Philippa Kaur

The Conversation U.S. has commissioned more than four dozen articles relating to the various criminal investigations into the activities of former president Donald Trump before he took office, while he was in the White House in office, and since he left office.

There are four criminal cases that have been made public. It can be hard to keep track of all the different developments in each and what they mean for the country and for democracy.

To help you make sense of it all, here is a list of articles about each of those cases. We have also included articles on related topics, such as the potential prosecution of a former president, the importance of the rule of law to American democracy and some basics of how criminal cases are developed and prosecuted.

Donald Trump appears in court in New York City in a courtroom sketch by Jane Rosenberg.
Jane Rosenberg/Reuters

Prosecuting an ex-president

Trump is facing various criminal charges – here’s what we can learn from legal cases against Nixon and Clinton – Jan. 12, 2023.
As charges loom over Trump, prosecutors come under fire – a criminal justice expert explains what’s at stake – Feb. 1, 2023.
Trump’s unprecedented call for protests is the latest sign of his aim to degrade America’s institutions – March 20, 2023.
Prosecuting a president is divisive and sometimes destabilizing – here’s why many countries do it anyway – March 31, 2023.
How the indictment of Donald Trump is a ‘strange and different’ event for America, according to political scientists – April 4, 2023.
Donald Trump and the dying art of the courtroom sketch – April 18, 2023.
The presidential campaign of Convict 9653 – April 18, 2023.
Trump’s political action committee wants a $60 million refund on paying his legal fees – 3 key things to know about PACs – Aug. 4, 2023.
Donald Trump’s right − he is getting special treatment, far better than most other criminal defendants – Aug. 9, 2023.
Hitler, Burr and Trump: Show trials put the record straight for history but can also provide a powerful platform for the defendant – Aug. 11, 2023.
Trump’s free speech faces court-ordered limits, like any other defendant’s – 2 law professors explain why, and how Trump’s lawyers need to watch themselves too – Aug. 11, 2023.

Former President Donald Trump has been indicted by a Manhattan grand jury.
AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Do federal or state prosecutors get to go first in trying Trump? A law professor untangles the conflict – June 8, 2023.
Even after an indictment on federal charges, ‘persecuted’ Donald Trump could win again – June 8, 2023.
Trump indictments won’t keep him from presidential race, but will make his reelection bid much harder – June 9, 2023.
Prosecuting a former president is not an easy decision. A criminal law professor explains why – June 13, 2023.
A jury of ex-presidents? No, but Trump’s fate will be decided by 12 citizen peers, in a hallowed tradition of US democracy – June 15, 2023.
Georgia indictment and post-Civil War history make it clear: Trump’s actions have already disqualified him from the presidency – Aug. 18, 2023.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump sits with his attorneys for his arraignment at the Manhattan criminal court on April 4, 2023, in New York City.
Pool/ Getty Images News via Getty Images North America

New York state’s charges of business records falsification

Former President Donald Trump waves as he arrives at the Manhattan Criminal Court on April 4, 2023.
Kena Betancur/Getty Images

The federal indictment against Donald Trump includes photos such as this one, allegedly of boxes of documents, including classified material, stored in unsecured spaces at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and home.
U.S. Department of Justice

Department of Justice charges for hoarding classified documents

Former President Donald Trump on his airplane on June 10, 2023, two days after his federal indictment.
Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

‘If you want to die in jail, keep talking’ – two national security law experts discuss the special treatment for Trump and offer him some advice – June 12, 2023.
How the exposure of highly classified documents could harm US security – and why there are laws against storing them insecurely – June 14, 2023.
Despite threats of violence, Trump’s federal indictment happened with little fanfare – but that doesn’t mean the far-right movement is fading, an extremism scholar explains – June 15, 2023.
Trump’s trial will soon be underway in Florida – here’s why prosecutors had little choice in selecting any other courthouse location – June 21, 2023.
Why Trump’s prosecution for keeping secret documents is lawful, constitutional, precedented, nonpartisan and merited – July 14, 2023.
Despite calls for her to recuse herself from Trump’s criminal case, Judge Aileen Cannon’s situation doesn’t meet the standard for when a judge should step away – July 25, 2023.
Trump faces additional charges – 4 essential reads to understand the case against him for hoarding classified documents – July 27, 2023.
https://theconversation.com/trumps-classified-documents-indictment-does-more-than-allege-crimes-it-tells-a-compelling-story-211713 – Aug. 23, 2023.

