Don’t Believe the Hype, MoC Edition

Just a side or secondary point that I wanted to add to what’s below. As I said, a President can’t lose the support of his congressional party going into an election. Why that happens or whether it’s fair becomes secondary to the fact itself. It’s one thing in ordinary circumstances. But you simply can’t have or survive that going into an election, certainly not one where you appear to be running at least a bit behind. I wanted to mention something about members of Congress themselves. In my experience the vast number of members of Congress have no hidden insight or greater access to information than you or I do. They may in certain instances get access to party polling. But that usually leaks in some form or another fairly quickly. They’re basically just as prone to panic, the groupthink of their social sets or cocoons, wishful thinking as you or I am.

This isn’t universal of course. Some have better political instincts than others. Some have really good political instincts. But on balance they’re just not cut from very different political cloth. That’s my experience at least.

Groundhog Day But With Cognitive Exams

I am going to try to write a few pieces today and tomorrow taking stock of the truly unprecedented and almost unimaginable standoff that is not so much wracking the Democratic Party as simply holding it in place, in limbo, for more than a week now. But before doing that I thought it was important to share some general thoughts on where we are with all of this. First I must say that I can’t think of many other or perhaps any political situation I’ve written about at TPM over decades that was more difficult for me to make sense of, either as a matter of what is happening or will happen, or what should happen. I’ve been mainly focused on the first question.

For the second half of last week I was basically certain that Joe Biden would be forced to end his candidacy and that it was simply a matter of time before he did so. Then, starting Saturday, things seemed to shift. These things work in waves. For any politician the best way to avoid being forced to resign (and here I’ll use “resign” as a proxy for Biden ending his candidacy, not actually resigning the presidency) is simply not to resign. It’s one of those truisms that contains more depth and nuance than one at first realizes.

Continue reading “Groundhog Day But With Cognitive Exams”  

What An Utterly Surreal Week In American Politics

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

A Seismic Jolt

One week ago today the Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in U.S. v. Trump, creating a monarchial presidency the likes of which the founders would have taken up arms against.

The court’s response to an attempted auto-coup by a defeated president who is poised to potentially regain office in a matter of weeks was to carve out vast new areas of presidential immunity and invent new rules of evidence that no one was even arguing about yet – but to do so with no clear standards or bright lines, reserving to itself the considerable power to set them later or not set them at all and decide things as it sees fit on a case-by-case basis where it can craft its own preferred outcomes.

And yet … the biggest national political story since then has not been the Supreme Court’s unilateral rebalancing of the Constitution’s separation of powers in favor of Donald Trump’s short-term criminal defense and long-term political power, but rather Joe Biden’s decline with age and his fitness to defeat Trump in the November election. Historians will struggle to make sense of this week because it’s impossibly surreal for those of us living through it.

Politics – and covering politics – is hard even in normal times because there is so much uncertainty, so few anchors or touchstones, and compromise is built in, which can blur lines and make things seem adrift. The kind of feeding frenzy were witnessing now is often driven by an unusual level of seeming certainty. The sense that something is suddenly clear and obvious and undeniable – like Biden’s debate failure – can act like a magnet for those exhausted by all of the nibbling at the margins, hedging bets, and the never-ending difficult task of balancing interests that is required in a mature political economy. Moreover, the supposed obviousness of the immediate issue can often override consideration of the downstream consequences. Sometimes, the decision that looks so obvious in the moment gets a whole lot more opaque when you start to grapple with the knock-on effects.

In contrast to Biden’s nationally televised failure, the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity was complex, in writing, and with impacts that while real remain in many ways contingent and forward-looking. In the media economy, it’s obvious which story is easier to tackle. Likewise, the entire march toward authoritarian rule remains murkier and harder to cover than the up-and-downs of a political campaign.

But I want to stay focused on the Supreme Court decision because I think this past week was a fulcrum in U.S. political history.

The Supreme Court Is Now The Kingmaker

I mentioned last week that while on the surface U.S. v. Trump seems like a dramatic expansion of executive power the reality is that at its core it aggrandizes power to the high court itself. We’ll keep returning to this theme, but in the meantime:

  • I want to direct you to this piece by Asha Rangappa:

[T]here are so many implications written between the lines that fundamentally alter the balance of power among the branches, not only making the President effectively a king, but making the Court’s conservative majority the kingmakers who rubber stamp or veto what kinds of actions get immunity (thereby ensuring that any potential dictator is symbiotically dependent on the Court to preserve his facade of legitimacy).

