Post Debate Analysis: For Democrats, the Clock is Now Ticking

The headlines following the debate SHOULD be about how much disinformation Trump spread. They SHOULD be about how he refused to take accountability for January 6. They SHOULD be about how he was convicted of 34 felony crimes…so far.

And for any other candidate running for president, this debate SHOULD have been a "gimme." Trump did what he always does: he lied, he pushed an authoritarian agenda, he avoided answering questions he should been made to answer...and he smirked through all of it.

But Joe Biden isn't just any other candidate. And he's certainly not the same Joe Biden that ran for president four years ago. 

These are not the words I want to write. I wish I could say that it's clear and obvious for whom anyone should give their vote to in November. And honestly? It's still clear to me whom I'm going to vote for.

But I really wish I had another viable choice.

Joe Biden's performance on Thursday night didn't just leave more to be desired for — it left many people's jaws dropped, myself included. 

I heard every excuse in the book tonight from the apologists. Biden overprepared and simply tried to say too much, saying too little in the process. Biden had a cold, and so of course he couldn't say what he meant to say. And so on, and so on.

The fact of the matter is this: Biden didn't do what he does best, which is call Trump out, and explain, in clear terms, why he's the better choice. 

Instead, at various points tonight, I saw the current president try to "keep pace" with Trump, who meandered and waded into multiple different topics that had nothing to do with the questions he had been asked. Had Biden simply slowed his pace down, said his piece, and point out how off-topic Trump was, he'd have looked great.

He'd have looked like the mature choice for president. The right one. The only reasonable one.

But that's not what Biden did.

He'd have been better off skipping the debate entirely — which is what he suggested he was planning to do in March. Biden even had the perfect response as to why he would skip the debate: that Trump's "behavior" wouldn't warrant him worthy of debating. The notion rightfully frames Trump for exactly who he is, as a child, an immature imbecile.

But alas, that's not what went down. And now, Democrats have to ask themselves, late in the game: is Biden really their guy?

The clock is ticking to make a decision.

Featured image credit: U.S. Secretary of Defense/Flickr

[VIDEO] Louisiana Students Don't Need 10 Commandments Lurking Behind Them in Classrooms

Transcript of video appears below...

Louisiana Students Don't Need 10 Commandments Lurking Behind Them in Classrooms#10Commandments #churchandstate #FirstAmendment #religiousfreedom #politics #uspolitics #Louisiana #JeffLandry #TenCommandments pic.twitter.com/medz4jq1h6

— Chris Walker (@thatchriswalker) June 23, 2024

Louisiana has become the first state in the country to mandate the Ten Commandments be posted in every public school classroom.

This is a clear infringement on First Amendment religious freedom rights. Now, I consider myself a Christian, but I don't believe that my faith or anybody else's for that matter should be endorsed by government in this way. By the way, the Bible feels this way, too (Matthew 6:5-7, Luke 20:20-26).

The state's governor, Republican Jeff Landry, justified the new law by stating the Commandments were a part of this country's history. That may be, to some extent, but so is Voodoo or Vodou in his home state. Somehow, I'm guessing he's not advocating for any literature from those faiths be required reading in every classroom.

And that justification from Landry doesn't make any sense to begin with. How does the historical relevance of a religious text matter in a science or math classroom? This law goes all the way up to colleges and universities, too. Why do we need the Ten Commandments in a class that focuses on molecular biology? Even in a history class, the presence of the Commandments lurking over the shoulders of students isn't exactly educational.

This law is nothing more than an attempt to get the Supreme Court to upend decades of precedent that clearly states the separation of church and state extends to public schools. The scary thing is, with this current, conservative version of the High Court, Landry and his cohorts may just succeed.

Featured image credits: Gage Skidmore/Flickr; Chris Walker

Showing Fealty to Trump, PA Republicans Boo & Hiss at Jan. 6 Capitol Police Officers

TWO FORMER U.S. CAPITOL POLICE OFFICERS who helped to defend Congress during the January 6, 2021, Trump-inspired attack were invited guests to the Pennsylvania House of Representatives earlier this week. Although they were meant to be honored guests, that's not exactly what happened...

From The Associated Press:

Witnesses said the appearance Wednesday by former U.S. Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and his ex-boss, former Sgt. Aquilino Gonell, triggered a distinctly negative response from some Republicans, with someone even shouting that they were cowards.

...

"The GOP members’ shameful behavior was unbecoming of our institution for any guest, let alone two of the men responsible for defending our democracy during a dark day in our nation’s history," [Democratic House Speaker Joanna McClinton] said. "The Republicans’ disrespect, lack of patriotism and even common decency, epitomizes the poor behavior that so many in the MAGA movement have adopted."

