Politico:
So were the missing Secret Service texts a treason cover-up? It would be irresponsible not to speculate.
Maybe the Benghazi committee should look into it.
Just Sharpie in “Hillary Clinton” to get GOP buy-in.
Chicago Magazine:
Detroit News:
Greg Sargent/WaPo:
Jennifer Rubin/WaPo:
Perry Bacon, Jr/WaPo:
Nate Cohn/NY Times:
Brian Beutler/NY Times:
‘Sprint through the finish’: Why the Jan. 6 committee isn't nearly done
The panel has a much-anticipated hearing Thursday that is expected to feature former Trump White House press aide Sarah Matthews and former deputy national security adviser Matthew Pottinger. But that won't be the end.
Thursday’s hearing will focus on Trump’s hours of inaction on Jan. 6, 2021, while a mob ransacked the Capitol and supporters, aides and family members begged him to speak out. But beyond that, the committee is pursuing multiple new avenues of inquiry created by its investigation of Trump’s scheme to seize a second term he didn’t win, from questions about the Secret Service’s internal communications as well as leads provided by high-level witnesses from his White House.
If I'm the judge in the #Bannon case, and he made me waste the court's time on a trial when he had no arguments to make, when it came time to sentence him I would definitely give him the absolute maximum I could. These ppl need to be taught the courts are not their plaything.
— Peter O'Connor (@BostonMassMark) July 19, 2022
So were the missing Secret Service texts a treason cover-up? It would be irresponsible not to speculate.
Maybe the Benghazi committee should look into it.
Just Sharpie in “Hillary Clinton” to get GOP buy-in.
Chicago Magazine:
The Big Truth
University of Chicago professor Robert Pape has spent the past year and a half examining the January 6 insurrectionists — and sounding the alarm about the future of democracy. Is America listening?
What Pape and his colleagues have found is that those who attacked the Capitol were not, as had been widely assumed, an assemblage of rural Donald Trump voters linked to fringe right-wing groups. The movement appears to be far more mainstream than that, with a surprisingly broad base of support for political violence. CPOST continues to examine the insurrectionists — their demographics, attitudes, and social connections — to present a more comprehensive picture than has been seen anywhere. This is academic work meant to stand above the partisan fray, though it’s also intended to have a real-world impact. Pape’s stated purpose is not to craft policy but to provide vital information to those who do, as was the case with CPOST’s previous work on suicide terrorism and domestic ISIS recruitment.
Yet the current state of politics puts Pape and his colleagues in a tricky situation. Can a fact-based approach prevail when many of the subjects — people who supported overturning a presidential election through violent means — subscribe to a conspiracy theory called the Big Lie, the claim that the 2020 election was stolen? Or when other Trump allies, including some of the very politicians who were forced to evacuate the Capitol, have downplayed, even defended, the insurrection? How can researchers avoid the trappings of politics when facts themselves are deemed partisan?
Detroit News:
Trump-DeSantis matchup shows cracks in ex-president's control of Michigan GOP
Support for former President Donald Trump remains strong in Michigan, but there are signs his influence has waned somewhat among Republican voters, according to a statewide poll commissioned by The Detroit News and WDIV (Channel 4).
In the July 13-15 poll of 500 registered voters who said they are likely to vote in the Republican primary in August, most signaled they would support another potential re-election campaign by Trump, valued his endorsement in the Michigan GOP gubernatorial primary and trusted his assessment of the 2020 election more than that of Michigan Senate Republicans, whose investigations found no evidence of widespread fraud.
But Trump's favorability numbers among Republican primary voters are about eight points lower than they were in an early May survey conducted by Lansing-based Glengariff Group.
And, in a hypothetical 2024 Republican presidential matchup against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, support among Michiganians for the two Floridians was largely split, with Trump's slight edge falling within the margin of error, according to the poll conducted by the Glengariff Group.
When asked if they would support Trump or DeSantis if the presidential election were held the day they were contacted, 45% of voters said they would vote for Trump and about 42% said they would vote for DeSantis. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.
What was the heart of Democrat @LauraKellyKS ‘s winning message in ‘18? It was that school was down to 4 days a week in many parts of Kansas. She took the trickle-down zealotry of right wing statehouse politics and showed how it impacted everyday Kansans. And won! https://t.co/e4Ndy0w9JK
— David Pepper (@DavidPepper) July 20, 2022
Greg Sargent/WaPo:
A clever plan to foil a 2024 coup attempt quietly advances
A serious threat to our democracy is this scenario: A state legislature appoints a slate of presidential electors in defiance of the state’s popular vote, and one chamber of Congress, controlled by the same party, counts those electors. Under current law, those electors would stand, potentially tipping a close election.
But now, these senators appear to be homing in on solutions to that problem. If they succeed, it would constitute a substantial accomplishment, thanks in part to the House Jan. 6committee’s focus on President Donald Trump’s attempt to overthrow U.S. democracy.
This week, the senators are expected to reach a deal on ECA reform. Trump revealed the ECA’s vulnerabilities by pressuring his vice president and congressional Republicans to invalidate electors appointed for Joe Biden in several states, as part of a plot to get them to appoint new electors for Trump.
Let’s see if I get this right: Donald Trump’s deposition to the NY AG was delayed due to his first wife's death but he’s still going to a rally in Arizona this Friday? He should be called to testify this Friday. No more delays.
— Republicans against Trumpism (@RpsAgainstTrump) July 18, 2022
Jennifer Rubin/WaPo:
How to prevent Republicans from worming out of questions about Trump
Let’s consider the questions that should have followed AZ Gov.] Ducey’s first non-answer refusing to say whether Trump’s conduct should disqualify him.
