More stories

  • in

    For Now, Trump and Allies Focus on Political Upside of a Criminal Case

    The indictment of the former president has unlocked a rush of fund-raising and has frozen the 2024 Republican primary, but he faces deeper legal peril in multiple inquiries.Just hours after he became the first former president in American history to be indicted, Donald J. Trump sat on the patio of his private club in Palm Beach, Fla., on Tuesday night and played disc jockey.Sitting with a group that included his daughter Tiffany and her husband, as well as his longest-serving adviser, Roger J. Stone Jr., Mr. Trump used an iPad to choose the music blaring over speakers: “It’s a Man’s Man’s Man’s World” by James Brown — one of Mr. Trump’s favorite performers — “Macho Man” by the Village People and the national anthem sung by a choir of inmates arrested after storming the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.When the anthem played, people rose to their feet, put their hands over their hearts and sang along, according to two attendees. In the song, Mr. Trump’s own voice periodically cut into the soundtrack to chant the Pledge of Allegiance, a recording experience he has boasted about as the song topped Billboard’s digital song chart.Mr. Trump’s campaign said that by Wednesday afternoon it had raised more than $12 million in online donations since news of his indictment broke last Thursday, according to a person briefed on the numbers, which won’t be available to be checked in filings for weeks. Roughly a third of those donors had never given to Mr. Trump before, two other people briefed on the data said, a statistic that suggested he might be able to gain new Republican supporters in the 2024 presidential primary race.In the long term, an indictment is not something any candidate seeks, a fact that some of Mr. Trump’s close associates acknowledge privately. Its impact on the months ahead remains unclear, particularly if Mr. Trump is also indicted in other investigations, which are being conducted in Georgia and by the Justice Department.Some of Mr. Trump’s close associates concede that in a general election indictments are unlikely to draw more moderate suburban and independent voters who have been wary of the former president for several election cycles. And all of that is outside of the substantial legal peril Mr. Trump now faces.Watching at Mar-a-Lago. Mr. Trump held court at his club on Tuesday night playing music.Todd Heisler/The New York TimesSeveral people in his orbit have privately acknowledged that, absent a recession, it is hard to visualize the circumstances that would lead an independent voter who supported Joseph R. Biden Jr. in 2020 because they were fed up with chaos to turn around — four years and potentially multiple indictments later — and look at Mr. Trump and figure he’s worth another shot.But Mr. Trump and some of his allies and advisers view politics through a narrow, and short, lens, and for the moment, they are looking for the upside of an undesirable situation. For now, they are treating the indictment brought by the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, as a political gift, and one that contained nothing that surprised them.Mr. Trump’s adviser Jason Miller said prosecutors had “awakened a sleeping giant” with what he said was a “weaponized” justice system. “It served as a reminder to Americans from all walks of life, including those who don’t normally follow politics, that this is a fight to save our country, and if we want to save our country, we need to rally around our strongest fighter,” he said.The day of the arrest had been “exhausting” but “energizing,” aides said. Before Mr. Trump began playing music on Tuesday night, he said to several people, “Don’t you know I’m tired.” He then went on to deliver roughly 20 minutes of remarks lighting into the Manhattan district attorney, the judge overseeing the case, investigators in Georgia and the special counsel, Jack Smith, who he seemed to suggest goes by a fake name, a claim he has made privately as well..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.Besides the money pouring in to bolster what had been a slow start to his 2024 campaign’s fund-raising, influential voices on the right who had been gravitating away from Mr. Trump, or outright criticizing him, have become more muted or said they are now supporting him.Mr. Trump’s advisers have gleefully noted that it has become politically painful for a Republican to attack Mr. Trump after the indictment. Doing so now, they say, makes those Republican critics co-conspirators with Democrats who Mr. Trump says are bent on destroying him. Some of his allies have painted him in starkly martyr-like terms, comparing him to Jesus Christ.“We the American people need to stand behind this guy,” said Mark Levin, the influential conservative television and radio host, hours after Mr. Trump’s arraignment in Lower Manhattan. “There’s not another Republican I can think of that can fight back, and fight back this way.”At Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday night. The crowd was highly supportive of the former president.Todd Heisler/The New York TimesThe New York Post, which, like other properties owned by the media mogul Rupert Murdoch, has been campaigning aggressively against the former president and playing up Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, on Wednesday gave Mr. Trump his best coverage in its pages in a long while, splashing his face on the front page with the big block headline declaring Mr. Bragg’s charges “Trumped Up.”Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, one of Mr. Trump’s most vocal critics within the party who voted to convict the former president in his two impeachment trials, said after the arraignment that he took issue with the case.“I believe President Trump’s character and conduct make him unfit for office. Even so, I believe the New York prosecutor has stretched to reach felony criminal charges in order to fit a political agenda,” Mr. Romney said. “No one is above the law, not even former presidents, but everyone is entitled to equal treatment under the law.”Even a string of frequent critics of Mr. Trump, including on the left, have raised questions about the strength of Mr. Bragg’s case, which rests on a novel legal theory aimed at proving Mr. Trump falsified business records with an intent to defraud while he was a presidential candidate in 2016 with regard to hush-money payments to a porn star made by Mr. Trump’s former fixer and lawyer, Michael D. Cohen.The statement of fact accompanying the indictment, however, offers less-than-flattering details for Mr. Trump. It lays out Mr. Trump’s reimbursing Mr. Cohen while he was president and speaking with him in the Oval Office about it. It also describes Mr. Trump’s hosting David Pecker — the former chief executive of the parent company of the tabloid National Enquirer, which is said to have killed articles detailing questionable personal conduct by Mr. Trump — at a White House meeting to thank him for his help during the campaign.Mr. Trump’s support in public opinion polls has jumped among Republicans, showing his perceived limits in gaining back those voters is higher than some of his opponents had believed. Some of Mr. DeSantis’s allies have been surprised at the extent of the bump Mr. Trump has garnered.In the lead-up to Mr. Trump’s arraignment, he and his team devoured media coverage around his impending arrest, trading screen grabs of the news. Mr. Trump monitored cable news while his aides took note of how much the coverage was blotting out almost everything else.Mr. Trump, after what was described as some snappishness before he walked into the courtroom in Manhattan for his arraignment, described the experience as relatively pleasant in a statement Wednesday.“The GREAT PATRIOTS inside and outside of the Courthouse on Tuesday were unbelievably nice, in fact, they couldn’t have been nicer. Court attendants, Police Officers, and others were all very professional, and represented New York City sooo well,” he wrote. “Thank you to all!” More