And from The Washington Post:

As the two men — both of whom were injured by rioters on Jan. 6 — were introduced, the House floor descended into chaos. According to Democratic lawmakers, several GOP lawmakers hissed and booed, with a number of Republicans walking out of the chamber in protest.

It's incredibly disheartening to see Republican lawmakers, or anyone at all, act this way toward people who put their lives at risk to defend out democracy. But when your fealty is to Trump and not the country, what can you expect? The GOP is no longer a party of any principles or beliefs, other than "Trump" and "MAGA" — a telling sign that indicates a growing love of fascism and authoritarianism within the party's ranks.

Featured image created by Chris Walker. Image of Pennsylvania Capitol building by Wally Gobetz/Flickr. Image of Trump by Gage Skidmore/Flickr.

RNC Used Ho Chi Minh City as Image of Milwaukee on Its Convention Website

A BOSTON GLOBE REPORTER noted something peculiar about the Republican National Committee's (RNC) website, featuring its convention set to occur in Milwaukee this July.

Up until today, the skyline the organization decided to use on its page for the convention didn't even depict Milwaukee, but rather Ho Chi Minh City, the capital of Vietnam.

"Was on the 2024 GOP convention website and saw it used a background image that... does not look like Milwaukee. Which makes sense because it's actually a photo of Ho Chi Minh City," national political reporter Sam Brodey said on X.

Upon Brodey's catch of this error, the RNC changed its banner image to show the actual city on its website. But apparently, Republicans had the image up since as far back as February.

Quick advice for any political party out there listening: If you're trying to impress the host city of your nominating convention — and if you're trying to win the Electoral College votes of the swing state that city is within — it's probably best to do more than just the bare minimum amount of work, like picking a random skyline picture from another country, to show you actually give a crap about the place.

Bfkenney/Wikimedia 

Reports: AG Kaul Files Charges Against "Fake Electors" Schemers in Wisconsin

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul has reportedly filed criminal charges against two former lawyers for Donald Trump as well as an aide for the former president for their involvement in the 2020 fake elector scheme in the state. 

The two lawyers, Kenneth Chesebro and Michael Dean, along with Trump aide, Robert Oswell, are accused of orchestrating and executing the fake elector scheme, which aimed to manipulate and interfere with the electoral process in Wisconsin. Chesebro, who is from Wisconsin, was the architect of the scheme in this state and several others where the Trump campaign attempted to overturn the election results.

Notably, the former president was not among those charged by Kaul on Tuesday.

Read more at JSOnline

Paywall free option at HuffPost

Featured image credit: Susan Ruggles/Flickr

"Wear Orange Day" Event Happening in Madison on Friday

This Friday is "Wear Orange Day," a nationwide event dedicated to raising awareness about gun violence through rallies and other calls to action. 

Coinciding with National Gun Violence Awareness Day, there are hundreds of "Wear Orange Days" happening across the country. Participants are encouraged to wear orange to show their solidarity and support for reforms to gun laws, to reduce gun violence across the U.S.

In Madison, the event and rally will take place at Galaxy Park, located at 132 Milky Way on the city's east side. Scheduled from 5 pm to 7 pm on Friday evening, the event is hosted by Public Health Madison & Dane County (PHMDC) and co-hosted by Moms Demand Action, Focused Interruption, and Dane County Human Services.

The rally will offer a range of activities, including food, music, and speeches from various community leaders. 

Join the Madison community at Galaxy Park this Friday evening to support this important cause. Your presence and participation help amplify the message that gun violence must be addressed with immediate and effective solutions.

If you have a community event or announcement you would like to see shared on Political Heat, please contact Chris at thatchriswalker@gmail.com.

Trump Demands SCOTUS Overturn His New York State-Based Conviction

ON HIS FLEDGLING TRUTH SOCIAL WEBSITE, former President Donald Trump demanded that the United States Supreme Court intervene to overturn his recent conviction in New York state, alleging various conspiracy theories and questioning the impartiality of Judge Juan Merchan, who is set to determine his sentencing on July 11. 

Last week, Trump was found guilty by a jury of his peers of 34 counts relating to his making hush-money payments to women he had affairs with, then using his personal business to hide the payments, concealing them from American voters in the run-up to the 2016 election. 

Trump made several false assertions, including calling Merchan "HIGHLY CONFLICTED" (the New York State Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics had determined Merchan was not). Such notions are part of a broader (and obvious) plot by him to undermine the judicial process and to escape being held to any accountability.

Trump's plea to the Supreme Court is not only highly unusual but also legally tenuous. The Supreme Court typically refrains from intervening in state judiciary matters unless there is a clear federal question regarding a violation of constitutional rights. 

