More stories

  • in

    Trump should drop out of 2024 presidential race, says Republican

    Donald Trump should drop out of the 2024 race for the White House because polling shows the former US president trailing Joe Biden as he grapples with more than 90 pending criminal charges, according to the Republican US senator Bill Cassidy.Cassidy’s comments to the State of the Union host, Kasie Hunt, on Sunday were not the first time he has denounced Trump. About two months earlier, he went on CNN and predicted that Trump would lose if his party nominated him to run for the Oval Office again, citing the poor performance of his endorsed candidates during the 2022 midterms.“Obviously, that’s up to him … but he will lose to Joe Biden, if you look at the current polls,” Cassidy said of his fellow Republican and the ex-president on State of the Union.The Louisiana senator added that it would do their party no good if Trump “ends up getting the nomination but cannot win a general [election]” against the Democratic incumbent Joe Biden.Alluding to a Republican presidential candidates’ debate scheduled Wednesday in Milwaukee that Trump intends to skip, Cassidy said: “I want one of them to win.” But he passed on an opportunity to single out any of the expected debate participants as someone he supported and assured he would vote for “a Republican” if Trump stayed in the race.A poll by CBS News on Sunday showed Trump at the moment enjoys 62% support among Republicans, with many of them trusting him more than they do their friends, family and religious leaders. But polling for now shows Biden generally is ahead of Trump, whose next closest rival for the Republican nomination – Florida governor Ron DeSantis – is culling just 16% support among his party’s voters.Trump has established his domination so far in the Republican presidential primary despite facing 91 criminal charges across four separate indictments filed against him for his alleged 2020 election subversion, illicit retention of classified documents and hush-money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels.On Sunday’s edition of State of the Union, Cassidy said to him it seemed like the classified documents case was “almost a slam dunk”.“I’m not an attorney,” said Cassidy, who is a gastroenterologist. But, while referring to an audio recording of Trump discussing military secrets that he had not declassified at his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club in 2021, Cassidy remarked: “The mishandling of the federal documents … seems … a very strong case.“They have a tape recording of him speaking of it. If that is proven, then we may have a candidate for president who has been convicted of a crime. I think Joe Biden needs to be replaced, but I don’t think Americans will vote for someone who’s been convicted. So, I’m just very sorry about how all this is playing out.”Cassidy joined six other Senate Republicans who voted to convict the former president when Trump was impeached after his supporters staged the US Capitol attack on 6 January 2021.Trump had more than enough votes to be acquitted at his impeachment trial despite the lack of support from Cassidy, whom the former president has previously dismissed as a “Rino”, the acronym meaning “Republican in name only”.Cassidy is in his second six-year term in the Senate and is not up for re-election until 2026. More

  • in

    Trump’s legal woes are part of his quasi-religious mythology of martyrdom | Sidney Blumenthal