  • in

    Defendant Trump Has the G.O.P. Just Where He Wants It

    It was perhaps inevitable that, with Donald Trump’s historic arraignment taking place in the run-up to Easter Sunday, one of his most zealous disciples, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, would aim to drag Jesus into this mess.The former president “is joining some of the most incredible people in history being arrested,” the MAGA chaos agent blathered to a conservative news outlet just hours before Mr. Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts related to a hush-money deal with a porn star. “Jesus! Jesus was arrested and murdered by the Roman government!” proclaimed Ms. Greene.As a lapsed Southern Baptist, I’ll leave it to the more devout to debate whether this comparison qualifies as outright blasphemy or is merely idiotic. Regardless, it was a perfect distillation of Mr. Trump’s longstanding political refrain and current legal defense: He is the faultless victim of political persecution — a righteous martyr beset on all sides by America-hating, baby-eating Democrats and Deep Staters. In the Gospel According to the Donald, any bad thing he is ever accused of is just more proof that the forces of evil are out to get the MAGA messiah.It’s a great story if you can sustain it. Unless you’re a Republican presidential hopeful not named Donald Trump, in which case being required to shovel this grade of malarkey to please the base is increasingly awkward — at least for anyone hoping to retain a shred of credibility beyond the hard-core MAGAverse.This uncomfortable reality is actually something for every member of the G.O.P. to think about. Again. Because, if Mr. Trump’s prime-time, post-arraignment remarks on Tuesday were any indication, this is going to be a central theme of his third presidential run — one that promises to relegate everyone else in the party, including those considering a 2024 run themselves, to being minor players in this latest, tawdriest season of “The Trump Show.”Tuesday night was Mr. Trump’s first chance to address the criminal charges against him — his first real opportunity to counterpunch — since the New York indictment came down. Safely back in the gilded cocoon of Mar-a-Lago, surrounded by American flags and supporters sporting red hats and campaign signs, he delivered a half-hour battle cry that was painfully on brand: a greatest hits of his witch-hunt grievances interwoven with his dark take on how the country is “going to hell” without him. As he tells it, “all-out nuclear World War III” is just around the corner. “It can happen! We’re not very far away from it!” He also suggested that the investigation into his squirreling away sensitive documents at Mar-a-Lago could somehow lead to his being executed.Precisely the kind of responsible rhetoric one likes to hear from a political leader.It was not one of Mr. Trump’s more compelling speeches. The Mar-a-Lago crowd, while friendly, wasn’t the kind of roaring mass of fans from which Mr. Trump draws energy, and the former president sounded heavily scripted. Even so, the address was impressively offensive in its attacks on the justice system in general and the individuals leading the investigations of Mr. Trump in particular — as well as their families. (Seriously, what was with all the wife bashing?) He sniped about the “racist in reverse” officials out to get him. He went on a bizarre riff about how President Biden had hidden a bunch of documents in Chinatown. And his repeated attacks on the “lunatic” Jack Smith, the special counsel overseeing the federal investigations of Mr. Trump, suggest that whole business is really chafing the former president’s backside.Get ready for more of this magic. As Mr. Trump’s legal troubles heat up, with possibly more indictments to come, these investigations are going to eat at him and distract him. A hefty chunk of his campaign is likely to be an extended whine about his ongoing martyrdom, constantly putting other Republicans in the awkward position of having to defend him. And they won’t really have any choice as he whips his devoted followers into a frenzy over his persecution — and, of course, by extension, theirs.That is certainly what we have seen happening. Republicans have been lining up to trash the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg. It was in no way surprising to see Representative Lauren Boebert comparing the indictment of Mr. Trump to the actions of Mussolini and, yes, Hitler. But one might have expected slightly more from Gov. Ron DeSantis, widely regarded as the biggest threat to Mr. Trump’s 2024 ambitions, than his pathetic vow to refuse to assist any effort to extradite Mr. Trump to New York. Weak, Ron. Very weak.A long-shot candidate or two, like Asa Hutchinson, a former governor of Arkansas, may try to distinguish themselves by not smooching Mr. Trump’s backside so sloppily. But this is a risky path that few contenders seem inclined to tread. Having bowed to Mr. Trump so low and for so long, the party has left itself few, if any, good options for dealing with him now.Anyone looking to lead the G.O.P. beyond its Trump era was already at a disadvantage before the charges. Be it Nikki Haley or Mike Pence or Mr. DeSantis, the political world is busy assessing potential 2024 contenders in Trump terms, obsessing over where they fall on the MAGA spectrum and how delicately they are or are not handling the former president.Team Trump, meanwhile, is happy to play the martyr card for all it’s worth. They have been boasting about using the former president’s legal troubles to fund-raise and sign up volunteers.Any day now, look for the campaign to start hawking bracelets asking: WWDTD? (What would Donald Trump do?) Ms. Greene will surely snap up several. What classier, more tasteful Easter present for the MAGA faithful in one’s life?The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Election: Protasiewicz Wins With Abortion Message

