There will be a GOP presidential candidate’s debate, hosted by Fox News, on Wednewsday in Milwaukee. There’s another one scheduled for September 27 in Simi Valley, California, to be hosted by Fox Business and Univision.
I have no intention of watching either one. I’m sure somebody will post highlights.
Trump intends to skip the first debate. Instead, he’s going to be interviewed online by Tucker Carlson. I’ve just learned this interview will be prerecorded and released at the same time as the televised debate. It would be great fun if the official debate gets a lot more viewers than the interview, however.
It’s tempting to dismiss the GOP nomination contest as Trump and the Seven or So Dwarves. But it’s not impossible for one or two of the not-Trump candidates to break out of the pack and become serious contenders after the debates. No, I’m not going to guess who that might be. But televised debates have been known to elevate minor candidates while deflating major ones.
The candidates who for sure will be debating Wednesday are Ron DeSantis, Vivek Ramaswamy. Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, and Doug Burgum. Mike Pence allegedly qualified, but some news sources still have him listed as maybe. Chris Christie is maybe still a maybe. Asa Hutchinson, Francis Suarez, and Will Hurd are probably nots. But that could change.
Note also that the big money donors of the GOP are backing away from Trump. They would prefer someone who could pass for a normal human being, which leaves out most of the current field. But there’s a lot of interest in Glenn Youngkin and Brian Kemp. Meanwhile, Trump is burning through donors’ money paying for his legal defense(s). Even if he’s the nominee and stays out of jail, he’s not going to have much left to pay for a national general election campaign. Although maybe the big money guys will bail him out.
There is roughly eleven months before the 2024 RNC Convention in Milwaukee. A whole lot could happen in those months that none of us anticipate. But I can’t imagine how the Republican Party is not royally bleeped right now. If Trump is the nominee, they’re bleeped. If he isn’t the nominee he’s likely to attempt an independent run, and the GOP is still bleeped.
Karma has a hell of a lot of work to do.
It has almost 60 years of RepubliKKKLAN malfeasance to deal with.
It's almost as if after playing a critical role in the Voting & Civil Rights Acts, the RepubliKKKLANS turned to The Dark Side – thanks to Barry Goldwater In '64 & then Richard Nixon in '68. And then, Ronald Reagan was elected CA's Governor right after the VRA & CRA Acts, in 1966, and immediately played the role Ron DeSantis is following: A GQP Governor who turns his state, California, into a 'Laboratory of Anti-democracy."
————————————————–
BTW & WAAAAY OT:
I'm back in the hospital. Been here since Monday afternoon.
Intestinal issues.
Oy…
That's why you haven't heard from me since last weekend.
I don't know how long I'll be in here. Hopefully not long.
I'll comment when I can.
And hopefully my issues won't turn out to be overly serious.
Keep your fingers crossed!
Hospitals are icky. I hope they spring you out soon.
It's a bit ominous that they didn't kick you out on Friday. Insurance companies hate paying for weekends, unless it's necessary. Hope you're on the mend and can get outta there.
Teri Kanefield, quoting an Atlanta law professor and expert on local law, said it’s unlikely the Fani Willis case will start before the election. He says just seating a jury in a Georgia RICO case can take months, esp given the # of defendants. OTOH, lawyers I’ve read say they expect the number of defendants to shrink, as many of them seek get-me-out-of-jail deals.
Get well!
Sorry to hear you are in the hospital, GULAG. Agree with Maha, hospitals suck. Been there. We're pulling for you.
If you look at the whole scene, there's a major fight between Trump and Fox. First point: Fox paid out almost 800 million to settle a lawsuit. There's a second suit that may cost them as much. So in the neighborhood of 1.5 BILLION for spreading what Fox KNEW were lies about the election.
Second point: Trump was recently interviewed on Fox by Hannity, I think. No surprise that Trump went back to the same set of lies about the election being stolen. But this time, when the interview was broadcast, uncut, they cut immediately after the end to a disclaimer that Fox recognizes Biden as the legitimate president after a free and fair election. Since then, Trump has been pouting about Fox, the photos of Trump they select for news, blah, blah, blah. The upshot is that Trump wants flattering, fawning coverage with no criticism of his outright falsehoods.