SCOTUS ‘Cut The Heart And Soul Out Of America’

Former Appeals Court Judge J. Michael Luttig continues to be singular voice of our time, a conservative Republican of the old school horrified by his party’s abandonment of the rule of law as on organizing principle for democracy:

Intellectually Honest Conservatives Get It

Richard Bernstein, a former clerk for Antonin Scalia who is cut from the same cloth as Judge Luttig, finds in U.S. v. Trump many of the same hallmarks that conservatives loathed in Roe v. Wade. That’s a provocative point of view for a progressive audience, but he’s exhibiting an intellectual consistency that the Supreme Court’s right-wing justices have abandoned.

SCOTUS Decision Already Impacting The MAL Case

A series of developments in the Mar-a-Lago case since the decision in U.S. v. Trump are a taste of the ways in which the Supreme Court has hobbled the Trump prosecutions:

  • Trump is seeking to delay the Mar-a-Lago case in light of U.S. v. Trump.
  • In response, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon has for now delayed the next batch of deadlines in the case and provided a very generous briefing schedule to consider the impact of U.S. v. Trump on the charges against the former president.
  • Trump is seizing on Justice Clarence Thomas’ concurrence in U.S. v. Trump to renew his claim that Special Counsel Jack Smith was unlawfully appointed.
  • Cannon rejected Trump co-defendant Walt Nauta’s motion to dismiss for selective and vindictive prosecution but was careful to note that it should not be interpreted as her taking a position on Trump’s still-pending similar motion. She also took a swipe, as per usual, at prosecutors in the final footnote of the ruling.

How to Stop Fascism

Yale historian Timothy Snyder recounts in some detail the five lessons we learned from the rise of Nazism in 1930s Germany:

  1. Voting matters
  2. Coalitions are necessary
  3. Conservatives should be conservative
  4. Big business should support democracy
  5. Citizens should not obey in advance

Well Put

Good Decisions Aren’t Made In The Midst Of A Feeding Frenzy

I don’t have much to add to the maelstrom of Biden coverage and whether he will stay or go, or whether that’s a good idea or a bad idea, or who is best positioned to defeat Trump. But I’ll refer you to Brian Beutler’s thoughtful weighing of the most important considerations.

‘Some Folks Need Killing’

Following up on some of the ground-breaking reporting that TPM’s Hunter Walker has done on the GOP nominee for governor in North Carolina, Greg Sargent highlights a June 30 Mark Robinson speech in which he said:

Some folks need killing! It’s time for somebody to say it. It’s not a matter of vengeance. It’s not a matter of being mean or spiteful. It’s a matter of necessity!

Greg has all of the context, and it’s not good.  

The Big Picture

MIAMI, FLORIDA – JULY 01: John Cangialosi, Senior Hurricane Specialist at the National Hurricane Center, inspects a satellite image of Hurricane Beryl, the first hurricane of the 2024 season, at the National Hurricane Center on July 01, 2024 in Miami, Florida. On Monday afternoon, the storm, centered 30 miles west-northwest of Carriacou Island, became the strongest hurricane this early in the season in this area of the Atlantic. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Houston/Galveston narrowly dodged a climate-fueled bullet this morning as the necessary ingredients came together a few hours too late for Hurricane Beryl to re-intensify into a monster storm.

For the casual observer, it’s worth noting that Beryl was doing climatologically crazy stuff last week in the tropical Atlantic and Caribbean. With record-high sea surface temperatures creating conditions not typically found until the August/September peak of the hurricane season, Beryl was able to do things in terms of intensity and location at a time of the year that simply would not have been physically (as in, physics) possible before.

Weather is not climate, but Beryl was such an outlier and our understanding of the physics of tropical cyclones advanced enough that the connection is clearer and more concrete than can sometimes be drawn with other weather phenomena.

Related:

Do you like Morning Memo? Let us know!

Wow, Now France

Shocking and shockingly good news out of France. A longtime TPM reader who I am in constant touch with is an immigrant from France. And through conversations with him over the last few weeks I was expecting — though by no means sure — that Le Pen’s National Rally party would come up short in the run off. But the actual results are even more dramatic. They appear to be coming in third. Not just behind the the parties of the left running as a consolidated new United Front, but actually behind President Macron’s centrist party too. A couple weeks ago I think the best anyone was hoping for was keeping National Rally short of an absolute majority. It was treated as a foregone conclusion they’d get a plurality of seats. But even the Republicans — the old center-right party of government which has been thoroughly marginalized — is over-performing relative to expectations. It’s really a stunning reversal.

