusing would be an admission his wife is a criminal since he is too, he'll keep up the con.

Expand full comment

Barbara, I typically appreciate and often agree with Will's opinions, but today's rang with a cynicism that I believe *was* unfounded (at least until yesterday's decision to grant cert.). You are correct, in that we were right to have faith in the system that has served us for so long.

Sadly, we can no longer depend on the institutions, as they are crumbling. It's up to us to buttress them by our votes -- both you and Will are right in that regard.

Expand full comment

Will, you are correct. Democracy is not a spectator governing system. Those of us that have faith in the rule of law have been confident that would always be the case, while the conservatives and libertarians have been plotting the Lewis Powell Memo implementation. Just look at how the conservatives have been assaulting the law through the courts. They are working to strike down the administrative state that keeps order in the country and prevents exploitive actions.

Expand full comment

We may yet see that mf in jail. But we have to make sure he goes to trial. Sadly, it won't happen before Biden is re-elected.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

He is literally going to trial and facing time in less than a month in NY. There is also no reason at least one of the other cases would not be heard this summer.

Furthermore, there is no reason that Scotus *has to* rule on this at the end June. Even if they waited until then, and the judge in DC chose not to expedite, the trial would at least be ongoing by the election, which would be a nice little continuing reminder to voters.

Expand full comment

Don't depend on the courts to dampen support for him. We need to actively work to defeat him at the ballot box.

Expand full comment

Will, Americans are not ready to admit that something sinister has completely replaced one entire branch of government; “that can’t be, we have laws!!!” And yet here we are, with judges who cannot even say out loud that “no president is above the law”. Succumbing to Illegitimate Authority will increase

Expand full comment

Like but don’t agree about Mueller

Expand full comment

the CONservatives worked to undermine him from the start. No amount of evidence would change their minds.

Expand full comment

Will, The Gang of Six did not mess up this decision. It is going exactly as planned, as they were hired to do. Giving them benefit of the doubt for getting their homework wrong simply acknowledges that The Republic has already been stolen; we just don’t know it yet

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

Will, here's the problem as i see it: the only control the electorate has over SCOTUS' decision making is who we elect to the Senate and Presidency. The Prez picks and the Sen confirms, so the only remedy now is to vote the bluest progressives we can run into those offices. Use a hopefully 60-seat majority in the Senate to get rid of or severely limit the use of the filibuster. Expand the Supremes to counteract the disingenuity of the Trump picks.

If we can also flip the House, pass fed laws to preserve the original language of the Voting Rights Act, make a law that absolutely places health care decisions in the hands of the people whose health is at stake. Ban assault weapons permanently (why did the Brady bill expire anyway?), Make a law that automatically expands the debt ceiling as needed.

At the state level vote in legislators and judges that will put districting into the control of non-partisan bodies.

Get Whitmer and Shapiro or maybe Bashear Inslee, or Newsom lined up to run for the top spot in '28. These are things only voters can do. Once those offices are filled, we have much less power over how they legislate or decide anything.

Expand full comment

Yes, we should not be waiting for "something to happen" that will remove citizen trump from the scene. We should be organizing, writing our letters and postcards, seeking like friends, calling out disinformation and Putin, and showing up to vote or help run elections, with friends in hand.

Expand full comment

Agree with you, Will.

Saving democracy is our herculean task. And we can do it. The ocean consists of drops of water. That's us in October/November.

Expand full comment

In fact, isn't it a good idea to have checks and balances on every officer of government?

Expand full comment

We can win big if we mobilize in our communities to register voters, remind them to vote, support honest election officials, and do all we can to actively defeat MAGA candidates and Trump.

Expand full comment

"...wake up to the reality that the system has been hijacked and begin to reclaim their government. "

When they do wake up to that reality, it'll be forward march. Bravo, Hunter Biden, and those who reported.

Expand full comment

Indeed Ann, that would be the favorite quote from our dear doctor that I would have highlighted, and just so, on it's own to stand so ably. Brava ~

Expand full comment

"We need to fight back. What are the ways open to us?"

This from our rural Maine Hancock County Democratic Committee (city folk can adapt items to their circumstances.) Where we've helped elect and keep in office a Democratic House candidate from a Congressional District which went for Trump twice.