Third point: Trump is doing the interview with Carlson, who was fired from Fox. Trump has openly disagreed with the decision. Now, Trump will cut into what should be a high-ratings show by directly competing with the debate. If Tucker and Trump don't spend a bunch of time bashing Fox, I will be amazed.
As I see it, Trump is telling Fox, "You work for me or I will ruin you." Fox has to consider that ultimatum seriously. IMO, the total loss from the suits against Fox will keep them less dishonest than Trump wants them to be.
Maha pointed out that the GOP big donors have closed their wallets. Bigger than that is that lawyers from the Federalist Society have come out strong with the position that Trump is INELIGIBLE to be president because of J6. Where did the ultra-conservative justices on the USSC come from? Yep, the Federalist Society.
Arizona confirmed there is an open investigation into the fake electors' scheme and the pressure campaign by Trump to reverse his loss in Arizona. A few honest Republicans thwarted Trump there. Rusty Bowers comes to mind – he testified to the J6 committee. AZ elected a Dem to the governor's office, (Hobbs was the AZ Secretary of State who defended the election of Biden. She beat Kari Lake.) This could easily go to trial in another set of charges against Trump.
I'd expect Trump to take a swipe at Fox, but not Carlson. I'm certain a "say nothing bad about us" provision was part of his severance deal, and as far as I've seen, he's kept true to it. As a low-level nobody engineer, I've signed severance deals like this – with way fewer zeros in the payout – and this kind of provision is absolutely part of it, otherwise you forfeit the loot. It's clever of Carlson to perhaps get around this by running his production in the same time slot, competing against Fox.
I wonder who initiated it, Carlson or Trump. I'm sure Carlson is aching for the level of ratings, exposure, and influence he once enjoyed at Fox.
I am certain Trump's spew will be edited down into something more resembling an infomercial. He's grown more and more incoherent and angry as the walls close in. I had the misfortune of watching some footage of him at a recent rally, titillating the sad losers in my hometown (Erie, PA) – they were cheering and applauding a lot of random angry noise (how embarrassing). Carlson's editors will certainly clean that up, and it may be one reason why Trump shied away from a live format. Inside he must know his schtick is wearing thin, and that his ability to act like a normal human being is slipping.
Consider this: while everyone’s paying attention to all these places he’s supposedly maybe not gonna’ be: Fulton County Sherriff's Department, primary debate, campaign rally, pre-recorded interview with Cucker Tarlson … he’s not cuz he’s skippin’ the country
Lot of effort going into multiple distractions
On the bright side: I was in the hospital a year ago with intestinal issues, lost ten pounds! (well, ok, eight) Hang in there Vic …
It says alot that Stump would record and release an interview to compete with with the GOP debate, what a self centered narcissistic asshole, but we all know that and so do the magats that's why they love him. Deplorables! Get Well soon Gulag!
I advise everyone to read emptywheel.
The Chesbro info is food for alot of thought. Who was he reporting to and to me who was Alex Jones working for on January 6?
Jones strikes me as a greedy sort who did not fund the rally out of his own pocket. Who gave him the money for the rally and what a performance to march down and yell etc but not go in but quietly disappear?
I truly hope some of these rats do turn and quit pleading the 5th.
And yes Gulag get out and go home. Hospitals are full of germs and bad food( I know I still have my nursing license). Take care.
Thanks, folks!
Aj, the food at my Assisted Dying facility is so bad, I actually look forward to hospital food- at least this one!
Tremendous Ali Velshi interview, J. Michael Luttig and Laurence Tribe make the case for Trump’s disqualification from public office, this is based on the article these two just published in The Atlantic, which is in turn based on the opinion/research done by the two Federalist Society lawyers.
