It is time for every American patriot to stand up, speak out, and defend our democratic processes because the moment we allow them to be eroded is the moment that we risk losing the freedoms and justice they were built to protect, and that countless Americans have fought and sacrificed to defend.
-AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes
Steve Vladeck has a summary of DOJ corruption under Trump:
There isn’t enough electronic ink to fully summarize the background of the Eric Adams saga. To make a very long story short, the 110th Mayor of the City of New York was indicted last year by federal prosecutors on one count of conspiracy to receive campaign contributions from foreign nationals and commit wire fraud and bribery; two counts of soliciting campaign contributions from foreign nationals; and one count of soliciting and accepting a bribe. In essence, the indictment claimed that Adams received more than $100,000 worth of free plane tickets and luxury hotel stays from wealthy Turkish nationals and at least one government official over the course of a decade.
Trump’s AG, Pam Bondi, and one of here deputies, Emil Bove, are attempting to stop the prosecution. It’s a straight up quid pro quo to enlist Adams’ assistance with deportations. Towards that end, they directed the lead prosecutors in the NY US Attorney’s office – Trump appointees themselves! – to drop it. Their direction was so egregiously unlawful that the prosecutors quit:
What’s striking about this is not just how transparent what’s actually happening is; it’s Bove’s candid admission, in today’s letter, that “the policies of a democratically elected President and a Senate-confirmed Attorney General” take precedence over a Justice Department lawyer’s oath … to the Constitution. It would be one thing if Bove argued that the President’s (or Attorney General’s) interpretation of the Constitution takes precedence over that of an Interim U.S. Attorney. But that’s not even his argument. Rather, it’s that Sassoon (who, although it shouldn’t matter, is a Republican who clerked for Justice Scalia) had no business raising to the Attorney General her view of what the law required in a case in which it conflicts with the political preferences of the President—indeed, that it was “insubordinate” for her to do so.
My original post follows below the break but Vladeck’s write-up is much better.
I can’t find it now but several days ago I received an email from an organization I have a peripheral relation to that they are committed to “protect[ing] their vulnerable population.” Protecting people is good but “vulnerable” didn’t sit well with me. One of my goals in life is to avoid being vulnerable. You and I may have limited ability to affect whether we’re marginalized but vulnerability is, to some degree, within our control. If a bully punches you, gouge him in the eyes. Impress upon him that his aggression will cost him.
I write this in the context of the Democratic Party having inflicted no meaningful damage on Trump for his lawlessness. That’s not recent. It goes back to his first term. People have let Trump skate all his life. He’ll continue until he’s forcibly stopped.
This is where the criminal decides if you are safe to attack.
Yes, with all violence, the assailant’s safety is a critical factor in deciding whether or not to attack…
“Can I get away with it?” is a major motivation for what people decide to do — or not do. Hence, the interview.
This is one interview you want to fail. If you fail, the assailant decides that he cannot successfully, or easily, attack you. Then if he is a criminal, he will proceed to seek easier prey.
Far too many people just follow orders.
That and Congress appears to have no objections to handing government agencies over to Musk. I expected as much from Trump loyalists. I’m disgusted that there’s no opposition party.
As much as left-wing identity politics are counterproductive and annoying, right-wing identity politics are vile. Trump and co are right-wing identity politics 24/7/365.
Michael Ignatieff, I was born liberal. The ‘adults in the room’ still have a lot to learn:
By the late 1990s, the conservatives began to gain power by playing to the resentments of the ignored. The authoritarian right, especially, understood that it could build an entire politics on mocking the blindness of the liberal elite. It didn’t need solutions; stoking the rage was enough. We are now the embattled object of that rage. What will it take to earn the trust of those whose discontent we ignored? Liberalism in the next generation will need to save social solidarity from the “creative destruction” of the market by rebuilding the fiscal capacity of the liberal state and investing in the public goods that underpin a common life for all. Saying this, at a high level of generality, is easy enough: The tougher part will be finding the language and the cunning to convert a radical liberalism into a politics that wins elections and a governing strategy that pushes change through the veto-rich thicket of interests waiting to derail our best-laid plans.
A strong nation, like a strong person, can afford to be gentle, firm, thoughtful and restrained. It can afford to extend a helping hand to others. It’s a weak nation, like a weak person, that must behave with bluster and boasting and rashness and other signs of insecurity.