Nikki Haley Dodges Slavery As The Cause Of The Civil War

A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM’s Morning Memo. Sign up for the email version.

We’re Still Doing This In 2023?

Nikki Haley — a former governor of South Carolina, the first state to secede in 1860, who removed the Confederate flag from the state Capitol — couldn’t bring herself to mention slavery when asked at a campaign event about the cause of the Civil War.

The remarks Wednesday evening while campaigning in New Hampshire, which did not secede from the union, were a tacit acknowledgment that the party of Lincoln has settled comfortably into its status as a revanchist minority-white rump Trumpist party.

When the audience member asked the question, Haley raised her eyebrows, spun around and retreated upstage before turning back around and facing the audience with a smile: “Well don’t come with an easy question. I think the cause of the Civil War was basically how government was going to run. The freedoms and what people could and couldn’t do. What do you think the cause of the Civil War was?”

After a bit of back and forth, Haley engaged in some additional nonsensical meandering that was non-responsive to the question.

When the questioner expressed surprise that she had not mentioned slavery, Haley asked: “What do you want me to say about slavery?” 

“No, you’ve answered my question, thank you,” the questioner responded.

After the 2015 massacre of nine black churchgoers at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, in whose harbor the first shots of the Civil War were fired, then- Gov. Haley responded to growing public pressure by reversing course and signing a bill to remove the Confederate flag from the state Capitol in Columbia, bringing an end to a long-running controversy over the placement of the flag.

Amusing … Or No?

News accounts of Nikki Haley’s remarks awkwardly shoehorned in the basic fact-check that, yes, the Civil War was fought over slavery:

  • Politico: “While there were a number of contributions to the outbreak of the Civil War, the conflict, which was the deadliest in U.S. history, was fought predominantly over the South’s desire to see the preservation of slavery.”
  • WaPo: “Haley’s answer did not include any mention of slavery, which scholars agree was the main driver of the conflict.”
  • ABC News: “While several political and economic factors ultimately contributed to the start of the American Civil War, slavery was at the center of the nation’s tension.”

The NYT provided admirable context for the remarks in its writeup, but perhaps inadvertently telegraphed how bedeviled by racism we remain, calling the question “simple yet loaded.”

Almost 160 years after the end of the Civil War, asking a presidential candidate to affirm its root cause remains a “loaded” question.

Biden Gets The Last Word

Lauren Boebert Flees Her Own District

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), facing long odds of reelection in her home district, announced Wednesday evening via Facebook video that she will instead run for the open seat being vacated by Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO).

Colorado GOP Brings Trump DQ Case To SCOTUS

The Colorado Republican Party was first out of the gate in bringing the Trump Disqualification Clause case to the Supreme Court. Trump, too, is expected to ask the Supreme Court soon to consider taking the case and overruling the Colorado Supreme Court decision declaring him ineligible for the presidency.

An important early indicator will be how the Supreme Court frames the issues if it accepts the case. Here’s how the Colorado GOP wants the court to frame it:

  1. Whether the President falls within the list of officials subject to the disqualification provision of Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment?
  2. Whether Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment is self-executing to the extent of allowing states to remove candidates from the ballot in the absence of any Congressional action authorizing such process?
  3. Whether the denial to a political party of its ability to choose the candidate of its choice in a presidential primary and general election violates that party’s First Amendment Right of Association?

Jack Smith Is Probs Overdoing It Here

Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigations and prosecutions of Donald Trump have been mostly sober and stunt-free, except for this one little game he’s playing in the Jan. 6 case in DC: continuing to file motions and act as if the case is still active even though it’s been stayed while Trump appeals his outlandish claims of presidential immunity. It does sound a discordant note even if the the signal he’s trying to send about being ready for a March trial and the importance of keeping the case on track is itself legit.

Joyce Vance unpacks the latest motion from Smith.

Working The Refs Ahead Of The 2024 Election

TPM’s Kate Riga on Republicans’ current two-pronged attack on the Voting Rights Act.

House Ethics Committee Opens New Probe

Not many details available but the House Ethics Committee has opened a probe into whether Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL) has violated campaign finance laws.

Important Case

In what may end up being a landmark case on artificial intelligence and copyright laws, the New York Times has sued Microsoft and OpenAI in federal court in Manhattan claiming they are unlawfully using NYT stories to train chatbots.

