Category Archives: Morning tease

The Monday Morning Teaser

In this morning’s featured post, I try to find the bright side in the ridiculous complexity of the Trump trials: four criminal indictments, additional civil suits, various numbers of co-conspirators, nearly 100 counts, state vs. federal procedures, civil vs criminal procedures, does the 14th Amendment ban him from running, and so on.

What a legal education we’re getting, eh?

I find myself turning into something of a law nerd. So this week I loved federal Judge Steve Jones’ denial of Mark Meadows’ motion to remove his case from Georgia state courts to federal courts. Jones took something I’d seen lawyers arguing about on TV and explained it in a way that actually makes sense. And Fani Willis’ explanation of federalism in her well-researched takedown of Jim Jordan’s attempt to intimidate her? Priceless!

I think that’s the attitude we need to take: For the next year or so, we’re not going to be able to follow the news without learning a bunch of law, so let’s try to see that as a feature rather than a bug. That’s the attitude I try to take in “We’re all in law school now”, which summarizes this week’s far-flung Trump legal developments. It should be out maybe around 10 EDT.

As for the weekly summary: The biggest news this week is the Moroccan earthquake, but I’m not equipped to cover it. So I’ll just remind you about it and point you somewhere else. The ongoing Covid resurgence looks manageable if you use common sense and get the updated vaccine when it comes out. But of course folks like DeSantis are urging their followers not to do either. I’ve finally decided I can’t ignore Tommy Tuberville any longer, so I’ll state my opinion: His promotion blockade isn’t about abortion at all, it’s about his outdated notion of masculinity. And Climate Change Summer appears to be rolling into Climate Change Fall. Elon Musk is blaming the Jews for his Twitter blunder. Right-wing indoctrination is continuing its creep into red-state public schools. And I still have to come up with a closing.

Let’s say that posts sometime after noon.

The Monday Morning Teaser

Rachel Maddow often advises us to ignore what Republicans say and watch what they do, because the two are often in conflict. This week, I point to one obvious application of her maxim: Trump’s response to his indictments.

He says that the indictments are all political shenanigans by partisan Democratic prosecutors, engineered by Joe Biden to interfere in the 2024 election. But if that’s true, there’s an obvious way he can counter: Get the cases into a courtroom as fast as possible, where his lawyers can poke holes in the Democrats’ ridiculous claims and fantastical theories. Then a jury of ordinary Americans can vindicate him with a quick, unanimous acquittal.

That outcome would turn the issue around in a hurry: Biden’s nefarious plots would be exposed for what they are, and Trump’s string of courtroom victories would propel him back into the White House.

But what he does is avoid trials any way he can: Delay the proceedings. Ask the courts to recognize his “absolute immunity” from prosecution. Get his followers in Congress to defund the Justice Department until it sidelines Jack Smith, and have Jim Jordan’s committee harass hostile local prosecutors like Alan Bragg and Fani Willis. Get Georgia to fire Willis. And if all else fails, send his loyal cultists into the streets, even to the point of “civil war”.

Anything to avoid letting a jury see the evidence against him and make a judgment. Especially before the election.

This week’s featured post will lay that saying/doing contradiction out in detail. It should be out around 10 EDT.

The weekly summary will mark Labor Day, point to the compassionate way Democrats have handled Mitch McConnell’s unfortunate freeze-up, review developments in the Trump trials, continue marking the disasters of Climate Change Summer, note the resemblance between the Republican message and Harold Hill’s, and cover a few other things before closing with one cartoonist’s view of the therapy Disney princesses need. That should be out before 1 this afternoon.

The Monday Morning Teaser

Wednesday, even I couldn’t make myself watch the Republican presidential debate. But I did eventually read the transcript, and what struck me was how the candidates are struggling to dress up their most unpopular position: banning abortion. They actually have a strategy, and it could work if nobody confronts them with the facts. So this week’s featured post will be “Republican candidates think they’ve found a way to pitch abortion bans”. It should be out between 9 and 10.

The weekly summary has to cover what was everywhere this week: Trump’s mug shot, the first one his career of crime has produced. The week’s other big story was in some sense the most predictable: Putin rival Yevgeny Prigozhin died in a plane crash. I don’t pretend to know what that portends for Russia’s future, but I’ll link to some people trying to figure it out.