Build Community and Organizing: Join your city/town, county, and state Democratic committees. Be a state delegate to the state Democratic convention. Get on board with the League of Women voters and with voter registration drives.

Get Democrats elected:

Ballot petitions. Clean elections. Yard/house parties. Sign brigades. Drive team to help local candidates canvass your area. Parades, walk with your candidate. Event info tabling crew. Post card crew. Canvass crew. Calls & texts team.

And I'd add.

1. Attend local government meetings. Participate. Volunteer for committees. And consider running for office.

2. And if you are older, be allies to the next generations of candidates.

***FIGHT FOR RANKED CHOICE VOTING AT EVERY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT***

Expand full comment

With rank choice, I see advantages, but until the money need is removed nothing matters.

Expand full comment

I agree that reversing the perversion of "Citizens United" is paramount. The oligarchs are fueling the fringe to extract more power and money from the peasants. Feudalism on steroids.

But RCV is a completely different project that addresses two issues effectively. It negates the corrosive impact of a third party spoiler. And it expands our ability to build on a minority vision. I would love to vote for a "Green" ticket to express my alarm at a Planet being destroyed - but not if it means a Democrat losing to a "CONservative".

That's just what happened in Maine. An independent spoiled the governors race. The "Con" won with just 36% of the vote. TWICE! We suffered through eight years of embarrassment, and the dismantling of intelligent government programs. After we moved away to MA, the state wisely adopted RCV. And is now led by a very intelligent and experienced Democrat. (BTW, the "independent" who spoiled the election TWICE was recently busted for child porn.)

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

Yes. This, exactly

ThankYou (from CD2).

(Yup shout out to LePage's BFF Eliot Cutler. No surprise, abusively self indulgent in his public and private life.)

Expand full comment

Why is it always child porn with these freaking losers???

Expand full comment

Thank you for your information. I can see its benefits and it might just help with the money issue, but until that is gone......

Expand full comment

"until the money need is removed nothing matters"

RCV matters a lot!

One issue focus and defeatism are forms of voter suppression. Every step taken by every person matters. Every one.

Expand full comment

any move to weaken the money influence would help RCV could help, but like term limits, the need to raise money is the real problem. Read Pepper's book, if you have not. Spelled out rather clearly.

Expand full comment

There is no doubt that Citizens United has corrupted the political system in order to cement corporate power. This was set in motion by the 1971 Powell Memorandum, Justice Powell's decisions on the high court and Charles Koch's court capture through Leonard Leo, Mitch McConnell, and Donald Trump. But as important as that is, it is only one element of the problem. Tunnel vision suppresses taking useful steps to address other elements. Such as the GOP using racial data to institute racist gerrymanders, as per Thomas Hofeller. For one.

Expand full comment

"Tunnel vision suppresses taking useful steps to address other elements."

Expand full comment

The Dems were out spent the off year election last fall, when Kochscum desperately tried to keep our school board they lost Billy. I don't think the old money rules necessarily apply. And all the rethug money is going to drumpf inept lawyers.

Expand full comment

'drumpf inept lawyers.'

Please do not underestimate anything that has to do with Trump. His lawyer in the Georgia case is actually a respected pit bull defense lawyer. And not all of 'drumpf's' lawyers are arguing before the bench. Many are sitting on the bench.

Expand full comment

Not necessarily. As you say, ranked choice has many advantages. It worked in Alaska and now voters will decide whether to keep it or not with opposition led by, of course, Sarah Palin.

Expand full comment

But of course she's leading that crusade. I hope it dies on the vine.

Expand full comment

I have a friend who did all the things you outline, lin+, for 15 years in New Mexico. I worked with her there until I moved to Mexico in '21. She's currently buying a house in Costa Rica. I'm not saying our work (more hers than mine) was utterly useless, but it is an enormous uphill slog, and it often fails because of the ignorance and/or bigotry of our neighbors.