    Janet Protasiewicz prevailed in the state’s highly consequential contest for the Supreme Court, which will now be likely to reverse the state’s abortion ban and end the use of gerrymandered legislative maps.MILWAUKEE — Wisconsin voters on Tuesday chose to upend the political direction of their state by electing a liberal candidate to the State Supreme Court, flipping majority control from conservatives, according to The Associated Press. The result means that in the next year, the court is likely to reverse the state’s abortion ban and end the use of gerrymandered legislative maps drawn by Republicans.Janet Protasiewicz, a liberal Milwaukee County judge, defeated Daniel Kelly, a conservative former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice who sought a return to the bench. With more than 75 percent of votes counted, Judge Protasiewicz led by more than 10 percentage points, though the margin was expected to narrow as rural counties tallied ballots.“Our state is taking a step forward to a better and brighter future where our rights and freedoms will be protected,” Judge Protasiewicz told jubilant supporters at her victory party in Milwaukee.The contest, which featured over $40 million in spending, was the most expensive judicial election in American history. Early on, Democrats recognized the importance of the race for a swing seat on the top court in one of the country’s perennial political battlegrounds. Millions of dollars from out of state poured into Wisconsin to back Judge Protasiewicz, and a host of national Democratic groups rallied behind her campaign.Judge Protasiewicz, 60, shattered long-held notions of how judicial candidates should conduct themselves by making her political priorities central to her campaign. She made explicit her support for abortion rights and called the maps, which gave Republicans near-supermajority control of the Legislature, “rigged” and “unfair.”Her election to a 10-year term for an officially nonpartisan seat gives Wisconsin’s liberals a 4-to-3 majority on the court, which has been controlled by conservatives since 2008. Liberals will hold a court majority until at least 2025, when a liberal justice’s term expires. A conservative justice’s term ends in 2026.As the race was called Tuesday night, the court’s three sitting liberal justices embraced at Judge Protasiewicz’s election night party in Milwaukee, as onlookers cried tears of joy. During her speech, the judge and the other three liberal justices clasped their hands together in the air in celebration.“Today’s results mean two very important and special things,” Judge Protasiewicz said. “First, it means that Wisconsin voters have made their voices heard. They have chosen to reject partisan extremism in this state. And second, it means our democracy will always prevail.”Justice Kelly, 59, evinced the bitterness of the campaign with a testy concession speech that acknowledged his defeat and portended doom for the state. He called his rival’s campaign “truly beneath contempt” and decried “the rancid slanders that were launched against me.”“I wish that I’d be able to concede to a worthy opponent, but I do not have a worthy opponent,” Justice Kelly told supporters in Green Lake, Wis. He had not called Judge Protasiewicz by the time she delivered her victory remarks.He concluded the final speech of his campaign by saying, “I wish Wisconsin the best of luck, because I think it’s going to need it.”Judge Protasiewicz made a calculation from the start of the race that Wisconsin voters would reward her for making clear her positions on abortion rights and the state’s maps — issues most likely to animate and energize the base of the Democratic Party.In an interview at her home on Tuesday before the results were known, Judge Protasiewicz (pronounced pro-tuh-SAY-witz) attributed her success on the campaign trail to the decision to inform voters of what she called “my values,” as opposed to Justice Kelly, who used fewer specifics about his positions.“Rather than reading between the lines and having to do your sleuthing around like I think people have to do with him, I think I would rather just let people know what my values are,” she said. “We’ll see tonight if the electorate appreciates that candor or not.”Over the last dozen years, the court has served as an important backstop for Wisconsin Republicans. It certified as constitutional Gov. Scott Walker’s early overhauls to state government, including the Act 10 law that gutted public employee unions, as well as voting restrictions like a requirement for a state-issued identification and a ban on ballot drop boxes.In 2020, Wisconsin’s Supreme Court was the only one in the country to agree to hear President Donald J. Trump’s challenge to the presidential election. Mr. Trump sought to invalidate 200,000 ballots from the state’s two largest Democratic counties. The Wisconsin court rejected his claim on a 4-to-3 vote, with one of the conservative justices siding with the court’s three liberals on procedural grounds.That key vote gave this year’s court race extra importance, because the justices will weigh in on voting and election issues surrounding the 2024 election. Wisconsin, where Mr. Trump’s triumph in 2016 interrupted a string of Democratic presidential victories going back to 1988, is set to again be ferociously contested.The court has acted in Republicans’ interest on issues that have received little attention outside the state.In 2020, a year after Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, succeeded Mr. Walker, conservative justices agreed to limit his line-item veto authority, which generations of Wisconsin governors from both parties had used. Last year, the court’s conservatives allowed a Walker appointee whose term had expired to remain in office over Mr. Evers’s objection.Once Judge Protasiewicz assumes her place on the court on Aug. 1, the first priority for Wisconsin Democrats will be to bring a case to challenge the current legislative maps, which have given Republicans all but unbreakable control of the state government in Madison.Jeffrey A. Mandell, the president of Law Forward, a progressive law firm that has represented Mr. Evers, said he would file a legal request for the Supreme Court to hear a redistricting case the day after Judge Protasiewicz is seated.“Pretty much everything problematic in Wisconsin flows from the gerrymandering,” Mr. Mandell said in an interview on Tuesday. “Trying to address the gerrymander and reverse the extreme partisan gerrymandering we have is the highest priority.”The state’s abortion ban, which was enacted in 1849, seven decades before women could vote, is already being challenged by Josh Kaul, Wisconsin’s Democratic attorney general. This week, a circuit court in Dane County scheduled the first oral arguments on Mr. Kaul’s case for May 4, but whichever way a county judge rules, the case is all but certain to advance on appeal to the State Supreme Court later this year.Dan Simmons More