Continue reading “Wow, Now France”  

Hiding The Ball

Hello, it’s the weekend. This is The Weekender ☕

As Democrats grapple with a crisis atop their ticket of the sort not seen in generations, Republicans seem to be trying to figure out what they want the press and the public to see when it eventually directs its gaze back toward their party. That has, over the course of this week, developed into an effort to hide the ball ahead of the Republican National Convention. 

Continue reading “Hiding The Ball”  

Trump Tries To Claim He Has No Idea What The Deal Is With Project 2025

Former President Donald Trump attempted Friday to publicly distance himself from Project 2025 — an initiative referred to as the “presidential transition project,” spearheaded by the conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation. Over the course of the Biden administration, Project 2025 has put out a series of proposals for how a second Trump administration might radically reshape executive branch power, remaking the federal workforce and instituting a wide range of far-right policies on topics ranging from abortion to climate change to immigration.

Continue reading “Trump Tries To Claim He Has No Idea What The Deal Is With Project 2025”  

US’s Terrorist Listing Of European Far-Right Group Signals Fears Of Rising Threat—Both Abroad And At Home

This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis. It first appeared at The Conversation.

The rise of the radical far right in Europe poses a threat not only to the continent but also to Americans at home and abroad.

But while the U.S. government tends to be quick to use sanctions against perceived bad actors across the globe, when it comes to the transnational threat that far-right violence poses, successive U.S. administrations have been more coy about using another critical and effective tool: terrorist designations.

It wasn’t until mid-June 2024 that the Biden administration’s State Department sanctioned its first violent far-right group, the Nordic Resistance Movement. A neo-Nazi group based in Sweden but with a footprint that extends throughout Scandinavia, the NRM has built a reputation for brutality and espousing a vision of totalitarian rule. As the State Department noted in its designation, the group is also stockpiling weapons and explosive materials.

Prior to the Nordic group’s listing as a terrorist entity, the Trump administration designated the far-right Russian Imperial Movement as a terrorist group in 2020.

Both groups are now officially deemed “specially designated global terrorists” by the United States. As a result, the groups are subject to an asset freeze, and anyone trying to support them risks prosecution for financing terrorism.

As a former State Department counterterrorism official with more than a decade of experience sanctioning terrorists under U.S. law, I know that it’s no accident that the groups U.S. officials are targeting now are based in Europe rather than in America.

Targeting the far right overseas

The threat posed by violent far-right actors is certainly as serious in Europe as in the United States. But United States agencies do not have authority to legally sanction groups such as the U.S.-based Oath Keepers, Proud Boys or the Atomwaffen Division as terrorists.

Constitutional rights that protect freedom of speech, assembly and the right to bear arms make it exceedingly difficult to sanction domestic groups. Further, all of the relevant executive orders and statutory laws in the anti-terrorism space are explicit that the State Department must designate foreign-based groups.

With limited power to crack down on far-right groups in the U.S., agencies are instead looking to curtail the influence of violent far-right ideology from overseas.

Yet the designations of only two violent far-right groups as “specially designated global terrorists” – separated by four years – is disappointing to me, especially when considering the range of far-right threats that dot the European continent.

The EU’s crime-fighting agency, Europol, reported in its December 2023 report that there were 45 arrests of far-right extremists in 2022 and the “threat posed from right-wing terrorist lone actors, radicalized online, remained significant.”

The most significant attack was an October 2022 shooting carried out in Bratislava, Slovakia, in front of an LGBTQ+ bar that resulted in two deaths. Interestingly, the State Department’s designation of the Nordic Resistance Movement highlighted that the group’s violent actions include an anti-LGBTQ+ platform.

Anti-immigration attacks

The Biden administration designated the Nordic Resistance Movement as a terrorist group shortly after EU parliamentary elections, in which far-right political groups made significant gains.

Far-right groups, such as Germany’s Alternative for Germany, won seats – 15 of them – for the first time. The group encourages violence against immigrants – communities often singled out by violent radical-right extremists such as the Nordic Resistance Movement.