A visual of President Donald Trump is shown during the July 12, 2022, congressional hearings investigating the attack on the Capitol.
Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Department of Justice charges in effort to overturn the 2020 election results

Donald Trump gestures as he arrives to make a speech on Jan. 6, 2021.
AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

The most serious Trump indictment yet – a criminal law scholar explains the charges of using ‘dishonesty, fraud and deceit’ to cling to power – Aug. 1, 2023.
George Washington knew when it was time to go, unlike Trump, because the founders worried about the judgment of history – Aug. 2, 2023.
Immunity for witnesses is a key tool of prosecutors, whether they’re charging Trump or other alleged criminals – here’s how it works and what the limits are – Aug. 2, 2023.
Could Trump turn his politics of grievance into a get-out-of-jail card? Neither prosecution nor even jail time have prevented former leaders in Israel, Brazil and Kenya from mounting comebacks – Aug. 2, 2023.
Trump indictment: Here’s how prosecutors will try to prove he knowingly lied and intended to break the law – Aug. 3, 2023.
Trump may try to delay his first federal trial – it’s a common legal strategy to fend off a criminal conviction – Aug. 3, 2023.
A brief history of the Ku Klux Klan Acts: 1870s laws to protect Black voters, ignored for decades, now being used against Trump – Aug. 4, 2023.

Georgia charges about 2020 election interference More

The Conversation U.S. has commissioned more than four dozen articles relating to the various criminal investigations into the activities of former president Donald Trump before he took office, while he was in the White House in office, and since he left office.

There are four criminal cases that have been made public. It can be hard to keep track of all the different developments in each and what they mean for the country and for democracy.

To help you make sense of it all, here is a list of articles about each of those cases. We have also included articles on related topics, such as the potential prosecution of a former president, the importance of the rule of law to American democracy and some basics of how criminal cases are developed and prosecuted.

Donald Trump appears in court in New York City in a courtroom sketch by Jane Rosenberg.
Jane Rosenberg/Reuters

Prosecuting an ex-president

Trump is facing various criminal charges – here’s what we can learn from legal cases against Nixon and Clinton – Jan. 12, 2023.
As charges loom over Trump, prosecutors come under fire – a criminal justice expert explains what’s at stake – Feb. 1, 2023.
Trump’s unprecedented call for protests is the latest sign of his aim to degrade America’s institutions – March 20, 2023.
Prosecuting a president is divisive and sometimes destabilizing – here’s why many countries do it anyway – March 31, 2023.
How the indictment of Donald Trump is a ‘strange and different’ event for America, according to political scientists – April 4, 2023.
Donald Trump and the dying art of the courtroom sketch – April 18, 2023.
The presidential campaign of Convict 9653 – April 18, 2023.
Trump’s political action committee wants a $60 million refund on paying his legal fees – 3 key things to know about PACs – Aug. 4, 2023.
Donald Trump’s right − he is getting special treatment, far better than most other criminal defendants – Aug. 9, 2023.
Hitler, Burr and Trump: Show trials put the record straight for history but can also provide a powerful platform for the defendant – Aug. 11, 2023.
Trump’s free speech faces court-ordered limits, like any other defendant’s – 2 law professors explain why, and how Trump’s lawyers need to watch themselves too – Aug. 11, 2023.
Trump’s mug shot is now a means of entertainment and fundraising − but it will go down in history as an important cultural artifact – Sept. 1, 2023.
Do unbiased jurors exist to serve at Trump’s trials in the age of social media? – Sept. 7, 2023.

Former President Donald Trump has been indicted by a Manhattan grand jury.
AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Do federal or state prosecutors get to go first in trying Trump? A law professor untangles the conflict – June 8, 2023.
Even after an indictment on federal charges, ‘persecuted’ Donald Trump could win again – June 8, 2023.
Trump indictments won’t keep him from presidential race, but will make his reelection bid much harder – June 9, 2023.
Prosecuting a former president is not an easy decision. A criminal law professor explains why – June 13, 2023.
A jury of ex-presidents? No, but Trump’s fate will be decided by 12 citizen peers, in a hallowed tradition of US democracy – June 15, 2023.
Georgia indictment and post-Civil War history make it clear: Trump’s actions have already disqualified him from the presidency – Aug. 18, 2023.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump sits with his attorneys for his arraignment at the Manhattan criminal court on April 4, 2023, in New York City.
Pool/ Getty Images News via Getty Images North America

New York state’s charges of business records falsification

Former President Donald Trump waves as he arrives at the Manhattan Criminal Court on April 4, 2023.
Kena Betancur/Getty Images

The federal indictment against Donald Trump includes photos such as this one, allegedly of boxes of documents, including classified material, stored in unsecured spaces at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and home.
U.S. Department of Justice