  • in

    Trump’s Prime-Time Speech From Mar-a-Lago: A Laundry List of Grievances

    Former President Donald J. Trump, speaking at his Florida resort at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday evening hours after his arraignment in New York, cast the case against him as unfair and politically motivated in an unusually short 21-minute speech that focused as much on other grievances and investigations.Standing before his family members, Republican Party officials and allies, Mr. Trump called the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, a “criminal,” claiming without evidence that Mr. Bragg had leaked information from the grand jury. And Mr. Trump also called the judge overseeing the case, Juan M. Merchan, “a Trump-hating judge with a Trump-hating wife and family.”In the courtroom during his arraignment earlier on Tuesday, Justice Merchan admonished Mr. Trump about his public remarks, urging him to refrain from making statements about the case with “the potential to incite violence and civil unrest.”In his speech, which was carried live by CNN and Fox News, Mr. Trump spent much of his time airing other perceived wrongs against him. He renewed his criticisms of the F.B.I.’s search of Mar-a-Lago in August, the New York attorney general’s civil investigation into him and his family’s business dealings and the open case in Georgia about his meddling in the 2020 election there.“This is a persecution, not an investigation,” he said of the New York attorney general’s case.Anticipation for Mr. Trump’s remarks had been building all day as cable networks and national media outlets delivered minute-by-minute updates. The former president, meanwhile, declined to speak with reporters in New York and instead saved his remarks for a prime-time address back home in Florida..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.But Mr. Trump seemed to squander his opportunity with a speech that was long on complaints and light on applause lines. Inside the ballroom, the biggest cheer of the night was when he ended his speech by repeating his 2016 campaign motto.His remarks amount to a strategy that has become commonplace for Mr. Trump: blurring the lines between his court battles and political opponents to sway public opinion over his arrest while ginning up enthusiasm — and campaign contributions — from supporters.The ballroom at Mar-a-Lago where Mr. Trump spoke — the same spot where he announced his third White House bid in November — was set up with a wide walkway for Trump allies and relatives to make their entrances. The design also divided the room in a way that made the crowd appear larger than it was. Roughly 350 seats were set up for the audience, which included two of Mr. Trump’s adult children, Tiffany Trump and Donald Trump Jr., as well as Representatives Matt Gaetz of Florida and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, both far-right Republicans.The former president spoke roughly seven hours after he left a Manhattan courthouse, where he pleaded not guilty to 34 felony charges that prosecutors brought against him over his role in coordinating hush-money payments to a porn star. He is the first former president to face the prospect of a criminal trial.Mr. Trump has long aimed to paint himself as a target of politically motivated attacks and claimed the charges against him were baseless. Shortly after being indicted by a grand jury last week, he issued a statement calling the indictment “political persecution and election interference at the highest level in history.”His message has resonated with supporters. Since his indictment, Mr. Trump’s poll numbers in the 2024 Republican presidential primary have risen by double digits, even as some longtime supporters have slowed in their rush to defend him. As he was arraigned on Tuesday, a crowd of his supporters gathered in the streets outside the Manhattan courthouse. More