Then there was the Republican debate in general, where a number of topics other than abortion were covered. This led to the bizarre ascent of Vivek Ramaswamy, who was on all the talk shows this weekend, saying all manner of absurd things. Ramaswamy is a challenge to our news system: He’s intentionally saying outrageous things to get attention, and it’s working. I’ll try to tell you what you need to know about him without falling into that trap. (Wish me luck.)

Also, a number of significant things are happening in the Trump trials this week, and especially today.

This week’s news calls for a goofy closing, so I found one: an amusing collection ways people have posed with statues and other famous landmarks. The Leaning Tower of Pisa, for some reason, is especially popular.

The Monday Morning Teaser

Last week Maui was the target of this summer’s apocalyptic weather. This week it’s Southern California. A tropical storm hit San Diego and Los Angeles yesterday, and it’s raining hard in Las Vegas. This never happens. Also this week, the capital of Canada’s Northwest Territory had to be evacuated due to wildfire.

Climate change isn’t something to debate about any more. You just have to open your eyes and see it.

As usual, though, I don’t cover breaking news. So this week’s featured post will take a step back from the Trump-indictment soap opera and look at the larger picture. Lots of Democrats are anxious about the 2024 election, but I’m optimistic. The featured post will explain why. It should be out around 10 EDT.

The weekly summary will point to stories about the weather, review the recent developments in the Trump trials, explain why I haven’t been paying much attention to the Hunter Biden investigations, and cover a few other things. It should be out a little after noon.

The Monday Morning Teaser

This week downtown Lahaina, which I visited many years ago, burned to the ground in a wildfire that started in dry grass and was driven by hurricane-force winds. It was the most devastating event yet in our Climate Change Summer, emphasizing yet again that we cannot simply go on this way.

The Sift leaves breaking news to organizations that have the resources to cover it, and information about the disaster is still coming out. (And the death toll is still rising.) So if I don’t say a lot about Maui, that doesn’t imply I don’t see the seriousness of the situation there.

Instead, my attention was caught this week by something that may seem trivial by comparison. In July, the Authoritarian State of Florida approved videos by the right-wing non-university Prager University for use in public elementary schools. PragerU Kids videos constitute precisely the kind of “indoctrination” Governor DeSantis claims to be against. They are slickly produced and probably quite effective at distorting kids’ views of history and the world we live in today.

One video in particular stood out for me: Two time-traveling kids from the present go back to 1852 to talk to Frederick Douglass about abolition, and come back with a negative view of Black Lives Matter protesters today. The Douglass in the video seemed nothing like the Douglass of history, and yet I know the Prager style: They cherry-pick and deceptively reframe history, but seldom lie outright. So how did they do this?

Via the internet, I took my own trip back to the 1800s so I could listen to Douglass (or at least read his speeches). What I found emphasizes (at least to me) how tricky the Prager people really are, and why it’s so dangerous to give them this kind of access to American children. The post “How Frederick Douglass became a conservative spokesman” should appear before 10 EDT.

That leaves the weekly summary a lot to cover: Maui, of course, but also developments in Trump’s various trials, a victory for reproductive rights in the red state of Ohio, other disturbing things we’re learning about Florida education as the new school year approaches, that viral brawl in Montgomery, and a variety of other news. That post should appear before 1.

The Monday Morning Teaser

So, I missed a week for personal reasons. Did anything happen while I was gone?

Well, Trump got indicted again — not once, but twice, if you count the superseding indictment in the Mar-a-Lago case. And the indictment for plotting to overturn the 2020 election is the one we’ve all been waiting for. In a life and career that has been full of law-breaking, this is the one I want Trump held accountable for. If he gets away with cheating on his taxes and paying off porn stars, that’s just normal billionaire crime. But trying to stay in office after losing an election is arguably the worst thing any American president has ever done (though the Japanese removal and crimes against Native Americans make me hesitate about that). I want him to go to jail for it.

So naturally, the featured post has to be about the new indictment, but I’ll try not to repeat the wall-to-wall coverage you’ve undoubtedly seen elsewhere. To me, the striking thing in this case — and in the other Trump trials — is that he isn’t really contesting the evidence. The arguments Trump supporters make are mostly ad hominem attacks against anyone who dares to investigate the Great Orange One.