Department of Justice charges for hoarding classified documents

Former President Donald Trump on his airplane on June 10, 2023, two days after his federal indictment.
Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

‘If you want to die in jail, keep talking’ – two national security law experts discuss the special treatment for Trump and offer him some advice – June 12, 2023.
How the exposure of highly classified documents could harm US security – and why there are laws against storing them insecurely – June 14, 2023.
Despite threats of violence, Trump’s federal indictment happened with little fanfare – but that doesn’t mean the far-right movement is fading, an extremism scholar explains – June 15, 2023.
Trump’s trial will soon be underway in Florida – here’s why prosecutors had little choice in selecting any other courthouse location – June 21, 2023.
Why Trump’s prosecution for keeping secret documents is lawful, constitutional, precedented, nonpartisan and merited – July 14, 2023.
Despite calls for her to recuse herself from Trump’s criminal case, Judge Aileen Cannon’s situation doesn’t meet the standard for when a judge should step away – July 25, 2023.
Trump faces additional charges – 4 essential reads to understand the case against him for hoarding classified documents – July 27, 2023.
https://theconversation.com/trumps-classified-documents-indictment-does-more-than-allege-crimes-it-tells-a-compelling-story-211713 – Aug. 23, 2023.

A visual of President Donald Trump is shown during the July 12, 2022, congressional hearings investigating the attack on the Capitol.
Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Department of Justice charges in effort to overturn the 2020 election results

Donald Trump gestures as he arrives to make a speech on Jan. 6, 2021.
AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

The most serious Trump indictment yet – a criminal law scholar explains the charges of using ‘dishonesty, fraud and deceit’ to cling to power – Aug. 1, 2023.
George Washington knew when it was time to go, unlike Trump, because the founders worried about the judgment of history – Aug. 2, 2023.
Immunity for witnesses is a key tool of prosecutors, whether they’re charging Trump or other alleged criminals – here’s how it works and what the limits are – Aug. 2, 2023.
Could Trump turn his politics of grievance into a get-out-of-jail card? Neither prosecution nor even jail time have prevented former leaders in Israel, Brazil and Kenya from mounting comebacks – Aug. 2, 2023.
Trump indictment: Here’s how prosecutors will try to prove he knowingly lied and intended to break the law – Aug. 3, 2023.
Trump may try to delay his first federal trial – it’s a common legal strategy to fend off a criminal conviction – Aug. 3, 2023.
A brief history of the Ku Klux Klan Acts: 1870s laws to protect Black voters, ignored for decades, now being used against Trump – Aug. 4, 2023.

Georgia charges about 2020 election interference More

Democrats in Congress are making a new push to get the long-dormant proposed Equal Rights Amendment enshrined into law. As legislation, it would guarantee sex equality in the Constitution and could serve as a potential legal antidote to the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which removed the federal right to an abortion.

“In light of Dobbs, we’re seeing vast discrimination across the country,” said U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York in an interview July 13, 2023. “Women are being treated as second-class citizens. This is more timely than ever.”

Gillibrand, U.S. Rep. Cori Bush of Missouri and other Democratic lawmakers are arguing that the Equal Rights Amendment, often referred to as the ERA, has already been ratified by the states and is enforceable as the 28th Amendment to the Constitution.

Efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution to recognize women’s rights have faced major challenges for the past century. Most recently, in April 2023 Senate Republicans blocked a similar resolution that would let states ratify the amendment, despite an expired deadline.

I’m a scholar who studies gender and politics. Here’s a quick summary of how the country got to this point and the barriers that still exist to adding the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution.

Members of the National Organization for Women demonstrate outside the White House in 1969 for the Equal Rights Amendment.
Bettmann/Contributor

‘Ladies against women’

Women’s rights advocates argue that sex discrimination is a pervasive problem that could be resolved by the ERA. Even though the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment prohibits states from denying any person equal protection under the law, women’s rights are not explicitly guaranteed.

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, which took away a woman’s right to an abortion, women’s rights advocates argue that the ERA is critical in the post-Dobbs world. The amendment could help protect women’s access to reproductive health services, including abortion and contraception.

Proponents also believe that the ERA can be used to push back against legislation that threatens the rights of LGBTQ+ people.

The push for equal rights first heated up in the 1920s after women gained the right to vote.

Alice Paul, a suffragist, proposed the first version of an Equal Rights Amendment in 1923. The language of the legislation, which is very similar to the amendment Democrats are currently championing, guaranteed equal rights under the law, regardless of a person’s sex.