Herb Kohl, 1935-2023

The former Democratic senator from Wisconsin who founded the eponymous department store chain and was the majority owner of the NBA’s Milwaukee Bucks, has died at age 88.

RIP Tom Smothers

Tom, of Smothers Brothers fame, has died at age 86:

Do you like Morning Memo? Let us know!

Boebert Hoping for Soft Landing in Nextdoor District!

I love this story. Lauren Boebert has apparently seen the writing on the wall and now realizes she can’t be elected in her congressional district, Colorado’s 3rd. Too much interrupting Joe Biden’s State of the Unions, too many Beetlejuice handies, too many bonkers TV appearances. So she’s decided to run not in her own district but in the neighboring 4th district, which unlike the 3rd is solidly Republican. That district is available because incumbent Ken Buck is retiring.

She just announced the move in a Facebook video post this evening.

Continue reading “Boebert Hoping for Soft Landing in Nextdoor District!”

Wisconsin Republicans Hope The Supreme Court Will Step In To Save Them Again

When the Wisconsin Supreme Court handed down its momentous decision requiring new state legislative maps last week, there were a lot of statements from Republicans along the lines of “you haven’t heard the last of us!”

On Tuesday, state Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R) previewed to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel what he has in mind.

“We will pursue all federal issues arising out of the redistricting litigation at the U.S. Supreme Court,” Vos said.

It’s a vague statement, and it’s very unclear on what grounds he would seek Supreme Court intervention.

But the High Court has delivered for Vos before, ruling in 2022 that the state Supreme Court had made a mistake when it endorsed maps proposed by Democratic Governor Tony Evers. The U.S. Supreme Court sent the issue back to the state Supreme Court, which then picked maps drawn by state legislative Republicans.

This month’s decision by Wisconsin’s Supreme Court ordering the maps to be redrawn came after a shift in the makeup of the state court, which, as of last spring, has a liberal majority.

In the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court opinion, the justices found that the Evers-proposed map went too far in creating Black-majority districts. Evers’ team’s map added a seventh majority-Black district, which it said would bring the state’s maps into compliance with the VRA. The state Supreme Court, in its decision picking Evers’ maps over other maps proposed by the legislature, wrote, “[W]e cannot say for certain on this record that seven majority-Black assembly districts are required by the VRA,” but concluded that there were “good reasons” to think that they were.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s majority didn’t like that at all.

The state Supreme Court, the justices said, “improperly relied on generalizations” and failed to consider whether a “race-neutral alternative” that didn’t add a seventh majority-Black district would have also been permitted under the VRA. The decision was unsigned, but included a fiery dissent by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who was joined by Elena Kagan.

Vos suggested to the Journal Sentinel on Tuesday that Republicans would seek to make similar arguments were they to return to the U.S. Supreme Court — though in order to game it out, he had to run through a series of hypotheticals. “Last time around, the Democrats’ maps racially gerrymandered voters to obtain a political goal. I expect they’ll do so again,” he said. “The Supreme Court wasn’t fooled by the overt racial gerrymandering before, and it’s my hope that the Court will refuse to allow that or any other violation of federal law this time around, too.”

The Wisconsin Election Commission is asking for new maps to be in place by March 15, so whatever happens will have to play out in a relatively short time frame — unless SCOTUS is open to a dramatic, last-minute intervention.

The Best Of TPM Today

Republicans Launch Two-Pronged Attack Against Voting Rights Act

Michigan Supreme Court Keeps Trump On 2024 Ballot

Yesterday’s Most-Read Story

Dictator On Day One: The Executive Orders That Trump Would Issue From The Start

What We Are Reading

Michael Flynn’s Rhode Island Hall of Fame Inclusion Prompts Resignations — New York Times

John Fetterman isn’t the politician you thought he’d be — and he doesn’t care — Politico

Jack Smith Drops Holiday Filing In Jan. 6 Case Asking That Trump Be Barred From ‘Injecting Politics’ Into Trial 

Special prosecutor Jack Smith has evidently been working through the holidays, dropping a surprise December 27 filing in the January 6 insurrection case against Donald Trump.