I think we have to educate our young people to think critically and wait for the older generations to die out. I'm a boomer from Chicago, and I remember the street fighting and police overreach at the '68 democratic convention. The severe issues we face today began with Nixon's southern strategy and got consolidated by Reagan's affiliations and policies. We can't unwind a top that started spinning 75 years ago in one or two election cycles. Maybe we should use our campaign funds to hire the inception team. Too bad Christopher Nolan's a Brit, or we could run him for President.

Grass roots activism is important and to be nurtured, but the most important initiative is to get everyone to observe the golden rule and mind their own business. I have never understood why anyone cares what goes on in someone else's bedroom, for example. What other people get up to privately has zero effect on my life, and is therefore not my concern. America needs a citizenry that is passionate about Emma Lazarus-style justice - welcome everyone and leave personal bias out of the equation. After all, leftist extremism is every bit as intrusive and inappropriate as rightist.

Expand full comment

Yes. A slog.

It took racist right wing religious extremists decades of hard work at every level of government to remake the GOP in their image.

Expand full comment

I 'spose if they can do it, so can we. Thank you for your dedication to the cause. And as you characterize those righties responsible for the current pickle, we on the left have to guard against our social justice warriors making everything about nomenclature and perceived misogyny and racism. Words and attitudes matter, but extremism in any cause is a pain in the ass. Also destructive to the obtainable goals of a progressive agenda.

Expand full comment

Some of you may have noticed that I have been writing screeds against this Supreme Court for at least two years. Now, they have once again, shown that they are one of the major, if the not THE major threat to democracy in America. Yesterday, they announced that Trump’s crimes should not be prosecuted before the election. They told Jack Smith to go sit in the corner; they were not going to let him get to their man Trump. I wonder how much influence Clarence had on that decision. Almost every problem that has divided and upset America has either been created or encouraged by this court. Women’s rights, voting rights, workers’ rights, guns for everyone, ok to destroy the environment, their religion over the Constitution, rich people win, poor people lose -always, and many more. They can take bribes if they wish. They can openly support the insurrection and protect the person who lead it. Who is going to stop them?

It needs to be us. We need to begin to do it now. We need to take down this court, peacefully but firmly. It won’t be easy, since they are protected by the Constitution that they often choose not to follow. Send emails and letters to every Congressperson, newspaper, web site, including state legislators and local organizations. Repeat this every day. Otherwise, no matter who gets elected, this court will continue to ruin the country.

Expand full comment

oaitw, I made the argument in 2016 that the election was nominally for President, but was really about the Supreme Court. I hate it that I was right, and I have nothing but disdain for the "Bernie Bros" and the "Unicorn Wishers" who still say their "principles" were more important in that election that the SCROTUS that we have today.

Expand full comment

I hope to find your post tomorrow, to add some conclusions to flesh out a bit more, perhaps add some of the insights I suspected beginning in 1991, that have grown to more as the years have passed. I just am too spent to offer more this late evening. Your outline though is correct Alex; we yet have much to do.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

What the Supreme Court has put on its docket is the most basic question of all: Do we have, in John Adams’ words, a government of laws and not of men?

Expand full comment

If the November elections go the way HCR hints at, Democrats might have enough of a majority in the Senate to eliminate the filibuster and add five more Justices to the Supreme Court. While they’re at it, they could consider imposing ethics rules on said court.

Expand full comment

Id love to have been a fly on the wall to hear what the liberal members of the Court had to say about this. It does sound like a torpedo effort by the right-wing majority. But i also like what Lawrence O'Connell said, he had no doubt that Trump would NOT become president. I get the impression Heather is almost suggesting as much. AND, she's implicitly issuing a clarion call for voter turnout plus. For sure on flooding SCOTUS "with outrage"! I can't, as a foreign national that'd be election interference, literally. The LAST thing most Canadians want is Trump 2.sick. Not that we don't have MAGA aspirationalists in the country.

Expand full comment

Alexandra I am flooding. A tidal wave.

Thank you....

Expand full comment

Letters of outrage addressed to whom? How can we the little people let this extreme court know how out of line they are? Can only attorneys file amicus briefs? Can law students? Deluge the SC with them!!! Protest outside the building ! When Biden wins, I wonder if these justices have thought about what happens then? Their reputations in the annals of law will be trashed & Roberts court will be looked down forever in the hx books.