  • in

    Wisconsin’s High-Stakes Supreme Court Race: What to Watch

    The election for a swing seat on the court is likely to determine whether abortion remains illegal in Wisconsin, as well as the future of the state’s heavily gerrymandered political maps.WAUKESHA, Wis. — American political candidates routinely drum up support by warning voters that this election, really, is the most important of their lifetimes.It’s almost always an exaggeration, but the description might just fit for Wisconsin’s deeply polarized voters, who on Tuesday will choose a justice to fill a swing seat on the state’s Supreme Court.The winner — either Janet Protasiewicz, a liberal Milwaukee County judge, or Daniel Kelly, a conservative former State Supreme Court justice — will have the deciding vote on a host of major issues, including abortion rights, gerrymandered political maps, and voting and election cases surrounding the 2024 presidential contest.Officials on both sides have described the stakes of the officially nonpartisan race in existential terms — either they win and democracy survives, or they lose and it perishes.Wisconsin Democrats, who have been lost in the political wilderness for a dozen years, cast Judge Protasiewicz as their path to a promised land of abortion rights and fair maps. The state’s Republicans say Justice Kelly is their last hope to ward off liberal tyranny by fiat.Here are four themes animating Tuesday’s election:Wisconsin could turn sharply back to the left — or not.Wisconsin Republicans tend to talk about the election as if Judge Protasiewicz would roll onto the Supreme Court with a giant eraser to wipe out all of the legislative policies and structural advantages the G.O.P. has built for itself since Scott Walker became governor in 2011.They’re not entirely wrong.“A lot of the duly passed laws by the elected representatives of the state of Wisconsin would be deemed invalid,” Duey Stroebel, a Republican state senator from Cedarburg, said last week. “It wouldn’t be the people electing their representatives that would be making decisions, it would be her, based on her personal beliefs.”Indeed, Judge Protasiewicz has been clear about her views. She has signaled her opposition to Wisconsin’s 1849 law banning abortion in nearly all cases, which went back into effect when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last summer, and she has called the legislative maps Republicans drew to give themselves a durable near-supermajority in the State Legislature “rigged” and “unfair.”But the state’s Democrats sound similarly apocalyptic about the prospect of Justice Kelly, who lost a 2020 bid to retain his seat on the court, returning to deliver conservatives a majority. He is aligned with the state’s anti-abortion groups and has said there is no legal problem with the maps.He also worked as a legal adviser for the Republican National Committee and the Republican Party of Wisconsin when they sought to overturn the results of the state’s 2020 presidential election. That Republican effort to undo Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory in Wisconsin was only narrowly rejected by the State Supreme Court, which voted 4 to 3 to uphold the results.“Dan Kelly advised fake electors in 2020,” said Greta Neubauer, the Democratic leader in the Wisconsin State Assembly, referring to a brazen plan by former President Donald J. Trump and his allies to overturn results in several states. “I absolutely fear what he would do in 2024 if a challenge to the popular vote and the election results came in front of him.”Abortion and crime are the two main issues.From the beginning of her campaign, Judge Protasiewicz (pronounced pro-tuh-SAY-witz) has sought to make the race a referendum on abortion rights in Wisconsin. Her campaign has spent $12 million on television ads in the last six weeks reminding voters that she supports them and Justice Kelly does not.“Judge Janet Protasiewicz believes in women’s freedom to make their own decisions when it comes to abortion,” her closing television ad states.It is a bet on the power of the most potent issue for Democrats since last summer, when the U.S. Supreme Court left the issue to the states.Even Republicans acknowledge privately that if the election is about abortion, Judge Protasiewicz has the advantage. Justice Kelly has not been as explicit, but he has implied that because legislators enacted the state’s abortion ban 174 years ago, they would need to rescind the law — something the current Republican majorities are unlikely to do.Hundreds of abortion rights supporters marched to the State Capitol in Madison, Wis., in January. Nearly all abortions became illegal in Wisconsin when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York Times“He’s running a bit of a traditional campaign talking about larger issues of judicial restraint and things of that nature,” said Mr. Walker, the former governor who appointed Justice Kelly to the State Supreme Court in 2016. “She just spelled it out, and that very well may be the case for the left and the right in the future, just people saying, ‘Here’s how I’m going to vote.’”Republicans, as usually happens in Wisconsin, have tried to make the election about crime. Outside groups backing Justice Kelly have bombarded Judge Protasiewicz with ads attacking her as soft on violent criminals.Last week, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the state’s business lobby, removed from the television airwaves an ad claiming that Judge Protasiewicz had issued a soft sentence to a convicted rapist. The victim in that case had told The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the ad had caused her new trauma and that she had no problem with the length of the sentence.In another episode, the Republican Party of Wisconsin, while southern Wisconsin was under a tornado watch last week, texted to voters a replica of an emergency weather alert warning that Judge Protasiewicz was “a soft-on-crime politician with a long history of letting dangerous criminals go free.”The cash-filled contest is all over Wisconsin TV screens.All indications are that more people will vote in this Supreme Court election than any other in Wisconsin history.More people voted in the Feb. 21 primary contest than participated in the state’s primaries in August, when there were races for governor and Senate. According to data from the Wisconsin Elections Commission, the early-vote total as of Monday amounted to about a third of the total turnout of the 2019 State Supreme Court race, the last one that did not fall on the same day as a presidential primary.The record-smashing spending in the race — $39 million on television alone, according to AdImpact, a media-tracking firm — has ensured that just about every Wisconsinite is at least aware of the race, a key hurdle in typically low-turnout spring elections.The ultimate cost is expected to triple the previous high-water mark for spending on an American judicial election, which was $15 million for a 2004 Illinois Supreme Court race.Weeks ago, Wisconsin Democrats switched their strategy. Instead of sending door-to-door canvassers to visit voters who typically cast ballots in spring elections, they focused on reaching out to a broader group of people who tend to vote in November general elections.“When I was out knocking on doors a month or two months ago, people were aware that this election was coming, because they were seeing YouTube ads with their kids,” Ms. Neubauer said. “They were being bombarded with information about this election.”A key State Senate race is also unfolding.Wisconsin is also holding a special election on Tuesday for a vacant State Senate seat that covers parts of four counties in the suburbs north of Milwaukee.The district has long been held by Republicans but is trending away from the party. Mr. Trump carried it by 12 percentage points in 2016 but by only 5 in 2020. The Democratic candidate, Jodi Habush Sinykin, is contesting it with a heavy emphasis on abortion rights.Jodi Habush Sinykin, a Democrat, is running for a State Senate seat in suburbs north of Milwaukee. Morry Gash/Associated PressIf the Republican candidate, State Representative Dan Knodl, wins, his party will have a two-thirds supermajority in the State Senate, which would allow the G.O.P. to impeach and remove judges, statewide elected officials and appointees of Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat.Mr. Knodl, in an interview with PBS Wisconsin, said the impeachment powers granted to State Senate Republicans with his election “certainly would be tested.”Mr. Stroebel, the Republican state senator from Cedarburg, called impeaching Judge Protasiewicz over expected rulings on abortion and gerrymandering unlikely “but certainly not impossible.”If Dan Knodl wins his race for State Senate, Republicans will have a two-thirds supermajority, which would allow them to impeach and remove judges, statewide elected officials and appointees of Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat.Mark Hoffman/Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, via Associated Press“If she truly acts in terms of ignoring our laws and applying her own personal beliefs, then maybe that’s something people will talk about,” he said. “If the rulings are contrary to what our state laws and Constitution say, I think there could be an issue.”Even if Republicans do not seek to impeach Democratic officials, the mere possibility could limit Democrats’ ambitions.“Just the threat of it obviously changes the way that public officials will act,” said Kelda Roys, a Democratic state senator from Madison. “It will make agency heads and civil servants be extremely timid and feel like they can’t carry out their job responsibilities.” More

