There is still one party that respects the law

Mark Sumner of Daily Kos wrote about the Republican response to the nasty guy’s guilty plea. Some Republican senators vowed to block judicial appointments – which they were already doing. The House vowed to investigate DA Alvin Bragg for bringing the case and they’ll add Special Counsel Jack Smith too. They claim the charges were because of the defendant (New York has charged 9,793 others with falsifying business documents since 2015). They say the DA should have settled (but settling means the defendant pleads guilty which the nasty guy would never do). They claim the conviction helps the nasty guy. They suggest Biden should pardon the nasty guy to show Biden is the better man. They call for no federal funding of New York (would be nice if NY residents also don’t need to pay federal taxes because more money goes to red states than comes home)

Because in buying into Trump’s claims that his prosecution was political, Republicans appear to have concluded that the only answer to Trump being prosecuted for his crimes is to make sure that the judicial system is as unfair and political as their dear leader claims.

Robert Faturechi, Justin Elliott, and Alex Mierjeski, in an article for ProPublica posted on Kos, report that nine witnesses in the various criminal cases against the nasty guy have received significant financial benefits – large raises, cash, better jobs, and more. This could be seen as witness tampering, though a list of conditions would need to be met to be able to prove it. An Associated Press article posted on Kos discussed some of the things that go into determining the appropriate sentence for a case. One of them is whether the defendant has taken responsibility for their actions. But the nasty guy has always refused to acknowledge wrongdoing. Instead, he attacks the court, the jury, the judge, and the prosecutors. That doesn’t sit well. There is another important societal interest. Should a former and potentially future president go to jail? (To some of us the answer is obvious that he should – and should have for crimes committed back in the 80s and 90s.) Kerry Eleveld of Kos discussed how busy Republicans are to portray the nasty guy’s conviction as a good thing, that it will make him a sure winner in November. As part of that they are crowing that the Never-Trumpers are returning (which is news to the Never-Trumpers).

"It’s a common tactic in politics, and something Republicans used successfully in 2022," [Democratic strategist Simon] Rosenberg wrote over the weekend in his Hopium Chronicles Substack. "By trying to convince everyone the election is over, that they are going to win and there is nothing any of us can do about it, they are attempting to suppress our enthusiasm, our commitment, our work, our voting. 'Trump is winning' is a volunteer and electoral suppressant, as the 'red wave' was in 2022."

The next story reminded me of a comedy album Jeff Foxworthy released in 1993. I heard excerpts, but never the whole thing. Part of the album has Foxworthy saying, “If you... you might be a redneck.” In that gap he says something about Southern rural white people and their supposed unsophisticated way of life. The album sold more than three million copies. I mention all that because, as Walter Einenkel of Kos reported, Rep. Eric Swalwell, Democrat, used that sort of pattern when the House Judiciary Committee brought AG Merrick Garland in for questioning (perhaps to distract the public from the nasty guy conviction). He must have hit a nerve because Republicans strongly objected. Which is good. Here’s some of what Swalwell said:

If you believe in states’ rights, except when a jury in that state convicts your nominee for president, you might be in a cult. If you claim you back the blue but want to defund the police, when the police go to your nominee's house to retrieve national security secrets, you might be in a cult. If you're supporting a guy whose felony convictions prevent him from getting a security clearance, you might be in a cult.

At the start of Hunter Biden’s trial Sumner wrote that there is a law and order party – and it isn’t Republicans. Hunter had plenty of family support. He didn’t threaten the judge, prosecutors, witnesses, or jurors. “Instead, the president’s family provided a powerful example of trusting in the law and submitting to the judicial process.” Hunter kept quiet even through there is plenty to complain about. The US attorney was appointed by and acted on a call from the nasty guy. The judge was appointed by the nasty guy, who blew up a plea agreement and ruled out witnesses and evidence Hunter saw as critical.

In his New York criminal trial, Trump repeatedly claimed that the investigation had been instigated by Biden. That wasn’t true. But it is true that the investigation into Hunter Biden was instigated by Trump. ... Hunter Biden, and his family, will allow this to play out as the law demands. They may be disappointed by the results, but they won't blame the outcome on a corrupt system. Because this is America, and there is still one party that respects the law.

Dartagnan of the Kos community discussed Republicans and abortion. They used to be quite specific about how severely they were willing to restrict abortion because with Roe in place they could say what they wanted and it wouldn’t happen. But with Dobbs overturning Roe, allowing each state to do what it wanted and getting a furious female response, Republican candidates now have to scrub websites and be very careful what they say. Some of them took a year or more to figure that out. But what they said in the past doesn’t stay in the past.

These sad efforts by Republicans to “soften” their radical and reactionary positions won’t work. Because when voters who care about their reproductive destinies realize someone is trying to deceive them—particularly now, in this post-Roe environment—it just makes them more angry. So highlighting this deceitful behavior early—as Planned Parenthood did with a series of ads in the 2023 race for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, for example—seals the deal for such voters almost immediately. For these voters, Republicans’ advocacy for these radical, harmful, and sometimes deadly policies is bad enough. But being lied to about their real positions is absolutely infuriating.

Dartagnan included a long list of Republican politicians with their before and after statements. For some of them their “after” views are pretty much a word salad. Dartagnan concluded:

These Republicans have all warmly embraced anti-abortion extremism in the past. Whether it was out of genuine belief or political convenience, that’s what they are. What they want now is power, and they’re clearly prepared to say or do anything to attain it, no matter whose rights they’ve trampled on or simply disregarded. The only reason they’ve changed their position is because they feel they have to. They deserve absolutely no credit or consideration for that, and they certainly don’t deserve any votes for it.

In a pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin quoted a tweet by Ben Wexler:

(During impeachment) This should be decided at the ballot box! (He loses at the ballot box) (incites a violent mob to storm the capitol) If he broke any laws, that’s up to a jury to decide! (A jury decides he broke a ton of laws) This should be decided at the ballot box!

Down in the comments are some good cartoons. Jimmy Margulies posted on with a man at the bar watching a baseball game. He says, “Can you believe the umpire’s shirt says ‘Go Yankees’?” The bartender replies, “How is that a problem for you, Justice Alito?” Mike Luckovich has a cartoon showing the nasty guy as the emperor with no clothes. A couple look at him and the wife says, “Does an ankle monitor count as pants?” exlrrp posted a meme of Snoopy writing his novel: “And, after all the dust settled, they suddenly realized American had been saved by a porn star. The End.”