    On 16 or perhaps 17 July 2024, in Milwaukee, the Republican national convention will likely nominate as its presidential candidate a convicted criminal. When Donald Trump ascends the podium to accept the nomination for his third time he will probably have been found guilty months earlier of having staged an attempted coup to overthrow American democracy – “conspiring to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election, obstruct the certification of the election results, and discount citizens’ legitimate votes”, in the words of special counsel Jack Smith.The US district court judge Tanya Chutkan has announced that she will set the trial date at the next hearing on Trump’s case on 28 August. Smith has sought a 2 January 2024 start date for a trial to last an estimated six weeks into mid-February. Trump’s attorneys have preposterously suggested a date in April 2026. If Judge Chutkan fixes the trial for any time before 1 June 2024, Trump will accept the Republican nomination after its verdict is rendered.And if the date is earlier than June, Republican primaries will be conducted at the same time as the trial. Day by day, the compounding of the doubled events will incite his followers to redouble their fervor and devotion. Rocket fuel will be pumped on to the fire of Trump’s campaign. While the closing statements are delivered to the jury, Republicans will, if the polls hold, have already voted overwhelmingly for Trump and reduced his opponents’ chances to ashes.The day of the first contest, the Iowa caucuses, 15 January, is also the day that his second defamation trial with E Jean Carroll begins. The judge in that case, in New York, Lewis A Kaplan, found in July that Trump had “raped” her. “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted … makes clear, the jury found that Mr Trump in fact did exactly that,” he said. So Trump will mount the stage at the convention, regardless of the legal verdict about the January 6 riot at the US Capitol, or any other verdict, as an adjudicated rapist.All told, so far, Trump faces 91 criminal counts in four jurisdictions. Three other elaborate trials will follow his January 6 case, if it is scheduled any time in January or February. His trial date in New York is tentatively on the calendar for 25 March 2024. In that case, he is charged by the Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg “for falsifying New York business records in order to conceal damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election. During the election, Trump and others employed a ‘catch and kill’ scheme to identify, purchase, and bury negative information about him and boost his electoral prospects. Trump then went to great lengths to hide this conduct, causing dozens of false entries in business records to conceal criminal activity, including attempts to violate state and federal election laws.”But Bragg has suggested he would postpone this trial to allow the January 6 federal case to be first.Trump’s trial in the Mar-a-Lago presidential records case is on the calendar in Florida for 20 May 2024, where he is charged with the illegal and willful theft of national security documents and obstruction of justice.Even more than during the gripping performance of his various indictments, the theatre of his trials will subsume politics. There will not be another campaign, some semblance of a normal campaign of the past, a fantasy campaign, separate from Trump’s trials. The scenes from courtroom to courtroom will overlap with the primaries – the final ones taking place on 4 June 2024 – only intensifying the zeal of his base. And then Trump’s battle with the law will engulf the general election.The trials are a continuous spectacle, featuring an all-star cast in far-flung locations. Political reporters are barely heard from, while legal analysts fill the airwaves. Every twist and turn, every motion, every argument is the breathless lead story. Everyone, from prosecutors to co-conspirators, named and unnamed, indicted and unindicted, are characters in Trump’s new reality show – part violent action movie (the insurrection), part sleazy porn flick (Stormy Daniels), part conspiracy thriller (Mar-a-Lago), and part mafia drama (the fake elector racket).But the Trump trials are more than his means; they are his ends. The trials are not the sideshow, but the heart and soul of Trump’s campaign. They have become his essential fundraising tool to finance his defense, his platform for whipping up his followers into a constant state of excitement, and his instrument for dominating the media to make himself the center of attention and blot out coverage of anyone else.The trials are the message. They are the drama around which Trump plays his role as the unjustly accused victim, whose rights are trampled and who is the martyr for his oppressed “deplorables”. He is taking the slings and arrows for them. The narcissist is the self-sacrificing saint. The criminal is the angel. The liar is the truth-teller. If any Republican lapses in faithfulness, they are more than a mere doubter or skeptic, but a betrayer and traitor. Trump’s trials are the rigorous trial of his followers’ faith. Rejection of temptation in an encounter with an impertinent fact that might raise a qualm shows purity of heart. Seduction by fact must be resisted. The siren song of critical thinking must be cast out as sin. Trump’s convictions are the supreme test of his followers’ strength of conviction.Republicans are not prisoners of Trump’s narcissistic rage. They don’t reject it. They don’t regret it. They don’t apologize. They mirror it. They mimic it. They exult in it. It is the gratification they receive for passing through the ordeal of belief. His rage is their reward. It is their cheap vicarious defiance of the evil-doers: the establishment, the globalists, the Fauciists, the FBI, the Barbie movie. As Trump has received target letters, so judges, district attorneys, the special counsel, and their wives, too, must be targets. Fair game is fair play. Hallelujah!Poor Mike Pence, who Trump chose as his running mate to balance his sinfulness with Christian virtue, benightedly still believes that truthfulness, righteousness and clean hands makes him the ideal evangelical avatar. He has positioned himself on the Republican issues as a scold of Trump’s fall from grace on abortion. Pence is in favor of a national ban, not leaving it to the states like Trump, as if issues matter. His humility as a godly servant leader, for years imitating every gesture of Trump’s, reached its abrupt end in his refusal to drink from Trump’s poisoned chalice.Yet Pence’s embrace of scripture in the form of the constitution has not beatified him to the evangelicals. There is no worldly subject that can grant him absolution from being perceived as Trump’s Judas. His steadfastness is scorned. His blamelessness is derided. “I’m glad they didn’t hang you,” a man said to