In the featured post, then, I want to model how I think we should argue with Trump supporters: Let them rant about “deranged” prosecutors, “Trump haters”, “election interference”, and “What about Hunter?”. But keep drawing them back to the evidence: Is he guilty? Did he do the things he’s accused of? If he did commit these crimes, should he be above the law? That post should come out shortly.

I wanted to keep that post focused, so more general stuff about the indictments (the text, links to other people’s analysis, etc.) will be in the weekly summary. Also: tomorrow’s vote on Ohio’s ballot initiative, yet another good jobs report, the ongoing destruction of public education in Florida, the democracy crisis in Israel, and a few other things.

Plus: I wanted to do a longer report on the Heritage Foundation’s detailed plan for the next Republican administration (and I may yet next week). But I’ll at least mention it today.

The weekly summary should come out around noon EDT.

The Monday Morning Teaser

We remain on indictment watch. Trump has received a target letter from Jack Smith, and has refused the invitation to tell his side of the story to the DC grand jury investigating January 6. An indictment could come any day. It’s tempting to speculate about what that indictment will say, and lots of commentators are giving in to that temptation. As I’ve often said before: Go ahead and speculate if that activity engages you, but you could also just wait and see.

Today’s two featured posts are sort of similar: They both involve me reading a document so you don’t have to. The documents are (1) the new Florida standards for teaching African-American history, and (2) the “Common Sense” booklet outlining the platform of the No Labels Party.

The Florida standards have gotten a lot of well-deserved criticism this week for a couple of egregious lines, but the real problem is in the document as a whole: It wants to tell a no-villains story of American history. So it presents racism as a vague, amorphous, impersonal force, against which heroic Americans of all races have been struggling for centuries. Who exactly they struggled against — other Americans? surely not! — is a big empty spot.

I’ll explain that in more detail in the first featured post, which should be out soon.

A lot of my readers will probably wonder why I’m wasting their (and my) time on No Labels. I believe most of you are on the progressive side of the progressive/moderate split in the Democratic Party, so you’re probably not tempted at all by a group that plans to run to Joe Biden’s right. But the false-equivalence argument that both parties are equally bad appeals to a lot Americans, and I think we’re going to need to understand it during the 2024 campaign.

So the second featured post dives into the No Labels proposals. My conclusion is that their target voter is a moderate Democrat who watches too much Fox News. So they have very real disagreements with MAGA Republicans (about gun control, global alliances, and immigration), and more-or-less imaginary disagreements (about things like the Twitter files, cancel culture, and voter fraud) with Biden. That should be out around 11 EDT.

The weekly summary will cover the actual news (as opposed to speculation) related to Trump’s legal situation, the culture-war skirmishes over “Try That in a Small Town” and the Barbie movie, and a number of consequential things happening in other countries: Russia attacking Ukraine’s wheat exports, Israel preparing to disempower its supreme court, and a few other things. That should be out between noon and 1.

The Monday Morning Teaser

Yesterday I talked to friends who had recently relocated to a summer place in eastern Pennsylvania, where torrential rains have produced deadly flash floods. They came up from Florida, where a heat wave has pushed ocean temperatures into the mid-90s. Apocalyptic weather is pretty much everywhere this summer. You can’t get away from it.

In one of this week’s featured posts, I’ll argue that this summer could be a turning point in the political debate about climate change. Up until now, we have had our weather disasters one-by-one. Sure, there was a hurricane somewhere or a flood or a wildfire, and maybe it seemed unusual in one way or another. But fundamentally, in the perception of the average person, it was nothing new: There have always been hurricanes or floods or wildfires somewhere. You could argue that those disasters were becoming more frequent or more destructive, but in the end that claim would rely on somebody’s statistical analysis. And, face it, large chunks of the public have never trusted statistics.

But this summer is different. “Bad things didn’t used to happen this often” is a statistical claim. But “Bad things didn’t used to happen all at once” is something we can all verify through our own experience. It might change the national debate. That article should appear maybe around 10 EDT.

Another post will come before it. The big news in Congress this week was FBI Director Chris Wray testifying to the House Judiciary Committee. Chairman Jim Jordan and the flying monkeys in the Republican majority treated us to a display of really wacko conspiracy theories. Apparently Wray, a lifelong Republican appointed by Trump, has turned the FBI into “an arm of the Democratic Party”.