Expand full comment

I think the Roberts court is pretty immune to public opinion. If they weren't they couldn't overlook the corruption in their own ranks or have ever decided as they did on Dobbs. Or the Voting Rights Act. Or Citizens United.

Expand full comment

Your voice counts. Still or yet. Support Jon Tester.

Expand full comment

ps.

Another reminder of why we fight back. I've belatedly learned of Project 2025 (from a Commenter here, ThankYou.) Sounds like a Teneo Network production. I'm playing catch up here.

From Greg Olear.

Project 2025: The "Cowboy Catholic" & the Conservative Counter-Reformation

https://open.substack.com/pub/gregolear/p/project-2025-the-cowboy-catholic?r=dvsxz&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

Expand full comment

It is frightening. The list of the supporting groups is a Dark Money trail.

Expand full comment

This is a brilliant comment to go along with Heather’s incredibly well-reasoned column today. We are so lucky to have her putting out these summaries night after night without missing a beat.

The news about SCOTUS feels like a breaking point for me -- one way or another. I am no scholar of jurisprudence but their brazen decision yesterday has got to be one of the worst the American Supreme Court has inflicted on its citizens in history.

Not only did they decide to hear the case, they waited a substantial amount of time before they announced it.

Not only did they inflict that delay, they held back hearings until April 22.

Not only did they delay the case that long, they reframed the question so that the question will be heard in its broadest sense. This means that the clock will not automatically start ticking on July 1 (should Trump lose - not a safe bet). By framing it this broadly, it invites a challenge to be brought as to whether Trump is guilty in some aspect of their decision. This would be heard by a lower court, presumably during the summer.

It is safe to conclude that NO case except the Manhattan one will be heard by the court before the election. In other words Trump got his Get Out of Jail Free card yesterday.

I am disheartened beyond belief. Like Alexandra I feel that Americans who care about their country should mobilize against the Court in a way that is unprecedented in scope. We now know that the rot in the Supreme Court knows no bounds and could care less about American democracy. Five judges were needed to call for the case to be heard. Those five promptly showed up.

The foundations of American democracy are being whittled away piece by piece. The Supreme Court is simply one example. The other side is emboldened to hack away at the tree, not at night when we are watching, but right in front of us as well. They have (correctly) observed Trump’s success in mowing down accepted principles of a liberal democracy and have concluded that no action is to brazen to ignite outrage and thus be stopped.

And the Democrats? In the blink of an eye Biden has gone from being a stunningly effective politician to a demented old man. This characterization has long been a push point for the Republicans, but now the poison has seeped into the tent, and fearful Democrats are playing with the idea and giving it more fuel.

Ezra Klein of the NYT has framed an entire series of podcasts around the idea that Biden should be replaced. His rationale is both two-faced and hair splitting - it seems that Biden is not too old to be a great President, but IS too old to campaign effectively. Klein is extremely influential and he has pushed the Democratic Party into a corner exactly when it most needs to unify behind Biden. Clicks for him and love from the scared sheep. Lovely. It comes just when we need to mount a furious assault on every aspect of the Republican Party. Instead we are sitting around like a group of Chickens Littles, fretting about Biden’s age, blackmailing him by holding back votes in the Michigan primary, fretting about other ways he is apparently losing this election.

Enough. Enough. We’ve been fucked over by a prissy, frightened AG who held back investigation of Trump’s insurrection in such a way that Republican lawyers and the Supreme Court simply had to exploit the yawning holes in the legal system to free Trump forever. All he has to do now is win. He undoubtedly has multiple ways of cheating to win the election, but now he is getting our help.

America, you are fast reaching the stage where you deserve to lose your democracy. I apologize for ranting to the choir. I know this is a fighting group here. But the Democratic elite and its base are a disgrace. Biden does not deserve to be savaged from behind when he is the last hope left to slay Goliath.

Expand full comment

Yes , you are right when you say we have to fight back, “ to do something “.Writing and calling our Congresspeople and the media are good ideas.I don’t know what else we could do either but we need to get a plan.Voting in gargantuan numbers is a must so that the numbers will wither Trumps claim of “ Witch Hint” and voter fraud which we know will certainly happen if he loses.What do others here think?