The proposal was adopted and turned into proposed legislation by two Kansas Republicans, Sen. Charles Curtis and Rep. Daniel Anthony Jr., and was brought up during every congressional session between 1923 and 1971 without success.

The idea of an Equal Rights Amendment, however, gained momentum among politicians and the broader public. World War II opened many doors for women, who filled gaps in the labor force while men were off fighting. During this time, women were welcomed into politics, onto juries, openly wooed by educational institutions and encouraged to take up male-dominated majors such as math, science and technology.

The fledgling feminist group, the National Organization for Women, adopted the passage of the ERA in its 1967 Bill of Rights for Women and began staging massive demonstrations and lobbying politicians in the late 1960s and early 1970s in an effort to get Congress to pass the amendment.

Finally, in 1972, the ERA passed both houses of Congress. The amendment had seven years to be ratified by three-fourths, or 38, of the 50 states.

While 30 states ratified the ERA in 1972 and 1973, the amendment ultimately came up three states short of approval by the 1979 deadline.

This was in large part due to the efforts of conservative women’s organizations opposed it. Conservative women said that the ERA was a threat to family and child-rearing, because it would disrupt traditional gender roles. They also believed women would lose, among other things, their exemptions from the draft and combat duty.

At the same time, for a number of reasons, Nebraska, Tennessee, Idaho, South Dakota and Kentucky rescinded their ERA ratifications between 1972 and 1982. Some state legislators argued that the amendment was too controversial given its potential to upend traditional gender roles and legalize what they called “abortion on demand.”

States such as Illinois and Florida became battlegrounds for liberal and conservative women fighting over the amendment. Feminists successfully lobbied Congress to extend the ERA’s ratification deadline to June 30, 1982. The ERA, however, was not ratified by the three states needed to ensure its passage. In 1982, conservative women proclaimed the Equal Rights Amendment officially dead.

In 2023, conservative women’s groups like the Eagle Forum and Concerned Women for America continue to make the same arguments against the ERA. Instead of focusing on the battlefield, however, the groups argue that the ERA will eliminate restrictions on abortion and erase “women-only safe spaces” like bathrooms and locker rooms.

Protesters gather to call for the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment in Washington, D.C., in September 2022.
Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

Another chance?

Since 2017, three more states – Nevada, Illinois and Virginia – have ratified the Equal Rights Amendment, bringing the total to 38 states, which is the number required to ratify the ERA and officially make it the 28th Amendment. That is why Democrats believe they have legal standing.

Some constitutional experts see Democrats’ latest attempt to codify the ERA as a political stunt rather than a legitimate legal move. To some extent, I think this may be true.

More than a dozen states have ERA equivalents that protect women’s equal rights in their constitutions. And four states, including New York, have active ERA initiatives.

The current push for Democrats to pass the ERA seems to be largely about advocating for abortion access and mobilizing abortion rights supporters ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

About half of the states across the U.S. have enacted restrictive abortion laws over the last year, with some states banning the procedure altogether. State ERA efforts, like the one in New York, are a response to these bans.

The renewed push for the ERA makes the fight over abortion access, once again, a national battle. In the current polarized political environment, abortion access promises to serve as a political lightening rod in coming years.

This is an updated version of an article originally published on Dec. 13, 2018. More

During his presidency, Donald Trump said, “We’re putting America first … we’re taking care of ourselves for a change,” and then declared, “I’m a nationalist.” In another speech, he stated that under his watch, the U.S. had “embrace[d] the doctrine of patriotism.”

Trump is now running for president again. When he announced his candidacy, he stated that he “need[s] every patriot on board because this is not just a campaign, this is a quest to save our country.”

One week later he dined in Mar-a-Lago with Nick Fuentes, a self-described nationalist who’s been banned from Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube and other platforms for using racist and antisemitic language.

Afterward, Trump confirmed that meeting but did not denounce Fuentes, despite calls for him to do so.

The words nationalism and patriotism are sometimes used as synonyms, such as when Trump and his supporters describe his America First agenda. But many political scientists, including me, don’t typically see those two terms as equivalent – or even compatible.

There is a difference, and it’s important, not just to scholars but to regular citizens as well.

An image from 1950, colorized in 2017, shows Superman – a refugee from another planet and a character created by two Jewish immigrants to the U.S. – teaching that patriotism should drive out nationalism.
DC Comics

Devotion to a people

To understand what nationalism is, it’s useful to understand what a nation is – and isn’t.

A nation is a group of people who share a history, culture, language, religion or some combination thereof.

A country, which is sometimes called a state in political science terminology, is an area of land that has its own government.