Pence at the Iowa state fair. That man’s sentiment is the current definition of moderate Republicanism.The precise source of Trump’s permanent campaign of trials can be traced to before the election of 2016, when his inveterate dirty trickster Roger Stone coined the “Stop the Steal” slogan to claim Trump had been robbed by Senator Ted Cruz in the Colorado caucuses. That falsehood became Trump’s “Stop the Steal” con before the 2020 election, which metastasized into his coup and insurrection, and now the prosecutions. (Last week, a Danish film-maker who has produced a documentary about Stone released previously unseen video of him laying out the details of the fake electors scheme on 5 November 2020, two days after the election. It seems doubtful that Stone was the originator of the conspiracy. The idea was floated in February 2020 at a closed meeting to the rightwing Council on National Policy, whose president, Tom Fitton, later called on Trump to pardon Stone. Fitton sent Trump a memo on 31 October 2020, three days before the election, advising him to declare before the ballots were counted, “We had an election today – and I won.” Fitton has been identified by a number of news organizations as Unnamed Co-Conspirator Individual 1 in the Georgia indictment.)But Trump’s career in crime is an epic story that antedates his election fraud. The Georgia indictment charging him with operating a “criminal enterprise” is overdue by almost 50 years. His coup d’état is the coup de grâce. But the enormity of his conspiracy to overturn the election ultimately depended upon the weak reed of Pence, who proved surprisingly unpliable. Trump brought the lessons he learned in the demimonde of New York to Washington.He always wanted his Roy Cohn, his model lawyer and mouthpiece. His credentials were nonpareil. Cohn was born and bred in the clubhouse political culture of graft and favoritism, Joe McCarthy’s vicious counsel, returned to the city as its number one fixer, from the mob to the Catholic archdiocese, who had won his own acquittals in four criminal trials for bribery and conspiracy when the Trumps – father Fred, with his real-estate empire in the outer boroughs, and his son Donald, on the make in the Big Apple – hired him in 1974 to get them off the hook of a federal suit for housing discrimination against black tenants. On advice of counsel, Trump repeatedly perjured himself, Cohn dragged the case out, and the Trumps ignored Department of Justice decrees. Cohn claimed the case was created by “planted malcontents”. Trump, meanwhile, got his real-estate license, and Cohn would set him up with the mob to build Trump Tower.But Roy Cohn was only one part of what Trump required to operate. He also needed the prosecutors to lay off. He needed his Robert Morgenthau, scion of one of New York’s most distinguished families, personification of civic virtue, the US attorney for the southern district of New York for a dozen years and the district attorney of Manhattan for 35 years, “my friend, the late, GREAT, Robert Morgenthau”, as Trump called him after his death at 100. Morgenthau brought Trump on to the board of the Police Athletic Association, hosted a tribute dinner to him and accepted campaign contributions. He never opened a single investigation into Trump, and always felt there was nothing to see.Soon after Rudy Giuliani was appointed the US attorney for the southern district in 1983, Trump was bounced out of New York by the bankers. Trump’s profligacy and mismanagement crashed his monumental casino and hotel, the Taj Mahal in New Jersey, built with mob help, and he could not secure his loans. Giuliani was busy elsewhere, prosecuting the five families of the mafia, under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (Rico) of 1970, the first time the act was applied in a major case. His pioneering use of the Rico statute made Giuliani’s reputation. Trump and Giuliani circled each other in a strange dance of outsized egos.Giuliani threw in with Trump late in the game, during the 2016 campaign, when he manipulated his network of FBI agents in and around the New York office to raise the pressure on director James Comey to reopen the already closed investigation into Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s emails because of the existence of a computer owned by her aide Huma Abedin and accessed by her husband Anthony Weiner. Comey succumbed. His public announcements were decisive in shifting marginal votes in swing states to Trump. (The FBI chief of counter-intelligence in the New York office at the time, Charles McGonigal, closely connected to Giuliani, pleaded guilty this week to money-laundering payments from a sanctioned Russian oligarch.)Trump’s next task for Giuliani was to troll through the back alleys of Ukraine seeking disinformation on Joe Biden to discredit him as the Democratic candidate in 2020. Giuliani’s efforts were an essential element in Trump’s scheme that prompted him to attempt extorting Volodymyr Zelensky into trading fabricated dirt on Biden for missiles desperately needed to defend Ukraine against Russia. Trump was impeached for the first time.Giuliani was the master of Rico. He knew better than anyone how the law worked and the mafia operated. The first he used to forge his image as a crime-fighter; the second he emulated on Trump’s behalf. So, the wielder of Rico was ensnared under Rico. He learned first-hand how the mafia did its business. He discovered how to organize a racket into an effective hierarchy. He learned the potential value of intimidating innocents. From this point of view, he saw the Republican party as a racket in the making, from the Republican National Committee to the Republican Association of Attorneys General to the state parties, all constituent families of a mafia, with Giuliani himself as the consigliere to the capo di tutti capi.“This criminal organization,” stated the Georgia indictment, “… constituted an ongoing organization whose members and associates functioned as a continuing unit for a common purpose of achieving the objectives of the enterprise.” Giuliani was indicted on 13 counts, including racketeering, making false statements, harassment and intimidation of an election worker, and election fraud. The former prosecutor is the prosecuted. He is struggling to meet his attorney’s fees. He complains that he is owed $300,000 from Trump for non-payment for his counsel.The trials have become Trump’s engine for capturing his third Republican nomination. His celebrity has been transformed into a passion play of victimization. His problem is that the trials are not shows.
    Sidney Blumenthal is the author of The Permanent Campaign, published in 1980, and All the Power of the Earth: The Political Life of Abraham Lincoln 1856-1860, the third of a projected five volumes. He is the former assistant and senior adviser to President Bill Clinton and senior adviser to Hillary Clinton More