The new document comes on the heels of a disappointment for Smith, after the Supreme Court declined to take up his request for an expedited ruling on Trump’s sweeping claims of immunity. How dramatically the Supreme Court’s move will delay the case is yet to be seen; the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is hearing the immunity claim on an expedited basis, starting January 9. Should Trump’s immunity arguments — which have already been rejected by a federal district judge — be upheld, the entire case could be tossed.

In the meantime, the bulk of the Jan. 6 case has been put on pause while the immunity question is litigated. But Smith on Wednesday chose to file through the stay, submitting a 20-page document detailing the “evidence” Trump should not be allowed to submit, calling it both irrelevant to the case and at risk of tainting the jury.

Continue reading “Jack Smith Drops Holiday Filing In Jan. 6 Case Asking That Trump Be Barred From ‘Injecting Politics’ Into Trial “

Readers Respond #3

Responding to yesterday’s Backchannel

I read your post and have to say, I share some of your optimism. Not because things are good or getting better—they’re not!—but because for the first time in what feels like forever, I see potential for the coming year to bring some extremely dark chapters in world history to a close.

First, the Trump-Biden rematch. Like you, I’m not discounting the possibility that Trump wins. But if he doesn’t, that’s the end of him as an active political figure. He’s too old to run again, too criminally liable, too spent. He’ll have a second political life after he dies, I’m sure, like Ronald Reagan had until Trump displaced him with a new cult of personality, but the man himself will be really and truly gone from our politics. Phew!

Continue reading “Readers Respond #3”

Readers Respond #2

Responding to yesterday’s Backchannel

You asked for our thoughts RE: Can Any Centers Hold?

Like you, I seem to have had a revelation (somewhere around 2022 but continuing this year) that the good people of America will be fighting Trumpist authoritarianism for decades to come. It’s become the new American sin – not the original sin, but the adopted sin. A sin that was completely avoidable yet irresistible to the power-hungry and to the ignorant. One thing that makes it so dispiriting is that broad swaths of the American public either don’t take it seriously, or they actively (think they) desire it. Life since 2016 has resembled a horror movie where people become zombies not because they are bitten, but because they go down the wrong internet rabbit holes. The mainstream press isn’t immune, either, having developed an insatiable thirst for “Forgotten Man” blood long ago.

Continue reading “Readers Respond #2”

Readers Respond #1

The first of several responses from TPM Readers to yesterday’s Backchannel

FWIW – I keep finding myself wondering whether, in terms of American politics, we are experiencing something of a rerun of Reagan’s reelection.  The current situation, of course, differs in all kinds of ways from the situation around New Years, 1984.  The geopolitical realities are very, very different.  American society has become much more polarized since then, and much more unequal.  Climate change did not loom in anything like the same way.  Gerrymandering had not become an art form, and neither major political party included millions of people who had explicitly soured on democracy and lived within an epistemic bubble.

Continue reading “Readers Respond #1”

Michigan Supreme Court Keeps Trump On 2024 Ballot

A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM’s Morning Memo. Sign up for the email version.

Disqualification Clause Case Flounders

In a brief, one-paragraph order, the Michigan Supreme Court has declined to take up the appeal of the Disqualification Clause case against Donald Trump. The decision leaves intact lower court rulings and keeps Trump on the GOP primary ballot.

The grounds for the decision are sparse: “[W]e are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.”

A longer dissent by one of the justices offers a bit more insight into the ruling. Elizabeth Welch in dissenting says she would have taken the appeal and ruled on the merits.

“Considering the importance of the legal questions at issue and the speed with which the appellants and the judiciary have moved, I believe it is important for this Court to issue a decision on the merits,” Welch wrote.

Welch distinguished Michigan election law from Colorado’s, where Trump has been declared ineligible for the ballot under the 14th Amendment’s Disqualification Clause. She reiterated that the appeals court was correct in ruling that under Michigan law the secretary of state is without power to remove an ineligible candidate from the ballot.

The big question about this just-issued order is whether those seeking to remove Trump from the ballot might get another chance to do so during the general election. The lower court had ruled that the issue wasn’t ripe for decision on the primary ballot, but would be ripe in the general election if Trump were the GOP nominee.

The ripeness question wasn’t appealed, Welch notes in her dissent, suggesting that the good government groups pursing Trump’s disqualification may yet get another bite at the apple.