Expand full comment

I agree that voter turnout is essential. Dems have always won when there were massive numbers of voters, Messaging is good, but voters are better.

Expand full comment

I would like to know the specific judges that voted to take the case. It took at least 5. So, who are they? I know Alito and Thomas are two of the at least 5. However, I also wonder how much their taking the case shows real fear of the crowd that backs Trump. They were so afraid of the protesters against their abortion decision that they had extra security and barricades put up around the court. They all have homes and families which I am sure are being threatened. In every way possible it is politically more dangerous to be a Republican with fascist treacherous-treasonous-traitor-Trump capturing and galvanizing the crazies of this country, of which there are way too many. I will send a letter of outrage to SCOTUS, but would like more details if they are available.

Expand full comment

Only 4 are required to ensure the case is heard. Alito and Thomas are given. I wonder if the SC pulled another ruling like the Colorado one where even the liberals on the Court supported letting the voters decide.

It’s not just the decision to hear Trump’s motion, it’s dragging it out that’s so revealing and the willingness to let one of their own (Thomas) flout the need to recuse.

Voters in November will need to protect Democracy. The Supreme Court has chosen to play Pontius Pilate.

Expand full comment

The Pontius Pilate comment is brilliant Paul.

I wonder if a minority of white faux-Christian Nationalists think Pontius Pilate is an exercise program? /S

Expand full comment

OK, Gary, that is good. Portentous Pilates?

Expand full comment

This morning Joyce Vance discussed this. What she said is, "We don’t know how a specific Justice votes on a cert grant. But we do know that at least five Justices voted to hear this case because while it only takes four votes to grant cert, it take five to grant a stay, and the Court’s order, above, continues the stay in the trial court while the appeal is underway." So, that is why I said, at least 5 justices. I would like to know who they are. I hope that someone has access to this information. Of course, is the leak guarded? Are the members of SCOTUS getting personal threats or to their family members? It is highly likely given the modus operandi of Quadruple-T (Treacherous-Treasonous-Traitor-Trump)!

Expand full comment

It took 5 votes to keep in place the stay, holding Smith’s prosecution in abeyance.

More clear evidence that they are giving voters the chance to vote to give us Barabas.

Expand full comment

Frame that closing sentence.

Meanwhile, in the House...

Expand full comment

I don't think the issue is so much that SCOTUS opted to take the case, but that they're slow walking it. They could have decided to hear oral arguments next week and made a decision by the end of March. That's according to notably conservative Judge Luttig on Deadline Whitehouse yesterday.

Expand full comment

I am not sure. I think the fact that they imply that it has merits and they are ready to override what states have said about their ballots is big. I can see why they would slow walk it, because the appearance of haste is not going to appease the crazy crowd that follows Trump. Since they are unappeasable, I wonder why we are still trying. I am glad I am not an elected official when Putin's Partner Trump is trying to run our country just like Putin has been doing to carry on the Soviet Union dictatorship in Russia. These autocrats want what they want and are used to getting it. Trump is no different. He has his hatchet-people willing to die to kill for him. He is the treacherous-treasonous-traitor-Trump!

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

I understand your frustration and ire, Linda. I share them. If it helps, I tell myself that yesterday's decision doesn't imply anything about their eventual decision. I think it's more likely they'll go with the 11th District's finding than give double 0 45 (reference to James Bond, but also he's a double nothing) a license to kill, I imagine they want their stamp on it, both because it's a momentous constitutional case and because they maybe hope to recover some of their credibility by slapping it down, Not Thomas or Alito, of course, but I'll take a 7-2 finding against it and laugh at the contortions T & A go through in their dissent.

In the alternative, it will give Biden permission to take out a hit on the hideous gasbag and everyone else that stands in his administration's way. Not that kindly old Uncle Joe would do such a thing, but I enjoy the image of him in his aviator shades driving his BMW 3 by Maralardo, AK blazing.

Maybe then the Congressional MAGAts will be afraid of him and restore the Brady bill.