  • in

    ‘Kissing Trump’s butt’ won’t help Republicans beat him, rival warns

    Offering “free advice” to his rivals for the Republican presidential nomination, the former Texas congressman Will Hurd said: “If Donald Trump is leading in the polls, and he’s your opponent, then kissing his butt is not going to help you win.”Trump is indeed leading national and key state polls by wide margins, despite facing 91 criminal charges under four separate indictments for election subversion, retention of classified documents and hush-money payments to a porn star.A poll by CBS News on Sunday showed Trump with a whopping 62% support among Republicans. Ron DeSantis was next with 16%. The Florida governor’s campaign is seen to be tanking but, ahead of a first debate this week in which Trump will not take part, no rival has staked a firm claim to replace DeSantis in second place.Hurd has not qualified to debate in Milwaukee but he is one of the few candidates prepared to attack Trump in strong terms, not least over scheduled trials that include civil cases over defamation and a rape allegation and investigations of his business affairs.On Sunday, Hurd told the MSNBC host Jenn Psaki: “Things are improving and changing.“Had a great time in Des Moines [Iowa] yesterday or this week at the Iowa state fair. And what people want is someone who’s willing to be honest. What people want is folks that are not afraid of Donald Trump and who are going to articulate a vision for a future and talk about the issues of the day that are impacting them, and not just focusing on Donald Trump’s legal baggage.”Hurd was recently booed in Iowa but he said people in the first state to vote also told him “thank you for being honest”.He said: “Here’s what we’re learning. There’s a good chunk of people that are never going to vote for Donald Trump, and there’s folks that like Donald Trump, voted for him twice, still like him as a person, and don’t think he has a chance in a rematch against Joe Biden.”In polling between Biden and Trump, Biden is generally ahead.“If the GOP puts up Donald Trump as a nominee, Joe Biden will win four more years of office, and I think people are recognising that. And what I’d also remind folks is that the voting doesn’t start for about 24 more weeks. A lot can change between now and then.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionInstead of debating on Wednesday, Trump has chosen to prerecord an interview with the former Fox News host Tucker Carlson.Hurd said that showed Trump was “afraid to go on the debate stage and answer for being a proven loser. The last time he won was in 2016. He doesn’t want to have to defend his poor record, he doesn’t want to have to defend all of these issues he’s dealing with. These legal issues are self-inflicted wounds.“And that’s what I’m looking forward to talking about: not only his problems but articulating what the GOP needs to be doing, so we prevent a trend that has been happening for the last 20 years. And that’s losing the general election popular vote.”Republican candidates for president have not won the popular vote since 2004. Presidents, however, are elected via the electoral college. More