  • in

    Donald Trump and New York City Brace for a Consequential Week

    Donald Trump and his campaign spent the weekend making plans for his arrest, and how to capitalize on it, while officials in New York prepared for potential turmoil.Former President Donald J. Trump is preparing to walk into a Manhattan courtroom as both a defendant and a candidate, making final plans for his arrest on Tuesday while also trying to maximize his surrender for political benefit. Officials in New York, meanwhile, are bracing for the circuslike atmosphere that expected protests might bring.The Trump campaign on Sunday scheduled a prime-time news conference at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday night, just hours after Mr. Trump is expected to turn himself in. The campaign also has been using his indictment in fund-raising appeals, and said it had raised $4 million in just 24 hours, though financial records corroborating the claim will not be available for weeks.The planning reflects Mr. Trump’s belief that the indictment will ultimately bolster his standing in his third bid for the G.O.P. presidential nomination, with Republicans who had been considering alternatives rallying to his side. His recent polling has been among the strongest of his 2024 campaign.On Sunday, some Trump critics came to his defense, suggesting that the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, might have targeted him unfairly. The actual crimes Mr. Trump is accused of are not publicly known, though they are believed to be related to a hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels, a former porn star who claims she had an affair with Mr. Trump. The indictment, news of which broke on Thursday, may not be unsealed before his arraignment.Mr. Trump is expected to fly into La Guardia Airport from Florida on his private plane on Monday afternoon, and then stay the night at his apartment in Trump Tower, meeting with his lawyers while there. Aides are trying to negotiate a short visit to the courthouse in Lower Manhattan, for a midafternoon arraignment, people familiar with his plans said.The next few days could be critical for Mr. Trump, and advisers have warned him that he could easily damage his own case, according to a person involved in the discussions who requested anonymity because the talks were private. He wrote an especially incendiary post on his social media site, Truth Social, that featured a news article with a photo of Mr. Bragg on one side and Mr. Trump holding a baseball bat on the other. It was eventually taken down, after pleading by advisers. And he has already attacked the judge — comments his lawyers tried to smooth over in appearances on the morning talk shows on Sunday.Mr. Trump kept a typical schedule over the weekend.The Trump campaign on Sunday announced plans for a news conference at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday night.Josh Ritchie for The New York TimesOn Friday night, he attended a housewarming event for an associate near Mar-a-Lago, his home in Palm Beach, Fla. He golfed on Saturday and spent time with Gary Player, the South African retired professional golfer, at the nearby Trump International Golf Club, and dined at Mar-a-Lago on Saturday night (his legal adviser, Boris Epshteyn, was spotted nearby in a three-piece suit). Mr. Trump has been relatively calm, according to people who have spoken with him, exhibiting little of the anxiety he had in the lead-up to the indictment.When he arrives in court, Mr. Trump, unlike typical defendants, will be surrounded by a phalanx of Secret Service agents, making all logistics much more complicated. He will be fingerprinted and will possibly have a police photo taken; such photos are typically not released publicly in New York, although the intense public interest in this case could change that. While it is normal for defendants charged with felonies to be handcuffed — as the former Trump Organization chief financial officer, Allen H. Weisselberg, was in 2021 — one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Joseph Tacopina, has said he does not expect that to occur.Before the arraignment, Mr. Trump is likely to be held in an interview room as opposed to a cell, according to the person involved in the Trump team’s discussions. He will then enter a courtroom and make his plea, which is expected to be not guilty. While there is expected to be at least one camera set up in the courthouse hallway capturing Mr. Trump’s walk to the courtroom, cameras are typically not allowed in New York courtrooms. However, news organizations have asked the judge to make an exception.Law enforcement officials were preparing for a chaotic atmosphere, with protests around Trump Tower and near the courthouse. Barricades were set up near Mr. Trump’s office tower, stretching several blocks.Police officers were warned that they might be called on for crowd control around the courthouse. And the presence of what is likely the most famous defendant the Manhattan Criminal Court has ever seen, with his own unique security needs, has led to all kinds of changes in how the courthouse will function that day.Still, despite concerns about potential for violence, particularly after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol building by a pro-Trump mob, there were few signs that a repeat was likely..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.Mr. Trump’s advisers have been trying to impress upon him the need to avoid rousing his supporters in a way that leads to violence, people close to the former president have said.On Sunday, Mr. Tacopina and another of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Jim Trusty, appeared on television programs and tried to tamp down any inflammation their client might have caused on social media, particularly through his attacks on the judge in the case, Juan M. Merchan, an acting New York Supreme Court justice. Mr. Trump has claimed Justice Merchan, who also presided over the trial of the Trump Organization last year, was “hand picked” by prosecutors. And last week, Mr. Trump declared on Truth Social that Justice Merchan “hates me.”“I have no issue with this judge whatsoever,” Mr. Tacopina said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “He has a very good reputation.”Mr. Tacopina has otherwise aggressively defended Mr. Trump on television, and some of Mr. Trump’s advisers have privately complained that the lawyer is not helping his client’s cause. Mr. Trump, whose legal team is in flux, has told several people he thinks Mr. Tacopina is a “fighter.”As he heads into this consequential week, Mr. Trump finds himself in the unusual position of receiving support from nearly all factions of the Republican Party; even officials he considers enemies have condemned Mr. Bragg’s pursuit of Mr. Trump.“This seems to be more about the person than about the crime,” Senator Bill Cassidy, Republican of Louisiana, said on “Fox News Sunday.” Mr. Cassidy voted to convict Mr. Trump for his role instigating the Jan. 6 attack.Another surprising defender emerged in William P. Barr, the former attorney general who fell out bitterly with Mr. Trump because Mr. Barr refused to go along with his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. In a “Fox News Sunday” interview, Mr. Barr sharply criticized Mr. Bragg’s indictment and predicted it would set off a wave of politically motivated prosecutions.“I do think that this is a watershed moment, and I don’t think it’s going to end up good for the country,” he added.Mr. Barr did, however, offer some tongue-in-cheek advice for his former boss, who faces multiple investigations that may result in charges: It would be a “particularly bad idea” for Mr. Trump to appear on the stand.“He lacks all self-control,” Mr. Barr said. “And it would be very difficult to prepare him and keep him testifying in a prudent fashion.”William P. Barr with Mr. Trump in 2020. The two had a falling out after Mr. Barr would not support the former president’s plans to overturn his 2020 election loss.Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesTo that end, Cyrus Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney who preceded Mr. Bragg and whose office led most of the investigation into the practices of Mr. Trump’s business, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he was “disturbed” that Mr. Trump had been attacking not just Mr. Bragg but also the judge in the case.Mr. Vance said, “I think if I were his lawyer — and believe me, no one has called up to ask for my advice — I would be mindful of not committing some other criminal offense like obstruction of governmental administration, which is interfering, by threat or otherwise, with the operation of government.”Mr. Bragg has said little publicly about the investigation or the criticisms leveled at him by Republicans. Last week, his office, in a letter to congressional Republicans who have threatened to investigate the actions of the district attorney’s office, said accusations that the investigation was politically motivated were “unfounded.” The letter, signed by the office’s general counsel, Leslie B. Dubeck, said that the charges against Mr. Trump “were brought by citizens of New York, doing their civic duty as members of a grand jury.”Knowing that Mr. Bragg is expected to hold a news conference at some point on Tuesday, Mr. Trump has scheduled his own for that evening, when he plans to be back at Mar-a-Lago. He is also expected to deliver remarks to supporters at his club, similar to his event last November announcing his third run for president.Some Trump allies have made clear they want any protests in New York to remain civil, particularly because Mr. Trump has called for his supporters to protest. His longest-serving adviser, Roger J. Stone Jr., urged supporters to be “peaceful” and “legal” if they showed up for a planned rally outside Trump Tower late Monday morning.Reporting was contributed by More