A nation-state is a homogeneous political entity mostly comprising a single nation. Nation-states are rare, because nearly every country is home to more than one national group. One example of a nation-state would be North Korea, where almost all residents are ethnic Koreans.

The United States is neither a nation nor a nation-state. Rather, it is a country of many different groups of people who have a variety of shared histories, cultures, languages and religions.

Some of those groups are formally recognized by the federal government, such as the Navajo Nation and the Cherokee Nation. Similarly, in Canada, the French-speaking Québécois are recognized as being a distinct “nation within a united Canada.”

Nationalism is, per one dictionary definition, “loyalty and devotion to a nation.” It is a person’s strong affinity for those who share the same history, culture, language or religion. Scholars understand nationalism as exclusive, boosting one identity group over – and at times in direct opposition to – others.

The Oath Keepers and Proud Boys – 10 of whom were convicted of seditious conspiracy for their role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol – are both examples of white nationalist groups, which believe that immigrants and people of color are a threat to their ideals of civilization.

Trump has described the events that took place on Jan. 6, 2021, as having occurred “Peacefully & Patrioticly”. He has described those who have been imprisoned as “great patriots” and has said that he would pardon “a large portion of them” if elected in 2024.

There are many other nationalisms beyond white nationalism. The Nation of Islam, for instance, is an example of a Black nationalist group. The Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center have both characterized it as a Black supremacist hate group for its anti-white prejudices.

In addition to white and Black racial nationalisms, there are also ethnic and lingustic nationalisms, which typically seek greater autonomy for – and the eventual independence of – certain national groups. Examples include the Bloc Québécois, the Scottish Nationalist Party and Plaid Cymru – the Party of Wales, which are nationalist political parties that respectively advocate for the Québécois of Québéc, the Scots of Scotland and the Welsh of Wales.

Devotion to a place

In contrast to nationalism’s loyalty for or devotion to one’s nation, patriotism is, per the same dictionary, “love for or devotion to one’s country.” It comes from the word patriot, which itself can be traced back to the Greek word patrios, which means “of one’s father.”

In other words, patriotism has historically meant a love for and devotion to one’s fatherland, or country of origin.

Patriotism encompasses devotion to the country as a whole – including all the people who live within it. Nationalism refers to devotion to only one group of people over all others.

An example of patriotism would be Martin Luther King Jr.‘s “I Have a Dream” speech, in which he recites the first verse of the patriotic song “America (My Country ‘Tis of Thee).” In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” King describes “nationalist groups” as being “made up of people who have lost faith in America.”

George Orwell, the author of “Animal Farm” and “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” describes patriotism as “devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life.”

He contrasted that with nationalism, which he describes as “the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests.”

In his ‘I Have a Dream’ speech and other works, Martin Luther King Jr. decried nationalism and encouraged patriotism.

Nationalism vs. patriotism

Adolf Hitler’s rise in Germany was accomplished by perverting patriotism and embracing nationalism. According to Charles de Gaulle, who led Free France against Nazi Germany during World War II and later became president of France, “Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”

The tragedy of the Holocaust was rooted in the nationalistic belief that certain groups of people were inferior. While Hitler is a particularly extreme example, in my own research as a human rights scholar, I have found that even in contemporary times, countries with nationalist leaders are more likely to have bad human rights records.

After World War II, President Harry Truman signed the Marshall Plan, which would provide postwar aid to Europe. The intent of the program was to help European countries “break away from the self-defeating actions of narrow nationalism.”

For Truman, putting America first did not mean exiting the global stage and sowing division at home with nationalist actions and rhetoric. Rather, he viewed the “principal concern of the people of the United States” to be “the creation of conditions of enduring peace throughout the world.” For him, patriotically putting the interests of his country first meant fighting against nationalism.

This view is in line with that of French President Emmanuel Macron, who has stated that “patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism.”

“Nationalism,” he says, “is a betrayal of patriotism.” More

Hunter Biden, the younger son of U.S. President Joe Biden, is expected to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges as part of a recently announced deal with the Justice Department that will help him avoid the federal charges for possessing a gun while using illegal drugs.

Joe Biden has long defended his son amid his drug addiction and other personal issues, including a paternity scandal and ongoing court battle over child support.

The president responded to the news of Hunter’s charges, saying on June 20, 2023, that he is “very proud of my son”.

I am a scholar of the American presidency and have looked at how the children and other family members of presidents have been thrust into the nation’s spotlight, often unwittingly. Their shortcomings, vices and sometimes even physical appearance have been fodder for gossip columns, political opponents and comedians.