  • in

    Trump confirms he will skip Republican primary debate

    Donald Trump has confirmed that he will not attend the first Republican primary debate on Wednesday, in a post on Truth Social, amid reports that he is weighing several options in an attempt to upstage the opening event in the party’s nominating contest.The former president confirmed on his social media platform that he would be attending no primary debates. “New CBS poll, just out, has me leading the field by ‘legendary’ numbers… I WILL THEREFORE NOT BE DOING THE DEBATES.”The Trump team has two overarching priorities for the debate, according to several sources briefed on the situation: to starve the other Republican presidential candidates of attention, and to publicly humiliate Fox News, which is hosting the event with the RNC, because he has been displeased with some of its recent coverage.For weeks, Trump has asked his aides privately and rally crowds publicly whether he should attend the debate or engage in counter-programming efforts in a boastful display of his political strength even after being criminally charged four times.The response has overwhelmingly been for him to skip the debate. Trump has told allies he intends to shun the event and that his sit-down interview with the former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, which he taped in recent days, could be released around the same time.Trump had also considered swaggering into the debate at the last minute – without prior warning – betting that would almost certainly cause the news coverage to be about his surprise visit and not the other candidates’ answers. But he has since soured on that option, people briefed on the matter said.The Trump team had explored whether Trump could do the ultimate counter-programming by scheduling his surrender to authorities, after the Fulton county district attorney charged him with conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia, to take place at the same time.But even though the political team had pushed for him to be booked at the Fulton county jail on Wednesday, his legal team has been opposed. Trump’s lawyers thought Thursday was a more realistic option and intend to finalize logistics with the district attorney’s office on Monday, the people said.At the meeting with the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, Trump’s lawyers are expected to negotiate the scope of his surrender, including whether the former president will have his mugshot and weight released.The Trump campaign have asked the lawyers for there to be no photograph, in part because aides have produced a flattering “mugshot” which they have used on promotional material, even though Trump once thought getting arrested and photographed would make him look defiant.The political team has since recalibrated for a potential surrender on Thursday morning followed by a news conference.A spokesperson for Trump could not immediately be reached for comment.Trump’s decision to spurn the debate on Fox News in favor of an online interview with Carlson marks a new level of hostility with the network.Fox News executives and hosts have reportedly been begging Trump to take part in the debate. Last month, the Fox News president, Jay Wallace, and CEO, Suzanne Scott, went to Bedminster to convince Trump to attend, and came away thinking he could still participate.But Trump has been openly attacking Fox News since the launch of his presidential campaign, in part because of its positive coverage of his 2024 rival and Florida governor Ron DeSantis, and has privately lashed out at the Fox Corporation chairman, Rupert Murdoch. More

  • in

    Former top Trump aide says he was unaware of document declassification – report

    The former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows told investigators he had no knowledge of Donald Trump either talking about or declassifying confidential information, it was reported on Sunday, potentially skewering the ex-president’s defense in his classified documents case.Meadows’ alleged admission to the special counsel Jack Smith, reported by ABC News, suggests Trump made no blanket declassification of secret papers later seized from his Mar-a-Lago resort by FBI agents, leading to 40 criminal counts against him.Trump, who pleaded not guilty to all charges, has insisted without proof he gave automatic clearance to every government document he took to Florida at the conclusion of his administration in January 2021. But his lawyers have not yet presented the defense in court and doing so could open the possibility of Meadows being called as a witness to contradict it, ABC said.According to ABC, Meadows also told Smith he was not involved in packing the boxes, did not witness Trump or anybody else doing so, and claimed he was unaware the former president was taking anything with him.If true, it would be extraordinary that one of Trump’s closest aides had absolutely no knowledge of anything to do with the retention of the documents. It might also suggest Trump knew what he was taking and planned and executed the operation himself.Trump’s former vice-president, Mike Pence, also said he was unaware of any standing order for declassifying documents.Asked about the report, he told ABC’s This Week: “There is a process that the White House goes through to declassify materials. I’m aware of that occurring on several occasions over the course of our four years but I don’t have any knowledge of any broad-based directive from the president.”Pence, now challenging his former boss for the Republican presidential nomination, added: “That doesn’t mean it didn’t occur. It’s just not something that I ever heard about.”Asked if Meadows, as Trump’s chief of staff, should have been aware of any such broad declassification order, Pence said: “I would expect so.”Meadows, who has remained publicly silent about the documents case, was indicted alongside Trump and 17 others last week by Fani Willis, the district attorney for Fulton county in Georgia who is investigating efforts to reverse Joe Biden’s win there in 2020.On Saturday, attorneys for Meadows asked a federal court to dismiss the state charges against him.Meadows claims his alleged actions, including participating with Trump in a phone call to the Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, should be immune from state prosecution because they were performed in his capacity as a federal official.A 37-page document filed on Saturday with a US district court in Georgia asserted that Meadows’ actions were protected by the supremacy clause of the US constitution, under which federal officials are immune from state prosecution for acts committed within the reasonable scope of their duties.“The conduct charged here falls squarely within the scope of Mr Meadows’s duties as chief of staff and the federal policy underlying that role,” attorneys said in the filing.The document also claimed protection under the first and 14th amendments to the constitution.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe filing came days after Meadows, a former North Carolina congressman, sought to have the case moved from Georgia’s Fulton County to federal court.In the investigation over the classified documents, ABC said, Meadows appeared before a federal grand jury investigating the classified documents in April. According to ABC’s sources, Meadows told the special counsel he made an offer to Trump to go through the boxes and retrieve classified documents after the National Archives first requested their return in 2021, but was turned down.ABC also claimed to have reviewed a draft copy of Meadows’ 2021 memoir, The Chief’s Chief, which Meadows allegedly asked to be rewritten to change a description of Trump’s discussion of a classified Iran war plan in front of unauthorized persons at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.A reference to Trump’s handling of the document was removed from the final draft, ABC said, because it could be “problematic”. Audio of the meeting, heard by the Guardian, features Trump boasting about having a document on Iran from the “defense department”. Trump later claimed there was no document, and he was referring to news clippings.In a statement to ABC News, the Trump campaign accused the justice department of “selectively leaking incomplete information that lacks proper context”.Echoing language Trump has used in response to all his indictments, the statement said: “This witch hunt is nothing more than a desperate attempt to interfere in the 2024 election as President Trump dominates the polls and is the only person who will take back the White House.”
    Reuters contributed to this report More

