Yesterday I noticed the irrepressible Josh Kraushaar’s report on the Senate campaign. He’s one of the most notorious of DC reporters, now predictably working for Axios. He was positively giddy at newly good news for Republicans hoping to retake control of the Senate. But he’s not altogether wrong. Kraushaar focuses on two races — Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Democrats’ Mandela Barnes is now running behind Ron Johnson and John Fetterman’s once huge margin over Mehmet Oz has shrunk to mid- or low single digits. Kraushaar says Republicans are making gains by switching the discussion to crime. (Generally, he goes with his perennial hobbyhorse: Democrats are too liberal to win elections.) But I don’t think crime politics is precisely it.

I want to dig in a bit more on our exclusive this morning about the appeal before the 11th Circuit that has dragged on for nearly seven years since oral arguments with no decision from the court.

As I said earlier, it’s not clear WHY this is happening. But I don’t think we have to throw our hands up in the air in helplessness and lament another broken institution without accountability. It’s pretty clear where responsibility for this fiasco lies.

TPM’s Josh Kovensky has a new piece up on a bizarre case where a federal appeals court has simply failed to make a decision … for almost SEVEN years and counting.

The case was briefed, oral arguments were held (way back in February 2016), and despite entreaties from both parties the court has not issued a decision.

There are rumors and theories floating around for WHY no decision has been forthcoming, but nothing we could nail down or confirm. All we know is the court has abandoned its obligation to issue a ruling in anything approaching a timely fashion, circumstances legal experts describe to us as “extraordinary.”

Give it a read.

So we know who Perla is. She’s Perla Huerta, a former combat medic and Army counterintelligence agent who was discharged from the Army only last month after two decades in the Army. The news comes from an article in The New York Times. But the information appears to come out of the investigation being conducted by the Bexar County (San Antonio) Sheriff’s department which announced a criminal probe just days after the story broke. The Times as well as lawyers working with the Venezuelan migrants in Massachusetts showed pictures of Huerta to several migrants who had either worked with Huerta or been hustled by her and shipped to Martha’s Vineyard. All apparently confirmed that Huerta was the “Perla” at the center of the operation.

I wanted to update you with some thoughts on recent events in the Russo-Ukraine war. When I write posts like this I usually get a bundle of messages to the effect of, “No, we can’t give in to Russian threats. We see where that’s gotten us.” So let me anticipate that by saying that I agree. I don’t think we should give in to increasingly shrill and unhinged Russian threats to use nuclear weapons over (literally or figuratively) Ukraine. But that doesn’t mean it’s not a highly and increasingly dangerous situation. To bring you up to date, over the last week discussions and planning in NATO and U.S. national security circles have turned heavily toward the possibility that Russia will use nuclear weapons in the Ukraine war. You can see various efforts to quantify these risks in terms of percentage chances or the rise in the percentage chance from last month to now. But really these things are impossible to quantify. Certainly they are impossible for me to put any meaningful numbers to. So what I’d like to do here is just describe the confluence of events getting us to the point where this seems like a real possibility.

It’s interesting to step back sometimes and consider the possible big pictures of our times. These connections won’t be new to many of you. They’re not to me, as far as they go. But it’s been clarifying and helpful to me nonetheless. Today we have our ongoing battle over democracy and authoritarianism in the U.S. The UK is in its latest stage of its ongoing national self-immolation. Italy has just elected its first far-right government since Benito Mussolini’s rise to power in the early 1920s. Russia, which has made itself into the international clarion of rightist, revanchist nationalism, is stumbling through a succession of largely self-inflicted catastrophes in its war of choice in Ukraine.

A series of polls out of Wisconsin show why you simply cannot ever count Ron Johnson out, unfortunately. Johnson has been consistently unpopular with Wisconsin voters for sometime. There weren’t many polls of the reelection contest until the last month or so, after Mandela Barnes finally secured the Democratic nomination. Over that period polls have gone from showing a surprisingly robust lead for Barnes to show an almost equal advantage for Johnson.

Do take a moment to read Josh Kovensky’s report here on Judge Cannon’s latest order. It’s hard to capture just how unheard of and close to unprecedented this is. Trump literally asked for this particular judge to be the special master. Now only a couple weeks after his appointment she is jumping in and just overruling him in the most transparently one-sided ways. It’s really not too much to say that she’s essentially acting as Trump’s defense counsel — which is good I guess since he’s had a hard time holding on to them.

Special masters do work on behalf of the judge. At the end of the process he can make recommendations and she can simply not take them. So she is not acting beyond her authority in the narrow sense. But the point of the exercise is to have a respected outside party review evidence and make recommendations to the judge. By jumping in and overruling entirely reasonable and unremarkable decisions about how the review will be conducted she’s removing whatever pretense was left that she is there to oversee the case under the law as opposed to protect Trump. It’s not the worst of her orders in this ruling. Others are much worse on substance. But Special Master Dearie said he needed x amount of time to conduct the review. She jumps in and says, no actually you need to until past the election.

It’s all very transparent. But here we are. Read it.

A new episode of The Josh Marshall Podcast is live! This week, Josh and Kate discuss a charcuterie tray of a Supreme Court case, the latest hijinks of the two most infamous Democratic senators and some recent shifts in midterm polls.

You can listen to the new episode of The Josh Marshall Podcast here.

The DC insider sheets are already buzzing about the exciting news: House Republicans plan a new round of debt limit hostage taking next year. Of course, this is all treated as somehow totally normal, as opposed to an unconstitutional form of legislative terrorism. This piece in Axios walks through the ins and outs of it, noting the following ….

The debt limit turning into a “political football” has become a “pattern in divided government,” particularly with a Democratic president, Neil Bradley, chief policy officer for the U.S. Chamber of Congress, told Axios.

This is a crock. Let’s be honest. Only Republicans do this. It only happens with Democratic presidents. Perhaps understandably, the head of the pro-business Chamber — which is, paradoxically, somewhat reviled now in the Trumpite GOP — can’t say this directly. But journalists don’t have to repeat their nonsense. The leading contender for the key committee chairmanship that would call the shots on this is already being clear on what Republicans will do. Tell the President that he has to repeal his 2021-22 legislation or the country has to declare national bankruptcy.