Hunter Biden is not the first child of a president to be charged with a crime. Jenna and Barbara Bush pleaded “no contest” in 2001 to misdemeanor charges of underage drinking and using a false ID. Amy Carter was arrested for protesting in 1985, and before his father was president, Donald Trump Jr. was arrested for public drunkenness in 2001.

But nearly all presidents have had incidents involving their kids and other family members that attracted public scrutiny. Some of the events fall into questionable prank category, like when Tad Lincoln, the son of Abraham Lincoln, sprayed dignitaries with fire hoses.

Other incidents are less innocuous and amusing.

A colorized portrait of former President Theodore Roosevelt’s family features his oldest daughter, Alice, in the center.
Stock Montage/Getty Images

Youthful indiscretions

James Madison raised his troubled stepson, John Payne Todd, as his own. Todd regularly engaged in gambling, drinking and womanizing. Madison went deeply into debt trying to pay off Todd’s vices, including once bailing him out of debtor’s prison. In the mid-1800s, Todd’s debts eventually forced his widowed mother to sell the family estate, Montpelier.

Todd even had a lawyer visit his mother on her deathbed to rewrite her will, making himself her sole heir.

Alice Roosevelt, the oldest child of Theodore Roosevelt, also presented some complications for her father during his presidency in the early 1900s.

Alice had a strained relationship with her father and his second wife, Edith. When her parents suggested sending her to a boarding school, Alice responded: “If you send me, I will humiliate you. I will do something that will shame you. I tell you I will.”

In a time when women were expected to be demur, Alice smoked, drank, partied and even sometimes wore a pet snake as an accessory.

Theodore Roosevelt once said, “I can do one of two things: I can be president of the United States or I can control Alice Roosevelt. I cannot possibly do both.”

Alice was later banned from the Taft White House after burying a voodoo doll in the likeness of the new first lady, Helen Herron Taft, on the property.

Neil Bush, son of George H.W. Bush and brother to George W. Bush, also has a colorful history.

Neil was the director of a large savings and loans company that collapsed in 1988, after it made improper and illegal loans. This cost taxpayers more than US$1 billion at the time and resulted in an embarrassing payout to federal banking regulators.

People also criticized Neil because of his ties to Chinese investors and his limited knowledge about industries that employed him, leading to accusations of influence peddling.

Neil Bush, like Hunter Biden, was also the subject of paternity accusations during his divorce.

That’s my brother

Presidential brothers have been another particular sore point for some presidents.

Lyndon Johnson’s brother, Sam Houston Johnson, was often quite talkative after he had a few drinks. The president eventually had to use the Secret Service to follow his brother to ensure he didn’t disclose any embarrassing information to the press .

Billy Carter, former President Jimmy Carter’s brother, reveled in his notoriety. As the president’s brother, he toured the country to make money and hawk his own Billy Beer.

He urinated on a runway before the press corps while waiting for people.

When Carter was running for reelection in 1980, Billy took money from the Libyan government and became a foreign agent for the country – while also making inflammatory and antisemitic statements to justify his behavior.

Billy’s association with Libya ultimately led to a Senate investigation and complicated his brother’s failed reelection campaign.

Former President Bill Clinton comforts his half-brother Roger in 1994, shortly after their mother’s death.
POOL/AFP via Getty Images

Roger Clinton, the younger half-brother of former President Bill Clinton, also engaged in questionable activities. In the 1980s, before the Clinton presidency, Roger sold cocaine to an undercover officer.

Later, during the Clinton administration, Roger’s Secret Service codename was “Headache.”

Bill Clinton pardoned Roger for his drug offenses right before leaving office in January 2001.

Hunter Biden stands next to his father, President Joe Biden, at an event in 2016.
Kris Connor/WireImage

Keeping it in the family

Presidents are like everyone else. They, too, have family members who do or say things that eventually become stories for the dinner table – or tales people want to push under the rug.

A federal judge still needs to approve Hunter Biden’s deal with the Justice Department that would allow him to avoid prison time for paying $1 million in taxes late and possessing a gun.

And he is still not free of other controversies. The Republican-controlled House continues to investigate his bank records, as well as lingering questions about money he received from foreign organizations.

Hunter himself has said that he is accountable for his actions, and I do not think it is fair to conflate the administration with the activities of an adult son.

He is not the first presidential relative who has caused turmoil, and he won’t be the last. More

While incumbent Joe Biden is the favoured Democratic pick for the 2024 US presidential nomination, another more controversial candidate is gaining popular support in the polls. Robert F. Kennedy Jr, a self-described vaccine sceptic, announced his candidacy to run for president as a Democrat in April.