  • in

    Pence won’t say if criminal conviction should rule Trump out as president

    Donald Trump’s former vice-president, Mike Pence, refused to say if Trump should be barred from returning to the White House if he is convicted on any of 91 criminal charges against him.“I think that he’s to be left to the American people,” Pence told ABC’s This Week, on Sunday. “Let’s have the former president have his day in court. Let’s maintain a presumption of innocence.”Trump faces charges concerning federal and state election subversion, retention of classified information and hush-money payments to a porn star. He also faces civil cases involving defamation, alleged rape and his business affairs, contributing to a schedule of trials in the election year.Nonetheless, he leads polling by wide margins nationally and in key states.On Sunday, ahead of the first debate in Milwaukee on Wednesday, CBS News released a new poll. Among Republicans, a whopping 62% picked Trump to just 16% for Ron DeSantis, the hard-right Florida governor in second place. Pence received 5% support, placing fourth.Pence and other qualifiers for the debate – a contest Trump will skip for an interview with Tucker Carlson – have backed a Republican National Committee pledge requiring support for the nominee.On ABC, Pence was asked about the case of James Traficant, an Ohio Democrat who in 2002 became one of only five people ever expelled from the US House after being convicted on corruption charges. Then a congressman from Indiana, Pence voted for that expulsion.Pence’s host, Jon Karl, asked: “Would you hold that same standard for the White House?”Pence said: “I would tell you that it is the function of the Congress to determine membership where there’s ethical violations and I remember the Traficant case from 20 years ago, it was really quite outrageous.“But if you’re saying would I apply that to my former running mate in this race, look, I think that he’s to be left to the American people. Let’s have the former president have his day in court. Let’s maintain a presumption of innocence and in this matter, and any other matter that unfolded this week here in Georgia” – a reference to Trump’s state-level election subversion case – “but I’ve said many times, I would have preferred that these matters be left to the judgment of the American people.“No one’s above the law. But with regard to the president’s future, my hope is when we get to that debate stage, and I’m still kind of hoping maybe he’ll come, is that we can really have a debate about the challenges facing the American people.”Elsewhere, the former Arkansas governor turned Trump critic Asa Hutchinson said he had qualified for the debate and would sign the pledge. Insisting that Trump would not be the nominee, Hutchinson refused to say what he would do if he were.Speaking from Des Moines, Iowa, Hutchinson told CNN’s State of the Union: “I am pleased to announce that we have met … the polling criteria and now we have met the 40,000 individual donor criteria. We submitted to the RNC 42,000 individual donors and I’m delighted.”FiveThirtyEight.com puts Hutchinson at 0.7% support – to 53.7% for Trump.“I’ll sign the pledge,” Hutchinson said. “I’m confident Donald Trump is not going to be the nominee of the party. And I’ve always supported the nominee. So I’m gonna sign the pledge.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionPressed on whether he would support the man who sought to overturn the 2020 election and incited the deadly January 6 attack on Congress, Hutchinson repeated: “I’m going to support the nominee of the party. I do not expect it to be Donald Trump. And that I’m sure question will come up in the debate, so stay tuned for that.”’Conviction would not disqualify Trump from the presidency. But some say the US constitution might.Hutchinson said: “You can’t be asking us to support somebody that’s not perhaps even qualified under our constitution. I’m referring to the 14th amendment. A number of legal scholars said that [Trump] is disqualified because of his actions on January 6.”The 14th amendment says: “No person shall be a senator or representative in Congress, or elector of president and vice-president … who, having previously taken an oath … to support the constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same … ”Hutchinson said: “There would have to be a separate lawsuit that would be filed, in which there would be a finding that the former president engaged in insurrection, and that would disqualify him. That’s one avenue. The other way would be that if a specific state made that determination on their own … Either way … I think it’s a serious jeopardy for Donald Trump.”Trump’s longtime leading challenger, DeSantis, has long been falling back. No dominant alternative has emerged but Hutchinson insisted his party was not risking a repeat of 2016, when voters did not coalesce around one alternative to Trump.“I don’t see that happening,” Hutchinson told CNN. “First of all, it’s really early. I talked to voters in Iowa and New Hampshire and they’re gonna be late deciding, and that’s why you’re gonna see in Iowa, where Trump’s numbers come down first, it will be here.“… This debate is important … this is really a reduced number [of candidates] from 2016 with eight or nine on the stage. We’ll see who else qualifies for it but the voters are gonna be able to lock in on it, make decisions, and they’re not gonna be in a hurry to move. So everybody needs to be patient, including the media, and let this unfold over the next three or four months.“The right alternative to Donald Trump will surface.” More