- You didn’t answer the question. Is Trump disqualified in your judgment?
- Have you read about or watched the Jan. 6 committee’s hearings? Why can’t you render a judgment?
- How can voters trust you to defend democracy if you cannot rule out supporting the instigator of a coup attempt?
- Is seeking to procure fake electors acceptable?
- Should pressuring the Justice Department to “just say” the election was fraudulent despite any evidence of fraud be permissible?
- If Arizona’s state legislature had submitted alternative, phony electors contradicting Arizona voters’ choice, what would you have done?
- Is it acceptable to urge an armed mob to march to the Capitol to stop the count of electoral votes?
- What about inciting a mob against the vice president at the Capitol? Is that acceptable?
[Dana] Bash might not have succeeded in procuring better answers from Ducey with these questions. But what’s the priority: forcing elected officials to confront the truth about our democracy, or running through the garden variety of political queries? If one is serious in coverage of democracy, one’s interviewees should not be able to shirk responsibility for their party’s role in jeopardizing democracy.
Similarly, the notion of picking "a side between the baby or the mother" is a wholly false construct in many medical emergencies like ruptured ectopic pregnancy. Fetus is not viable, denying treatment is matricide.https://t.co/8Esp5B0tTs
— Jonathan M. Metzl (@JonathanMetzl) July 18, 2022
Perry Bacon, Jr/WaPo:
How media coverage drove Biden’s political plunge
One of the sharpest dips in Biden’s approval rating — which has dropped from 55 percent in January 2021 to less than 39 percent today — happened last August, when it declined almost five points in a single month. There wasn’t a huge surge in gas prices, nor some big legislative failure. What caused Biden’s dip was the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan — or, rather, the media’s 24/7, highly negative coverage of it.
To be clear, Biden deserved criticism. The early stages of the U.S. exit were tumultuous, with desperate Afghans clinging to U.S. military planes and massing outside the Kabul airport. The Taliban took control far more quickly than the administration anticipated. But for much of August, the homepages of major newspapers and cable news programs were dominated by Afghanistan coverage, as if the chaotic withdrawal was the only thing happening in the world. Journalists and outlets tore into the president, with Axios calling the withdrawal “Biden’s stain,” NBC News correspondent Richard Engel declaring that “history will judge this moment as a very dark period for the United States,” and CNN’s Jake Tapper asking an administration official on his show, “Does President Biden not bear the blame for this disastrous exit from Afghanistan?”
Biden’s poll numbers plunged, closely tracking the media hysteria. As The Post’s Dana Milbank wrote in December, data analysis showed a marked increase in negativity in media coverage of Biden that started last August. After the withdrawal, the media lumped other events into its “Biden is struggling” narrative: infighting among Democrats over the party’s agenda, Democrats’ weak performances in the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races, rising inflation, and the surge of the delta and omicron variants. Biden’s role in these issues was often exaggerated — there are many causes of inflation besides Biden’s policies; presidents can’t stop the emergence of coronavirus variants. This anti-Biden coverage pattern remains in place.
Americans are more likely to say that schools should (45%) acknowledge students’ gender identities than to say they should not (38%). Democrats (67%) are more likely than independents (45%) and Republicans (21%) to hold this view.https://t.co/iotziorHcw pic.twitter.com/xvABO5ojKw
— YouGov America (@YouGovAmerica) July 19, 2022
Nate Cohn/NY Times:
The Key Insights From Our First Poll of the 2022 Midterms
A summary of the findings includes deep dissatisfaction among voters and potential fertile ground for new candidates in 2024.
Many voters do not want to see a 2020 rematch. Mr. Biden still led Mr. Trump in a hypothetical 2024 matchup, 44 percent to 41 percent. What was surprising: Ten percent of respondents volunteered that they would not vote at all or would vote for someone else if those were the two candidates, even though the interviewer didn’t offer those choices as an option.
The midterm race starts out close, with voters nearly evenly divided on the generic congressional ballot (voters are asked whether they prefer Democrats or Republicans to be in control of Congress). That’s a little surprising, given expectations of a Republican landslide this year.
One of the great tragedies of the Senate's climate failure this week is that fossil fuel workers are going to bear the brunt of their failure, in spite of their claims to be on their side. And there is no better place to see that tragedy than West Virginia. Thread:
— Sean Casten (@SeanCasten) July 18, 2022
Brian Beutler/NY Times:
The Republican Ticket Is Being Helped by the Last People You’d Expect
In Arizona, Democrats have intervened on behalf of Kari Lake, a candidate for governor who has fanned lies about the 2020 election and demanded the imprisonment of the Democratic front-runner. In Pennsylvania, Democrats ran ads boosting Doug Mastriano, a Christian theocrat who participated in the Jan. 6 insurrection before running for governor.
To say that the Democratic strategy of putting a thumb on the scale for these charlatans and conspiracy theorists, in this political climate, has alarmed prominent liberals would be an understatement. The MSNBC host Chris Hayes called it “insane.” Barack Obama’s former chief strategist David Axelrod, who once helped orchestrate similar manipulation, recently wrote that in the Trump era, “I fear the tactic.”
"the armies of Vladimir Putin will go home on foot, leaving a lot of equipment behind. Why? They are facing a logistics collapse like that seen by the armies of the Tzar in 1917, after the Summer offensive." #SlavaUkraini Time is not on Russia's side. https://t.co/172cqk2DT6
— John Spencer (@SpencerGuard) July 18, 2022