After Friday and Monday’s Backchannels, full of the ominous progress of the Trump White House, we can see again today the dual nature of Trumpism, both predatory and absurd, methodical and feckless. The key to grappling with Trumpism is recognizing that both are simultaneously true and neither reality invalidates the other. Trump’s federalization of the DC Metro police is a case in point. The President can take control of the DC police for up to 48 hours. With notification of relevant committees of Congress, the president can maintain that control for an additional 30 days. After that he requires Congress’s authorization to continue to control the DC police.
Can Trump clean up the DC crime hellscape in 32 days? It seems unlikely. Will Congress allow him to continue past 32 days? Possibly. But by no means certainly. Trump’s margins remain razor thin and it’s the kind of issue where at least a few Republicans might refuse. Will the President remained focused on becoming the DC police chief and mayor or will the whole effort go by the wayside? Was any of it more than an excuse for a news-cycle-driving press conference?
Join
President Trump’s decision today to federalize the DC police and deploy National Guard troops to the city is a good reminder of the importance of what we discussed Friday: the necessity for the political opposition to narrate Trump’s abuses of power and the contents of the U.S. Constitution, to be crystal clear on what will be reversed when Democrats are back in control of the government and how they’ll provide civil and criminal accountability for those who have broken the law. It makes it even more relevant to review and remember the critical importance of the consent of the governed.
It’s part of American civic culture to marvel at the process of the peaceful transfer of power. We hold an election under a specific set of rules. The winners of those elections inherit a vast array of powers. The president gains control of the military and a vast federal bureaucracy. The president has a huge array of prerogative powers. What he or she says goes, in specific realms. Legislators make new laws. Judges make rulings on imprisonment, people’s redress of harms, etc. etc. The marvel is that a whole population of more than 340 million people freely accede to this power. We have ordinary criminal conduct which is policed and punished. But focus in on the fact of that free compliance. The vast majority of us never come into real contact with the coercive power of the state. And yet virtually everyone, even the most diehard opponents of this administration, recognize that this president has a whole bundle of legitimate powers and we will comply with them.
Why is this?
JoinI want to let everyone know that The Josh Marshall Podcast will be returning on August 20th, back to our regular weekly schedule and excited to be back.
No big push from me today. But I am really happy to see and really happy to report that we’re now highly likely to reach our goal in this year’s TPM Journalism Fund drive. We needed/need to raise $500,000 this year. And we’re currently at $458,443 after three and a half weeks. It looks like we’re probably get there early next week. I thank you; our whole team thanks you. We really appreciate it.
One of the things about running or being involved in TPM is one gets used to or accustomed to things that are pretty amazing and a pretty big deal. That’s a delicate balance. I never want to take them for granted. But we rely on them. And our reliance is mainly vindicated. The annual drive is high on those list of things. It’s a lot of money. I mean, it’s a half million dollars. That’s a lot of money. I always go into them with a measure of trepidation. Are our people going to be there for us? I try to get my head into it in a certain kind of way, thinking about my arguments, getting my thinking coherent and clear about what we’re trying accomplish in the current environment and so forth. I work on getting my game face on.
Like anything in life you need to be clear about what you want to say and what you’re trying to say to be able to say it.
As I’ve said before the whole endeavor is like a big organizational trust fall and we’ve been able to rely on you to catch us each time. We really, really appreciate that, even as it has become an annual thing and in some ways “routine,” though really never routine.
Finally, the vast majority of you who contribute are members. But I want to remind everyone that while the Journalism Fund is a critical part of our operation these days, the site exists because of membership fees. No paying members, no site. There’d still be a TPM without the Journalism Fund (probably?) but it would be smaller and much more crimped and threadbare, less leaning into deeper investigative pieces, more quick-hitty, etc. Certainly no expansion and quite possibly the opposite. Our members are our true and most important trust fall. Occasionally I’ll hear from members who say, I wish I could contribute but can’t this year. I really encourage anyone for whom it is an easy lift to contribute. But I always tell those people, if you are a member that is all we ask. You are 100% in good standing with us. Your membership is the thing. You are 150% carrying your weight.
At the moment we are closing in on another potential milestone: 36,000 paying members. We have 35,749 paying members and 38,438 total members, the delta between the two being free student memberships and community (financial hardship/fixed income) memberships. Those “free” memberships are in turn made possible by $70 increments of contributions to the Journalism Fund.
Let me conclude by again thanking you. This is a joint enterprise of the TPM community. Thank you for having our backs.
I’ve told you a few times of my difficulty launching the DOJ-in-exile project. Such is life. But there’s another set of actions, much easier to do, not requiring any organization or concerted action, which is just as important. We hear a lot of Trump administration actions decried, denounced and so forth, as they should be. What I would like to hear more clearly is that with this or that criminal or unconstitutional action, the next time Democrats control the government the actions will be reversed and those who acted criminally will be prosecuted. This also applies to bad policy. So, for instance, with the absurd expansion of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Democrats should be saying clearly that once they are back in power, that whole expansion is going to be reversed. People signing up for all those new jobs should know that now. Democrats couldn’t reverse those things as long as Trump’s in power and has a veto pen. But they might be able to deny more funding as soon as 2027.
Join
An onslaught of bad news for the rule of law over the past few hours:
Read MoreWe’re on the cusp of being 90% of the way toward our goal of raising $500,000 in this year’s annual TPM Journalism Fund drive. If you can please take a moment to help us get to $450,000 tonight. We’re almost there. Just click here.
The term “constitutional crisis” gets used a lot these days. By a very fair definition we’ve been in one since January. A more apt and consequential meaning, however, is a crisis in which the legitimacy and continuation of the state rests in the balance or whether it fragments and degenerates into civil war, military rule or state disintegration. Today President Trump proposed something that, to my view, for the first time provides a path to such a crisis.
Read More