Expand full comment

They may have overplayed their hand this time and it is our job as citizens to take it on. We can no longer rely on the courts and justice system. VOTEBLUE

Expand full comment

When a respected judge like Michael Luttig says there’s no basis whatsoever for the Supreme Court to hear Trump’s immunity claim, four chilling words come to mind: The fix is in.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

I think this forum is massively overestimating how much this court cares about tfg and the election (little, if at all), and massively underestimating the need these incredibly self-important people have to be the final word on everything (all-consuming). They frequently hand down unanimous or lopsided decisions that reaffirm a lower court. Why bother taking that case then? Because they can and need to always remind us of that.

They will most likely hand down a near-unanimous ruling that the President is not a king, and the applause and attention this will get will create a briefly distracting sentiment of "see, *sometimes* they rule for the other side!" right before they rule that machine guns are OK in public parks or declaring the real purpose of the EPA is to send Exxon Valentines or whatever insanely destructive crap they have up their sleeves this year.

Expand full comment

Will, I find one significant lapse in an otherwise well-reasoned argument. Were the High Court solely invested in having the last word, it simply would have agreed, via the required 4 votes, to hear the case. Instead, despite the option just to take the case but not grant the stay, there had to be a 5th vote to admit the stay, allowing for a continuation of the pause on all pre-trial proceedings. Said delay virtually ensures the case won’t be tried before the election.

Expand full comment
Feb 29·edited Feb 29

I mean, correct me if I am wrong, but it would seem a bit unworkable to me to allow a case to proceed to trial when the central pre-trial question has yet to be decided. It would be like putting something in the oven and *then* checking the cookbook to make sure you were not missing an ingredient. They should have dismissed this entirely, but I feel like they would have to dismiss the case or accept it *and* grant stay, no?

Expand full comment

Will, In response to your comment, I would note, while claims of immunity were being decided, that certain pre-trial filings (i.e., arguments over requests for documents and records or over appeals for preventing certain witnesses from testifying) could still move forward to keep the case on track to meet its scheduled trial date. Additionally, precedent exists for matters like claims of immunity to be heard post-conviction on appeal.

Expand full comment

So . . . Gorsuch , Kavanaugh (I’m still wondering who paid off his credit card & mortgage debts) & Barrett have repaid their debt to tRUmp, and, along with Thomas (he’ll never recuse) & Alito are looking to install “il Duce!”

Expand full comment

Alito will likely write the opinion quoting medieval writings from some obscure theologian.

Expand full comment

In his (hopefully) dissent, he would point out that *originally* the Founding Father's were loyal English subjects to a mad king.

Expand full comment

May Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Barrett and Kavanaugh burn in hell with Mitch, Trump and all the MAGATS in Congress. Did I miss anyone?

Expand full comment

...and once he's elected, both Alito & Thomas will promptly retire in order to make sure there are 2 more Repugnants on the (un)Supreme Court and there will be no more justice in this country.

Expand full comment

And, would they be willing to Crown Biden?

Expand full comment

My faith in even the overweening egos of the SC is waning.

Expand full comment

Oh, there are some intense egos there, to be sure.

Expand full comment

Hmm. My faith in the overweening egos of the SC is waxing.

Expand full comment

Interesting take, Will. Your last paragraph is a zinger!

Expand full comment

Agreed. The SCOTUS justices must realize they would become nothing more than a MAGA rubber stamp should DT and his supporters re-take control of the executive branch, no matter how invested 6 of them are in the current culture wars.

Expand full comment

The federalist society bought SCOTUS justices are showing that they are supporting Trump and his fascism!

Expand full comment

Once again proving that a minority (the small guy, the weak, the underappreciated, the brilliant autocrat) can and will win over the evil that we are ( goodness, integrity, actually live by the intent of the laws we pass, affect,fairness).

Expand full comment

Later in the program Neal Katyal advanced the idea that the Supreme Court may feel compelled to rule because, in the Mar-a-lago case, 45 has claimed immunity as well.

Expand full comment

But SCROUTS could have just affirmed the very solid decision of the appellate court which would have made it apply nationwide.

Instead, the corrupt partisan hacks on the Robert’s Kangaroo court played Cheetolini’s game and delayed any chance of justice.

They are BEYOND contempt and utterly undeserving of respect.