Velshi is a great interviewer, and cuts to how this would actually work. It comes down to each state’s Secretary of State (whoever has the job of qualifying and putting people on the ballot) either: refusing to put Trump on the ballot, OR putting him on the ballot, AND: someone filing a lawsuit saying this violates Article 14 Section 3. It then goes up to the Supreme Court.
Tribe, in the video makes it very clear that Trump does not need to be convicted of insurrection. All the months of focus on Trump’s crimes and indictments are a side issue.
So the question is: which blue state Secretary of State will kick this off by refusing to qualify Trump under Article 14 Section 3. I’m looking at Michigan’s courageous Jocelyn Benson for starts.
Interesting. For the sake of speculation, let's say Jack Smith gets a January trial date. Again, speculating, let's say Jack wins and gets a conviction on all four counts by the end of Feb. Even if the case is under appeal, the conviction is a legal fact and the factual link between Trump and the attempt to overturn the election, including the use of force is a fact.
IMO, Trump's support of Ashley Babbit in the months after J6 clearly establish, "aid and comfort" to the insurrectionists. The clip of her participating in the violent advance and her violent death are irrefutable. Trump is offering pardons to J6 criminals. Trump's statements are a matter of record. I bring this up because Trump will say his support of J6 rioters does not extend to the people who assaulted cops. That's a lie.
The GOP convention is in mid-July, '24. Let's say Trump officially is the GOP nominee then. I'm no lawyer, but how a Secretary of State (Moonbat mentioned Jocelyn Benson of MI.) would respond to Trump being the GOP nominee is academic until the GOP convention makes it official.
In the third week of July, Michigan (and perhaps several other states) through their Secretaries of State, announce Trump is ineligible and will not be on the General Election ballots. (I would not rule out AZ joining in.) Trump will sue and the case will go to the USSC.
The conservative side of the USSC are all (I think) Federalist Society judges. Most of them became candidates for the court because they were sponsored by the FS. In theory, the judges of the FS owe nothing to the club that brought them along, but the corruption on that side of the court stinks to hell and back.
As Moonbat pointed out, a couple of FS lawyers are publicly making the case that Trump is ineligible. It's not the official position of the FS but I doubt the lawyers published their opinions without consultation with the Federalist Society. IDK if the FS can influence the judges on the High Court who they positioned there. It would seem likely to me that they could move two of them to side with the liberal wing and disqualify Trump.
That would take Trump out of contention about a month before the General Election.
When I wrote the note above, focusing on Secretaries of State, it's not the only way, or even the most likely way. One of Trump's competitors (let's say Ramaswamy – you know who I mean even if I have his name wrong) – could loudly start calling Trump unqualified per the Constitution. And so while a Secretary of State is the formal control point as to who gets on the ballot, he or she may be incidental as to who gets the ball rolling. Tribe mentions that anybody could sue over this, and it's hard to imagine one of Trump's competitors not suing to get Trump off the stage.
I'm trying to figure out if there's ANY way to get the issue of whether or not Trump is legally disqualified for federal office into court. If the federal J6 case goes to a jury and Trump is convicted, that strengthens the hand of the USSC. And they are the court that will decide this.
The question is standing. Who has standing to sue? The Constitution says Trump can't hold office (if he's aided the insurrection OR the insurrectionists.) But who is harmed by Trump running for office by the hypothetical consequences that he might win and be declared ineligible?
I favor waiting until after there's a verdict in the J6 trial. After that, how do you get the issue into court?
I believe Tribe argued in the video that any voter or any of Trump's competitors has standing. Review the way he explained it.
IMO this is ideally resolved asap, before millions cast votes for TFG. Declaring him ineligible afterwards would create a colossal mess, and might cause the quest to invalidate him via Article 14 to fail. Remember, Trump's indictments, court proceedings and so on have nothing to do with his ineligibility to run as president, and so disqualifying him via Article 14 shouldn't be contingent upon them.
I goofed on the html, (no link) but there’s a YouTube of Harry Litman weighing in on Article 14 (worth trying to find, but I’m sure other legal minds will be speaking on this in the days to come). The upshot: It may not be as easy as it seems.