In fact, the Nordic group’s most notorious attack was carried out at a refugee center in Gothenburg, Sweden, in January 2017, during which an attempted bomb attack left one person seriously injured.

The perpetrators of the attack were trained at a camp in Russia by the Russian Imperial Movement – the group that the U.S. State Department designated as a terrorist group in 2020.

More recently, on June 18, a former member of the Nordic group carried out a knife attack on a foreign-born 12-year-old child in Finland.

Migration policy has long been a focus for violent far-right extremists, and increasingly politicians have been the targets.

In May 2024, for instance, a center-left German politician was beaten up while hanging campaign posters in an ideologically motivated attack.

In another assault, a politician in Dresden, Germany, was assaulted by a group that allegedly called out, “Heil Hitler.”

In fact, according to the Middlebury Institute’s Center on Terrorism, Extremism and Counterterrorism, the Nordic group’s goal is to “overthrow democracy across the Nordic region and Scandinavia in favor of establishing a Third Reich-inspired Nazi dictatorship.”

Groups like the Nordic Resistance Movement are leveraging a fragile and polarized European society, playing on fears that migrants are a threat to the continent.

Protecting democracies

Against the backdrop of recent violent far-right attacks against politicians and immigrants, along with recent European election results, the timing of the Biden administration’s designation of the Nordic Resistance Movement reflects growing fear in Washington that the far-right’s political rise in Europe may inspire violent extremists to move beyond chants, slogans and swastikas to mass shootings.

Nonetheless, the United States has been less inclined to sanction far-right groups than many of its partners. For example, the United Kingdom has designated seven far-right organizations as terrorist organizations; for Canada, the count is nine.

Simply put, the United States, despite its penchant to sanction enemies – from hostile states such as Russia to terrorist groups such as ISIS – appears reluctant to fully take advantage of its terrorist designation tools against violent far-right actors.

And that, I believe, could be a concern. U.S.-based far-right extremists are known to be very connected to similarly minded groups and individuals in Europe. Organizers of the 2017 white supremacist Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, had alleged links to the proscribed Russian Imperial Movement.

By designating groups such as the Nordic Resistance Movement as terrorists, the Biden administration is hoping to dissuade Americans from supporting Europe’s far right. Under the terms of the State Department order, if any American did offer support, they could end up behind bars.

At the same time, it may be that the Biden administration’s listing of the Nordic group is a signal to Europe that there are more far-right-related terrorist designations to come.

After all, the administration made a point to explain that the Nordic group’s designation was taken “following consultations with our European partners.”

And with multiple important elections on the horizon in Europe, Biden’s decision also represents an effort to champion democracy and push back against groups that promote us-versus-them narratives that define enemies as others worthy of attack.

If listing the Nordic Resistance Movement as a terrorist organization is a sign of more designations to come, it could further two of the Biden administration’s stated goals: promoting and protecting democracy overseas and combating domestic terrorism.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Conversation

Couple Thoughts on What’s Next

In one of the DC newsletters this morning, Mike Allen largely streamed the Trump campaign’s inner monologue about the “brutal attack” they plan to unleash on Kamala Harris if and when she becomes the nominee (and I really think it’s very likely when, not if). Meanwhile, he writes, Republicans are asking why they weren’t told about the Biden situation. Voters will ask. Democrats will ask! I really hope people won’t be stage managed like this, or led into dramas of self-doubt and self-wraithing. One thing that Trump is good at, really good at, is the cadence and roll out of public drama, maintaining the tempo and initiative, the mix of threats and bombast.

There’s a tableful of taunts and attacks just waiting there for Harris or another Democratic nominee to pick up. Obviously this isn’t where Democrats wanted or expected to be. But if they are here or will be here soon they should see and jump on all the opportunities it opens up. And there are a lot.

Continue reading “Couple Thoughts on What’s Next”  

Yes, Hamilton Thought John Roberts Was Full Of it Too

I noted earlier how Thomas Jefferson very clearly disagreed with the idea that the President was or should be immune from prosecution under the law, or above the law in any way. I also mentioned that as a general matter virtually every aspect of the authorship and debate over the Constitution was at war with the concept of presidential immunity outlined in the recent Supreme Court decision. A TPM reader reminded me further of this passage from Federalist 69, authored by Alexander Hamilton, certainly the Constitution architect and author most friendly to executive power.

Continue reading “Yes, Hamilton Thought John Roberts Was Full Of it Too”