Our new study on the rhetorical techniques used to spread vaccine disinformation partly explains Kennedy’s appeal to voters. We examined the strategies of RFK Jr and American osteopath Joseph Mercola, two prominent members of the “disinformation dozen”.

These 12 anti-vaccine advocates, according to research conducted by the Center for Countering Digital Hate, were responsible for nearly two-thirds of anti-vaccine content posted to Facebook and Twitter during the pandemic.

We analysed their social media profiles, books, documentaries, websites and newsletters from 2021-22, and identified the techniques that comprise what we call the “truther playbook”. These take the form of four enticing promises which figures like Kennedy and Mercola use to give their claims legitimacy and build a loyal following.

These techniques – promising identity and belonging, revealing “true” knowledge, providing meaning and purpose, as well as promising leadership and guidance – feature prominently in Kennedy’s 2024 presidential campaign.

1. Identity and belonging

COVID truthers offer their followers access to an exclusive in-group identity. They adhere to a dualistic belief system that divides the world into good and bad actors, light and dark forces. For COVID truthers, it is not simply that their opponents have acted through ignorance or error – they frame them as corrupt and evil.

Kennedy’s and Mercola’s social media posts, newsletters and publications frequently frame prominent public figures such as Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates as evil elites, or “dark forces” allegedly conspiring against ordinary people.

COVID truthers present themselves in opposition to these corrupt corporations and government institutions. They offer a promising invitation to their followers: join me, and be part of the movement fighting “the system”.

Kennedy, for example, refers to himself as a resolute “defender” of children and the public. His anti-vaccine activism is framed as a noble pursuit aligned with the public good. Similarly, his presidential pledge of honest government is pitched as being “for the people”.

2. True knowledge and enlightenment

The spread of disinformation about COVID vaccines has occurred in a society characterised by low institutional trust. Figures such as Kennedy and Mercola capitalise on this, appealing to those disillusioned with the government’s official narrative. They present themselves as having access to privileged knowledge and understanding.

They do this by revealing alternative “facts” that contradict the official narrative, and that they claim have been concealed from the public. Some researchers refer to such information as “stigmatised knowledge”, meaning claims that are not accepted by mainstream institutions.

COVID truthers, as the name suggests, promise to expose, release and reveal the truth, which they claim has been censored by powerful, corrupt organisations.

Kennedy’s presidential bid exists in opposition to what he has described as “an incredibly sophisticated system of information control”. He refers to himself as a “truth teller”, and promises to establish an honest government that will earn back the trust of the public.

The truther playbook promises followers ‘true’ knowledge and enlightenment.
metamorworks/Shutterstock

3. Meaning and purpose

COVID truthers provide their followers with meaning, offering a reason to believe in a greater purpose. This can take the form of New Age spirituality, suggesting that humanity is undergoing a “shift in consciousness”, or a more secular commitment to truth, freedom and justice.

Kennedy frequently deploys the language of social justice in his posts and newsletters, as a rallying call to unite his followers. Most of his early anti-vaccine messaging focused on protecting pregnant women and children from harmful ingredients in vaccines.

During the pandemic, Kennedy shifted to the topic of medical racism – situating the opposition to vaccine mandates in a broader civil rights agenda. He compared racial segregation to non-vaccination, or what he refers to as “the new apartheid”.

In a direct call to action, Kennedy’s newsletters invited followers to “unite to create a better world”, and reminded them of the importance of “seeking justice and spreading the truth”. He made explicit analogies to the civil rights movement, telling supporters: “We won a revolution before, we can win it again.”

Similar messaging appears in his presidential campaign, which calls on supporters to “join the movement”, “spread the word”, and “restore our rights”.

4. Leadership and guidance

COVID truthers proffer order and security in a world that feels disorderly and insecure. They speak to the institutional distrust many people feel towards “the establishment”.

Kennedy’s campaign contrasts the power of corrupt government institutions, corporate cronyism and nefarious media elites with the powerlessness that the disenfranchised public feels. As a consequence, he positions himself as an incorruptible leader with the capacity to “clean up government”, restore civil liberties, and speak truth to power.

Why this matters

The success of the truther playbook in spreading anti-vaccine discourse during the pandemic demonstrates the popular appeal of belief and emotion in the current political climate. Filings with charity regulators show that revenue for Kennedy’s organisation more than doubled in 2020, to US$6.8 million.