Michigan Fake Elector Has Regrets

The Michigan fake elector who had criminal charges against him dropped in exchange for his cooperation “expressed deep regret about his participation,” according to a recording of his interview with prosecutors obtained by NYT.

Dictator On Day One

TPM’s Josh Kovensky: The Executive Orders That Trump Would Issue From The Start

Why The Insurrection Act Needs Revising

Bob Bauer and Jack Goldsmith:

The problem is that the act has very broad and imprecise triggers to its operation and no temporal constraints, and it does not specify any role for Congress to assess, shape or limit the president’s response to an emergency. …

There is no serious dispute, on the merits, that the Insurrection Act gives any president far too much unchecked power. It is hard for anyone to argue that a president should be able to unleash U.S. troops or state militias without any accountability beyond public opinion or impeachment.

Eye on Media

Parker Molloy: NYT’s Past Week of Trump Headlines is a Glimpse into Our Future

Ooof …

NYT:

At least five board members who oversee the Rhode Island Heritage Hall of Fame have resigned from the organization after Michael T. Flynn, the former national security adviser under Donald J. Trump, was chosen to be inducted in 2024.

Fortenberry Conviction Overturned

The conviction of former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) has been overturned on appeal on the grounds that he was tried in the wrong venue.

He was convicted in federal court in Los Angeles on three felony counts of lying to federal investigators about illegal campaign contributions.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that he should have been tried in Nebraska or Washington DC, where the alleged lies occurred, not LA, the location of the investigation that his alleged lies adversely impacted.

The court said that Fortenberry can be retried in the proper venue.

Quote Of The Day

Jane Coaston’s interview with Tim Alberta on the factors that made evangelicals ready for Trump yields this gem:

If this was truly a 1776 moment, would Lauren Boebert be vaping in the middle of a “Beetlejuice” show, or would she have something more pressing to do with her time?

Tim Alberta

2024 Ephemera

  • NYT op-ed: A Trump Conviction Could Cost Him Enough Voters to Tip the Election
  • WSJ: Joe Lieberman’s Campaign for Third-Party Ticket Draws Ire of Democrats—Again
  • WaPo: Biden’s economy vs. Trump’s … in 12 charts

Recommended Reading

Jessica Valenti’s “Abortion, Every Day” is an invaluable resource in a post-Dobbs world.

Hate To See It

AP: “Criminal prosecutors may soon get to see over 900 documents pertaining to the alleged theft of a diary belonging to President Joe Biden’s daughter after a judge rejected the conservative group Project Veritas’ First Amendment claim.”

Is Climate Change Speeding Up?

WaPo:

The record shows that the pace of warming clearly sped up around the year 1970. Scientists have long known that this acceleration stems from a steep increase in greenhouse gas emissions, combined with efforts in many countries to reduce the amount of sun-reflecting pollution in the air. But the data is much more uncertain on whether a second acceleration is underway.

Trump Is So Proud Of Himself

A Daily Mail word cloud caught the former president’s eye:

Do you like Morning Memo? Let us know!

Republicans Launch Two-Pronged Attack Against Voting Rights Act

In their endless quest to further defang the Voting Rights Act and gerrymander their way into permanent control, Republican officials have launched a double-headed attack on the landmark civil rights law. 

The new attacks emerge as Republican politicians attempt to wriggle out of judges’ orders requiring that they draw additional, majority-minority, likely Democratic districts in their states, which could imperil their party’s thin majority in the House of Representatives. 

Continue reading “Republicans Launch Two-Pronged Attack Against Voting Rights Act”

Will New York Again Hold The Keys To Control Of Congress?

Josh Marshall wrote on Friday about a major court decision out of Wisconsin that could have a significant impact on the makeup of that state’s legislature, famous in recent years for being gerrymandered in favor of Republicans to an almost comic degree.

Its one of a number of redistricting fights we’re watching heading into 2024. My colleague Kate Riga will have more tomorrow on how four others — in Georgia, Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas — interact with a long-running effort on the right to chip away at Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

With Nicole out on a much-deserved holiday vacation, I wanted to use this space to look at another gerrymandering dispute that we haven’t given much attention to in recent months, but that could be hugely important. New York’s years-long fight over its districts is continuing to play out slowly and convolutedly — but the question of whether the state has new maps by November 2024 may determine control of Congress.

Continue reading “Will New York Again Hold The Keys To Control Of Congress?”