  • in

    Ron DeSantis calls Trump supporters ‘listless vessels’ in Republican broadside

    His presidential campaign widely seen to be listing badly, Ron DeSantis fired a broadside at supporters of Donald Trump on Saturday, calling them “listless vessels”.“A movement can’t be about the personality of one individual,” DeSantis told the Florida Standard.“The movement has got to be about what are you trying to achieve on behalf of the American people and that’s got to be based in principle, because if you’re not rooted in principle, if all we are is listless vessels that’s just supposed to follow … whatever happens to come down the pike on Truth Social every morning, that’s not going to be a durable movement.”Truth Social is Trump’s social media platform, set up when he was suspended from mainstream platforms after the January 6 attack on Congress.Running for re-election under four criminal indictments and 91 separate charges, Trump nonetheless dominates the Republican primary, leading polling by as much as 40 points nationally and by wide margins in key states.DeSantis, the hard-right governor of Florida, has long been established as the strongest challenger. But amid campaign firings and reported financial struggles, that status has begun to erode, with the former New Jersey governor Chris Christie and the entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy creeping up in polling.Trump is set to skip the first Republican debate, in Milwaukee on Wednesday, in favour of an interview with the former Fox News host Tucker Carlson.Responding to DeSantis’s remarks to the Florida Standard, Trump aides sought to link the governor to the Democrat Trump beat for the presidency in 2016.“DeSantis goes full-blown Hillary [Clinton] and call[s] MAGA supporters ‘listless vessels,’” Steven Cheung wrote.A spokesperson for a Trump-aligned fundraising committee, Maga Inc, made explicit the claimed connection to remarks by Clinton which Trump successfully weaponised.“To Hillary Clinton, Trump supporters are ‘deplorables’. To Ron DeSantis, they are ‘listless vessels’,” Karoline Leavitt said. “The truth is, Trump supporters are patriots. DeSantis must immediately apologize for his disgraceful insult.”DeSantis’s spokesperson, Bryan Griffin, said the governor was referring to supporters of Trump in Congress, not among voters.“The dishonest media refuses to report the facts,” Griffin wrote. “Donald Trump and some congressional endorsers are ‘listless vessels’. Why? Because Trump and DC insiders feel he is entitled to your vote.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“… That’s why Ron DeSantis will be showing up on Wednesday night to debate, and Donald Trump will not.”The Florida Standard is a conservative website run by a young Republican, Will Witt, to whom DeSantis has regularly granted interviews.In the passage of the interview in question, the governor repeatedly targeted “establishment Republicans” and “Rinos”, meaning “Republicans in name only”.“I think that we have a stream in our party that views supporting Trump as whether you are a Rino or not,” he said. “And so you could be the most conservative person since sliced bread, unless you’re kissing his rear end, they will somehow call you a Rino.”DeSantis also said “there’ll be people who are huge Trump supporters, like in Congress, who have like incredibly liberal leftwing records that [are] really just atrocious and … then you have other people like [Texas] congressman Chip Roy, who’s endorsed me, [Kentucky] congressman Thomas Massie, these guys have records of principle.“… Ultimately, a movement can’t be about the personality of one individual. The movement has got to be about what are you trying to achieve on behalf of the American people and that’s got to be based in principle, because if you’re not rooted in principle … all we are is listless vessels.” More

  • in

    Could Trump be barred under the constitution’s ‘engaged in insurrection’ clause?