In our current post-truth era, where opinions often triumph over facts, influencers and celebrities can achieve authority. By framing their opponents as corrupt and evil, and claiming to expose this corruption, COVID truthers can successfully encourage others to join their movement.

And, as Kennedy’s campaign is now demonstrating, these rhetorical techniques can be used to promote populist politics just as much as anti-vaccine content. More

The United States debt limit is a legislative limit on the overall debt the US government can incur. As the US keeps running budget deficits, the debt keeps increasing. Congress could deal with this permanently by either repealing the debt limit, or increasing it to a very large number.

But instead, Congress has only increased the debt limit enough to give grace for a year or two before it needs to be increased again. The last time the debt limit was increased was December 2021.

The US hit the debt limit on January 19 this year. The Treasury has been taking extraordinary measures to delay a default, but these measures could fail as early as June 1. While the US has never defaulted, there were debt limit crises in 2011 and 2013.

The main reason for the 2011 and 2013 crises was divided government – Democrat Barack Obama was president and Republicans controlled the House of Representatives. This situation is the same now, with Democrat Joe Biden as president and Republicans controlling the House. Republicans have attempted to use the debt limit to demand spending cuts.

Read more:
A brief history of debt ceiling crises and the political chaos they’ve unleashed

Republicans only hold a 222-213 House majority, and it took 15 rounds of voting for Republican Kevin McCarthy to be elected House speaker in early January. But right-wing Republicans won concessions from McCarthy, and the speaker decides what comes to the floor for a vote.

To keep the right onside, McCarthy will probably deny a vote on any debt ceiling increase that excludes major spending cuts, and such cuts would be unacceptable to Democrats.

Democrats had overall control of the presidency, House and Senate until January 3 when the new House started. But they made no real attempt to increase the debt limit and avert a crisis until after the 2024 presidential election. If there is a default, the failure to increase the limit will come back to haunt Democrats, the US and the world economy.

A weaker economy in the presidential election year of 2024 is likely to hurt Biden, so Republicans have some incentive to not compromise on the spending cuts they are demanding.

On April 26, Republicans passed a bill through the House of Representatives by a 217-215 margin that would raise the debt limit in return for big spending cuts that Democrats strongly oppose. All Democrats that voted were opposed.

This bill has no chance of passing the Democratic-controlled Senate, and would be vetoed by Biden. But it showed that Republicans could pass their agenda. Had the House not passed this bill or something similar, there would be more pressure on Republicans to pass a “clean” debt limit increase – an increase without any spending cuts.

As it is, McCarthy can argue that the House has done its job, and that Democrats need to give ground on spending cuts.

In the last week there have been negotiations over the debt limit between Democratic and Republican leaders, but these negotiations have broken down in the last two days, with both sides blaming the other for changing their positions.

Left-wing Democrats have been urging Biden to use Section 4 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, and effectively declare the debt limit unconstitutional. However, the US Supreme Court currently has a six-to-three right-leaning majority, so it’s unclear whether they would support Biden.

Trump way ahead of DeSantis in Republican primary polls

Republicans and Democrats will both select their presidential candidates for the November 2024 election in a series of nominating contests in each state in early 2024, at which delegates to the national conventions are elected. When we are closer to the voting in the early states, polls of those states will be useful, but for now the national polling is better.

Former President Donald Trump has 53.5% of the vote in the FiveThirtyEight aggregate of national Republican presidential primary polls. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis trails far behind on 20.8% and no other candidate has more than 6%. Since this aggregate started in early March, Trump has steadily increased his lead over DeSantis.

For the Democratic primary, there are polls that list many possible candidates, which indicate that Biden could face a contest if a high-profile candidate were to enter. However, Biden will easily defeat the only two other candidates who have actually entered: Robert F Kennedy Jr and Marianne Williamson.

General election Biden vs Trump polls are close

If Biden and Trump both win their parties’ nominations, which current polling suggests is likely, we will have a November 2024 rematch of the 2020 contest which Biden won. The RealClearPolitics average of national Biden vs Trump general election polls currently has Trump leading Biden 44.2-42.8%.

A key reason why this match-up is close is that Biden’s ratings have slumped since the beginning of his presidency.

In his first six months as president, Biden’s approval rating was over 50% in the FiveThirtyEight aggregate. But since October 2021, his approval rating has consistently been below 45%, while his disapproval has been over 50%. Biden’s ratings haven’t changed much in the last few months and are currently at 52.7% disapprove and 42.4% approve (net -10.4).

The two potential hurdles to Biden’s re-election are the economy and his age. A debt default would make the economy far worse, and Biden will be almost 82 by the November 2024 election, though Trump will be 78. More