  • in

    To Boldly Go Where No President Has Gone Before

    Bret Stephens: Hi, Gail. I have a clear memory of Democrats defending Bill Clinton tooth and nail for lying under oath in the Paula Jones case, about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. At the time, they said it was “just about sex” and that Clinton lied to protect his family and marriage.Morally speaking, is that better than, worse than or equal to the allegation that Donald Trump falsified business records to cover his alleged affair with Stormy Daniels (and possibly another paramour, too)?Gail Collins: Bret, sex scandal aficionado that I am, I’m sorta tempted to go back and revisit Clinton’s argument that he didn’t lie about Monica Lewinsky because it doesn’t count as having sex if … well, no. Guess not.Bret: To say nothing of Clinton parsing the meaning of the word “is.”Gail: Still, I’d say the Stormy Daniels episode — an ongoing, well-financed cover-up during a presidential campaign — was worse.Bret: Hmm. Trump wasn’t president at the time of the alleged affair the way Clinton was. And Daniels wasn’t a starry-eyed 22-year-old intern whose life got destroyed in the process. And lying under oath is usually a felony, unlike falsifying business records, which is usually treated as a misdemeanor.Gail: If you want to argue that Trump’s not the worst sex-scandal offender, I’m fine with it. Won’t even mention Grover Cleveland …Bret: “Ma, ma, where’s my pa?” Always liked Grover.Gail: Of all the investigations into Trump’s egregious misconduct, this strikes me as almost minor compared with, say, trying to change presidential election results, urging a crowd of supporters to march on the Capitol or illegally taking, retaining and hiding secret government documents or …OK, taking a rest.Bret: Totally agree. My fear is that the indictment will focus the media spotlight on Trump, motivate his base, paralyze his Republican opponents and ultimately help him win the G.O.P. nomination. In the first poll after the indictment, Trump’s lead over his Republican rivals jumped. Maybe that will make it easier for Democrats to hold the White House next year, but it also potentially means we could get Benito Milhous Caligula back in office.The only thing that will hurt Trump is if he’s ignored in the press and beaten at the polls. Instead, we’re contributing to the problem just by speaking about it.Gail: OK, now I’m changing subjects. It hurts my heart to talk about this, but we have to consider the terrible school shooting in Nashville — it doesn’t seem to have moved the needle one centimeter on issues like banning assault weapons or 30-round magazines. Pro-gun lawmakers, in light of the Covenant School shooting, are once again arguing that schools would be safer if the teachers could have their own pistols.Bret: I’m not opposed to an armed cop or a well-trained security guard on school campuses, who might be able to respond much faster to an emergency than the police could. Teachers? Seems like a really, really bad idea.With respect to everything else, I’m sometimes inclined to simply give up. Gun control isn’t realistic in a country with more guns than people. Even if stringent gun control were somehow enacted, it would function roughly the same way stringent drug laws work: People who wanted to obtain guns illegally could easily get them. I think we ought to repeal the Second Amendment, or at least reinterpret it to mean that anyone who wants a gun must belong to a “well-regulated militia.” But in our lifetimes that’s a political pipe dream.So we’re left in the face of tragedies like Nashville’s feeling heartbroken, furious, speechless and helpless.Gail: Your impulse to give up the fight is probably sensible, but I just can’t go there. Gotta keep pushing; we can’t cave in to folks who think it’s un-American to require loaded weapons be stored where kids can’t get at them.Bret: Another side of me wants to agree with you. Let’s ban high-capacity magazines, raise the age threshold for gun purchases and heavily fine people if they fail to properly store weapons. I just wonder if it will make much of a difference.Gail: Well, it sure as hell wouldn’t hurt.Bret: Very true.Gail: Let’s move on before I get deeply depressed. We’re slowly creeping toward an election year — close enough that people who want to run for office for real have to start mobilizing. Anybody you really love/hate out there now?Bret: Next year is going to be a tough one for Senate Democrats. They’re defending 23 of the 34 seats that are up for grabs, including in ever-redder states like Montana and West Virginia.I’d love to see a serious Democratic challenger to Ted Cruz in Texas, and by serious I mean virtually anyone other than Beto O’Rourke. And I’d love to see Kari Lake run for a Senate seat in Arizona so that she can lose again.You?Gail: Funny, I was thinking the same thing about Ted Cruz the other night. Wonderful the way that man can bring us together.Bret: He even brings me closer to Trump. “Lyin’ Ted” was priceless.Gail: Another Senate Republican I hope gets a very serious challenger is Rick Scott of Florida, who made that first big proposal to consider slashing Social Security and Medicare.Bret: Good luck with that. Florida may now be redder than Texas.Gail: You’re right about the Democrats having to focus on defense. The endangered incumbent I’m rooting hardest for is Sherrod Brown of Ohio, who’s managed to be a powerful voice for both liberal causes and my reddish home state’s practical interests.Bret: I once got a note from Brown gently reproaching me for using the term Rust Belt about Ohio. The note was so charming, personable and fair that I remember thinking: “This man can’t have a future in American politics.”Gail: And as someone who’s complained bitterly about Joe Manchin over the years, I have to admit that keeping West Virginia in the Democratic column does require very creative and sometimes deeply irritating political performances.Bret: Aha. I knew you’d come around.I don’t know if you’ve followed this, but Manchin is now complaining bitterly that the Biden administration is trying to rewrite the terms of the Inflation Reduction Act, which, with Manchin’s vote, gave the president his biggest legislative win last year. The details are complicated, but the gist is that the administration is hanging him out to dry. Oh, and he’s also skeptical of Trump’s indictment. Don’t be totally surprised if Manchin becomes a Republican in order to save his political skin.Gail: Hmm, my valuation of said skin would certainly drop . …Bret: Which raises the question: How should partisan Democrats, or partisan Republicans, feel about the least ideologically reliable member of their own parties?Gail: Depends. Did they run as freethinkers who shouldn’t be relied on by their party for a vote? Manchin got elected in the first place by promising to be a Democrat who’d “get the federal government off our backs.” But often this explosion of independence comes as a postelection surprise.Bret: Good point. There should be truth in advertising.Gail: Do they — like Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — forget their nonpartisanship when it comes to dipping into donations from partisan fund-raisers?And probably most important — is there a better option? If Sinema had to run for re-election this year, which she doesn’t, I would be a super-enthusiastic supporter if the other choice was Lake, that dreadful former talk show host.Any thoughts on your end?Bret: In my younger, more Republican days, I used to dislike ideological mavericks — they made things too complicated. Now that I’m older, I increasingly admire politicians who make things complicated. I know there’s a fair amount of opportunism and posturing in some of their position taking. But they also model a certain independence of thought and spirit that I find healthy in our Age of Lemmings.Gail: Hoping it’s maybe just the Decade of the Lemmings.Bret: If I had to draw up a list of the Senate heroes of my lifetime, they’d be Daniel Patrick Moynihan, John McCain, Howard Baker, Bob Kerrey and Joe Lieberman. And lately I’d have to add Mitt Romney. All were willing to break with their parties when it counted. How about you?Gail: Well, you may remember that a while back I was contemplating writing a book called “How Joe Lieberman Ruined Everything.”Bret: I recall you weren’t his biggest fan.Gail: Yeah, still blaming him for failing to give Al Gore the proper support in that 2000 recount. But I’ve come around on Mitt Romney. He’s become a strong, independent voice. Of course it’s easier to be brave when you’re a senator from a state that would keep re-electing you if you took a six-year vacation in the Swiss Alps. Nevertheless, I’ve apologized for all that obsessing about his putting the dog on the car roof.Bret: I came around on him too. I was very hard on him in 2012. Either he got better or I got wiser.Gail: I was a big admirer of John McCain. Will never forget following him on his travels when he first ran for president in 2000. He spent months and months driving around New Hampshire talking about campaign finance reform. From one tiny gathering to another. Of all the ambitious pols I’ve known he was the least focused on his own fortunes.Bret: I traveled with McCain on his international junkets. He was hilarious, gregarious, generous, gossipy — a study in being unstudied. If he had won the presidency, the Republican Party wouldn’t have gone insane, American democracy wouldn’t be at risk and Sarah Palin would be just another lame ex-veep.Gail: So, gotta end this with the obvious question, Bret. Republican presidential race! You’re a fan of Nikki Haley, but her campaign doesn’t seem to be going much of anywhere, is it? I know you’ve come to detest Ron DeSantis. Other options?Bret: Biden, cryonics or some small island in the South Atlantic, like St. Helena. Not necessarily in that order.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Super PAC Backing DeSantis Says It Has Raised $30 Million