    As Donald Trump fights a mountain of criminal charges, a separate battle over his eligibility to run for president in 2024 is fast emerging.The US constitution sets out just a handful of explicit requirements someone must meet to be the president. They must be at least 35 years old, a “natural-born” citizen, and a United States resident for at least 14 years. The constitution also bars someone who has served as president for two full terms from running again.None of those requirements disqualify Trump, or anyone else charged with a crime, from running for federal office.But one provision in the constitution, section 3 of the 14th amendment, makes things more complicated. It says that no person who has taken an oath “as an officer of the United States” can hold office if they “have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof”.That language disqualifies Trump from running for office because of his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, two prominent conservative scholars, William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St Thomas, concluded in a much-discussed article to be published the University of Pennsylvania Law Review.“The bottom line is that Donald Trump ‘engaged in insurrection or rebellion’ and gave ‘aid or comfort’ to others engaging in such conduct, within the original meaning of those terms as employed in section 3 of the 14th amendment,” Baude and Paulsen wrote in their 126-page article, which traces the history and original understanding of the amendment. “If the public record is accurate, the case is not even close.”The provision was enacted after the civil war to bar those who had joined the Confederacy from holding federal office, Baude and Paulsen note in their article. Never before has it been tested to bar a presidential candidate from office.“I think it’s really actually very clearcut,” said Steven Calabresi, a law professor at Northwestern University and a co-founder of the conservative Federalist Society (the group has reportedly instructed him not to speak to any journalist who identifies him as a co-founder). “Section 3 nowhere limits itself to the civil war or Confederates who broke their oath. It’s in general language, and so it applies to anyone who incites an insurrection or rebellion,” he added, noting that he believed the January 6 attack on the Capitol was an insurrection.Disqualification under the 14th amendment does not require a criminal conviction, Noah Bookbinder, the executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (Crew), said in an interview earlier this month. The push to disqualify Trump is likely to play out at the state level in parallel to both the federal and state cases criminally charging Trump and allies in connection with their efforts to overturn the election. The left-leaning group Free Speech for People has already sent letters to election officials in 10 states urging them to declare Trump ineligible to run for office under the 14th amendment. Crew is also preparing to file litigation in several states to disqualify Trump from the ballot, Bookbinder said.“It’s really important to resolve this as soon as possible and definitely before the election and not afterwards,” said Edward Foley, a law professor at the Ohio State University. “I am worried that if this doesn’t get resolved definitively, this issue could arise on January 6, 2025 if Trump were to win the electoral college having been on the ballot.“You could envision an effort to try and disqualify Trump after he’s won. And I think that would be a disaster. That would be a real constitutional crisis,” he added.Even if Trump winds up being constitutionally disqualified, many Americans may chafe, especially in the midst of a politically heated election year, at not being able to vote for their preferred candidate.“Viscerally in a democracy we don’t like the idea that we’re not allowed to vote for someone who we might want to vote for,” Foley said. “On the other hand, Barack Obama might actually be a pretty strong candidate for the Democratic party right now … he’s constitutionally disqualified. However much Americans or Democrats might want to nominate Barack Obama, it’s just constitutionally not permissible to do so.”The venue for the disqualification efforts could vary by state – it may be secretaries of state, boards of elections, or state courts that hear the challenges. “As a practical matter, the first time a state official decided that Trump was disqualified under Section 3, my guess is it would shoot up to the supreme court real fast and, I don’t know, who knows what the answer would be,” said Michael McConnell, a law professor at Stanford who has been more skeptical about the use of the 14th amendment to disqualify Trump.It’s also unclear who might have the legal standing to challenge Trump’s presence on the ballot. The best legal case would probably come from a candidate running against Trump, who could argue that they were injured by the presence of an unqualified candidate on the ballot. Calabresi suggested in a blogpost that Chris Christie, one of Trump’s most prominent critics in the GOP field, could lead such a challenge.The justice department did not choose to file charges against Trump under a specific statute that criminalizes insurrection, McConnell noted.“The amendment should be interpreted as … an enormous last resort and maybe January 6 rose to that level. It certainly was a much more serious civil disturbance than we usually see. But whether it’s actually an insurrection. I think it’s a bit of a stretch,” he said. “There were hundreds of participants in the January 6 incursion who have been criminally prosecuted and none of them have been charged with insurrection. Trump is one step removed.”But Calabresi said that Trump could be disqualified under the 14th amendment, even absent a formal insurrection charge. He noted that the standard for proving Trump engaged in an insurrection would be lower in the civil cases to disqualify him than in the criminal prosecutions.McConnell said his skepticism of disqualification was not intended as a defense of Trump, but rather a concern over what would happen if candidates started frequently trying to disqualify their rivals from the ballot.“I don’t want to see him water down the meaning of these words so that bringing disqualification motions against your political opponents becomes yet another aspect of our dysfunctional legal and electoral system,” he said. More