Expand full comment

Plus they could have heard the case next week. But they are probably going on a retreat to Fiji on some billionaires's dime.

Expand full comment

Neal Katyal said that the appellate court ruling would not apply nationally.

Expand full comment

That’s correct. The appellate decision was in relation to the facts in the DC case.

An interesting aspect of today’s Order is that they dismissed Trump’s application for a stay as moot. Rather, they directed the Appellate Court to continue to withhold their mandate until the Supremes “send down” their judgment. One of their criteria for granting a stay is that a majority believe there is substantial likelihood the appellant would prevail on the merits if cert is granted. By dismissing the application for stay as moot, they explicitly state that they are not “expressing a view on the merits.”

Expand full comment

Do you think that might also mean that they didn’t have the 5 votes needed for a stay, but were desperate to delay the trial and this was what they came up with?

Expand full comment

Just a guess, but I’d like to believe that there aren’t five who think it’s likely to succeed on the merits. Had they granted a stay (as requested in this application) there might have been a en banc appeal delay and then another delay for an application for cert.

Expand full comment

Exactly. Thus Scrotus could/should have simply affirmed it, thus making it apply nationwide.

Expand full comment

I don't get how immunity would apply in the classified documents case. He wasn't president when he refused to return the documents.

Expand full comment

Neal didn’t elaborate—I would imagine that it might apply to his taking them down there in the first place.

Expand full comment

TFFG's lawyer's claim that he removed the documents while he was still President.

They are not arguing that he has immunity from prosecution for the obstruction claims.

And the other two doofeses will likely spend a considerable amount of time behind bars. TFFG may be forced to pick out his own clothes or maybe Mercedes will do it for him. /S

Expand full comment

I heard Judge Luttig say this, right after the Supreme Court published their decision to hear the Trump appeal. It was clear that this esteemed legal scholar, whom I certainly admire, was and is profoundly troubled by the Supreme Court's willingness to engage with this Trump case. It remains to be seen , of course, but it may result in many of the legal charges against Trump being washed away like soap suds in your morning shower.

Expand full comment

Judge Luttig, like the rest of us, keeps learning that this Supreme Court is like no other. Norms? What norms?

Expand full comment

And we are in a fix. Unbelievable.

Expand full comment

I think you’re right, unfortunately 😡

Expand full comment

... "We" herein doubted that for one hot second ?

Expand full comment

Totally corrupt, the Clarence court.

The three recent Federalist Society justices perjured themselves in their nomination hearings. They joined Alito, Roberts, and Clarence, who in 2010 gave U.S. billionaires their Citizens United. The six together sicced American women and their families to Handmaid’s Tale tyranny.

These billionaires already killed humanities in America’s schools. Offshored millions of working-class jobs. Allied worldwide with dictators and nationalists. Grew the gap between the U.S. richest 1% and its 99%.

To the evident perjury, bribery, and corruption for U.S. billionaires, we can now add the court’s illiteracy, as it cannot read the clear English of section three, article 14 in the Constitution to which its justices all swore oaths.

U.S. Dems still cue Pollyanna strategists such as Simon Rosenberg, whose whistling how Republicans are “imploding” excuses Dems to do no more than their status quo of ringing doorbells, phoning, floating postcards.

No. Our best Dems – many of them – need to unite and appear in public, in groups of three and four, and quote, celebrate each other’s recent and current work. There’s so much to be done while the U.S. throws away democracy to the billionaires and their Clarence court.

Expand full comment

It's not the current Court that is corrupt. The entire Republican't party is corrupt. They have no interest in governing, despite that being the reason they were ostensibly elected. The are unable to craft legislation, or even to discuss compromising on legislation that others have crafted. They threw out the compromise that the Senate painstakingly put together. And why? After having maintained for ages that something needed to be done to address the chaos at our southern border, they nixed the plan so that Trump could run on immigration. Not, it is not just the Court that is corrupt, When a political party becomes a cult, putting their oath to the Constitution, the good of the country, and their former party's long-held principles in the trash for the good of one man (add your own adjectives), the rot is total.

Expand full comment

"When a political party becomes a cult . . . for the good of one man."

I'm guessing, Betsy, that one man is Putin.

Expand full comment