This hearing was not such a major event in itself, but it gives me a chance to apply two ideas I’ve discussed on this blog before: How to judge conspiracy theories, and what the “Deep State” really is. That post is just about done and should be out shortly.

The weekly summary still has to cover the House’s abandonment of the bipartisan tradition of the National Defense Authorization Act, the Hollywood strike (which gives me a chance to promote a classic work of Marxist economics), the countdown towards Trump’s next indictments, a heart-rending IndyStar article about family annihilations, and a few other things. I’ll try to get that out by noon.

The Monday Morning Teaser

On many Mondays, I complain in the teaser about how much news there is to cover. This week, though, I have a sense that we’re all waiting for something to happen.

Georgia is widely expected to indict Trump for tampering with its 2020 election, but not until next month. Jack Smith is looking at the same set of facts, but his timetable is unknowable. The standing indictments against Trump in New York and Florida won’t come to trial anytime soon. Meanwhile, the GOP presidential campaign is on, but the first debate won’t happen until late next month, and the first actual votes are half a year away.

Congress is about to come back into session, with lots to get done if it’s going to avoid a government shutdown in October. The Ukraine summer offensive is underway, but there have been no major swings on the battlefield yet. Climate change continues its inexorable grind, with record heat and flooding, but no city-destroying hurricanes at the moment. There are new stories of Clarence Thomas living the high life at the expense of rich “friends”, but when aren’t there?

It’s tempting to take the week off.

Instead, I’m going to write another article about judicial rulings. Last week, the Supreme Court gave me a lot to comment on. But while they’re out of session now, other courts continue to make news. Two rulings stand out, one positively and the other negatively.

The positive news is a remarkable protest against last year’s pro-gun Bruen ruling and the Supreme Court’s originalism in general, written by District Judge Carlton Reeves of Mississippi. Reeves protests the gun-rights ruling by applying it. The subtext of his ruling (dismissing a case against a former felon who owned a gun, in violation of a 1938 federal law) virtually screams “this is stupid, but it’s what I have to do to follow the precedent”. He ends with a plea for the Supremes to apply the same expansive standards to other constitutional rights (like voting) that they’ve applied to gun ownership.

The negative legal news is a Trump-appointed judge’s injunction ordering large swathes of the federal government to have no contact with social media companies. The ruling repeats a litany of alleged examples of the government suppressing conservative speech, with no fact-checking. It takes seriously various conspiracy theories about malign Biden administration intentions, and completely ignores the interest of the government in minimizing the spread of dangerous misinformation.

I’ll cover both in one article, which should be out between 10 and 11 EDT.

The weekly summary will cover the hottest week on record, some things I learned from last week’s Moms For Liberty convention (which I didn’t attend), what a flap in Oklahoma points out about anti-CRT laws, Marjorie Taylor Greene’s exit from the Freedom Caucus, and a few other things. It should appear around 1.

The Monday Morning Teaser

The last week in June always has an obvious news theme: It’s the final week of the Supreme Court’s term, so the news is dominated by a flurry of controversial decisions. Last year the Court went out with a bang, eliminating abortion rights, striking down a century-old gun control law, and blowing a big hole in the wall between Church and State. In each case, the boundaries of the decision were unclear; the logic of the majority invited future cases that could be even more consequential.

This year the Court also went out with a bang, but none of the decisions are likely to strike as live a wire as last year’s anti-abortion ruling. The targets of this year’s attacks — LGBTQ people, Blacks hoping to go to college, and young people drowning under student debt — may be outraged, but the vast mass of the electorate will probably shrug and move on. Most of the Court’s victims probably weren’t going to vote Republican anyway, so politically, what difference will it make?

So I decided to shift my coverage in a more abstract direction. Even if you are unaffected by the specific cases decided this week, the Court’s behavior should bother you, because it is systematically blowing through all the traditional restraints on its power. Aspects of the law that the general public considers arcane (like standing and precedent) are being cast aside. And new interpretative principles (like the major questions doctrine) are being instituted. The result is to give the Court’s conservative majority the power to intervene anywhere it wants and come to any conclusion it desires.

That’s a problem, and I’ll try to explain why in “The Court Unleashed”, which should be out between 9 and 10 EDT.

Reading the nearly 400 pages of the week’s three major decisions took up an inordinate amount of my time this week, so the weekly summary should be short. I’ll try to get it out by noon.