    Fund-raising is predicted to be a strength for Ron DeSantis, who is expected to announce his bid for the Republican presidential nomination in the coming months.The super PAC that is likely to serve as the main vehicle supporting Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida in a Republican presidential primary has raised $30 million since March 9, a senior official with the group said on Sunday night.The sums raised for the super PAC, named Never Back Down, show the financial might that would back a DeSantis campaign, should he enter the presidential race, as expected, after the Florida legislative session ends in early May.The fund-raising was described by an official with the group, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal operations. The official did not disclose any names of donors.None of the money raised was transferred from another committee, the official said. Mr. DeSantis’s state political committee had more than $82 million as of last month, which could eventually be transferred to another entity supporting him.Because Never Back Down is a federal super PAC, it can raise unlimited sums from donors. Over half the money was donated from people outside Florida, the official said.The group is raising funds online, sending money into a “Draft Ron” entity that could be transferred to an eventual presidential race.Fund-raising is expected to be a strength for Mr. DeSantis in a presidential contest, as a number of major Republican donors have expressed interest in him as a formidable challenger to the front-runner, former President Donald J. Trump.Mr. Trump, who was never the favorite of most major donors but who had most of their support while he was president, has not mustered the same type of backing for his 2024 presidential campaign. (He is scheduled to be arraigned on Tuesday in Manhattan in a case related to hush-money payments to a porn actress.)By contrast, Mr. DeSantis is expected to have tens of millions of dollars in commitments of support from donors, according to one Republican fund-raiser familiar with his operation. Money, this Republican said, will not be a problem for Mr. DeSantis.Never Back Down is being led by Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, who served as acting deputy secretary of homeland security under Mr. Trump. Mr. Cuccinelli has been traveling the country to drum up support for a DeSantis candidacy.The super PAC recently hired Jeff Roe, a Republican strategist who has played key roles in advising Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia, among others. And the team has hired several other national campaign veterans, including some who worked for Mr. Trump.For the 2024 Republican nomination, Mr. Trump has consistently led in national public polling of primary voters, and Mr. DeSantis has been his closest competitor in a still-growing field. On Sunday, former Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas announced his campaign, joining a fellow former Republican governor, Nikki Haley of South Carolina, looking to challenge Mr. Trump.Mr. Trump also has a super PAC, Make America Great Again PAC, which recently began running ads attacking Mr. DeSantis. The group has not released fund-raising numbers. More