Former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal emphasized this point while speaking on MSNBC recently, suggesting that while there might be an attempt to frame a federal issue, the likelihood of success is slim.

"Maybe they’ll find some federal issue here and maybe there will be an appeal that will get there. But I think it’s tough," Katyal said.

Notably, the Supreme Court has involved itself in Trump's other election interference case, which is a federal matter. Legal experts have questioned why the Court would entertain Trump's claims of "presidential immunity," but at least in that situation, they have a relevant (and federal) question to answer. 

The situation in Trump's New York case diverges significantly from that, as it revolves around state-level judicial processes. The Supreme Court's intervention here would set a problematic precedent, potentially undermining the principle that former presidents, like all citizens, should be held accountable under state laws.

While Trump's strategy will undoubtedly appeal to his supporters, it poses a severe threat to the integrity of the American legal system. If the Supreme Court were to acquiesce to his demands and intervene in the New York case, it would further erode public confidence in the judiciary's impartiality. 

So while it is not impossible for the Supreme Court to intervene, doing so would be a profound misstep, to put it lightly. The Supreme Court — particularly its far-right members of the bench — must resist the temptation to heed Trump's call. Unfortunately, I wouldn't be surprised if they took the alternative, Trumpian view instead, further demonstrating why the Court itself is in dire need of reforms.

Featured image credits: Image of Trump via Gage Skidmore/Flickr; image of Supreme Court via Marielam1/Wikimedia

Justice Alito’s Refusal to Recuse Is A Threat

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO'S refusal to recuse himself from cases relating to former President Donald Trump and the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack is deeply troubling, indicative of the right-wing bloc of justices' continued problems with a basic understanding of ethics and proof-positive of the need for more regulation and real changes at the High Court.

Featured image credit: Italy in US/Flickr

The flags flown over two of Alito’s residences over the past few years — an upside-down U.S. flag that flew just days after the deadly Capitol riot and Trump's second impeachment; and an "Appeal to Heaven" flag that flew as recently as last summer outside his vacation home — signal support for Trump and Christian nationalism, raising serious questions about the associate justice's impartiality.

Alito’s defense that “My wife is fond of flying flags — I am not,” fails to address the core issue here: the standard that applies (or is supposed to apply) is that "a justice should disqualify himself or herself" when their "impartiality might reasonably be questioned."

Reasonably speaking, Alito appears to harbor biases that would make him an improper figure to rule on these cases. Indeed, he offers no proof that these were even his wife's flags at all, other than his own saying so, which should cause any reasonable person to still question whether he's telling the whole story or not.

But unreasonably, the Court's rules allow him to decide for himself whether he's fit to hear cases still or not — a completely backward and, crooked and dishonest way of how things like this should be handled. 

By refusing to step aside, Alito shows that he doesn't think the standards he's supposed to abide by matters — and without an enforcement mechanism of the rules he's supposed to follow, he'll be free to do whatever he wants until his retirement, without consequence or reprisal, in this situation and future ones, resuming a disastrous precedent that shouldn't be allowed to stand.

Justice Alito’s actions are more than a misjudgment or a small error on his part; they are a direct challenge to the ethical standards that the Supreme Court must uphold, and a dismantling of a once-revered institution in this country. 

For the sake of preserving public trust in the judicial system, Alito must recuse from any cases related to Trump and the January 6 insurrection. The Court must make changes to ensure justices cannot be the regulators of their own ethical miscues. And failing that happening, Congress must create new standards and rules for them.

Poll: A Significant Number of GOP Voters Might Not Back Trump, Post Conviction

FOLLOWING DONALD TRUMP'S RECENT CONVICTION in his Manhattan-based hush-money and election interference trial, new polling data from a Reuters/Ipsos survey reveals a shift in attitudes among registered voters, including a small but significant portion of Republicans who now may not back the former president in his upcoming rematch with President Joe Biden. 

Trump was found guilty on 34 charges related to making hush-money payments to women he had extramarital affairs with, and using his business to cover them up, thus concealing their existence from voters during the 2016 election. 

Trump has long suggested that a guilty conviction would actually help him in the 2024 presidential race. But while the immediate reaction might demonstrate some Republicans are hardening their support of him, a deeper look into the numbers tells a more nuanced story.

Looking at Republican voters alone, the majority, 56 percent, indicate that the trial's outcome will not affect their voting intentions. Thirty-five percent say they are more likely to vote for Trump following his conviction. 

However, 10 percent of Republicans report they are less likely to vote for him now. 

As noted by Reuters:

The potential loss of a tenth of his party's voters is more significant for Trump than the stronger backing of more than a third of Republicans, since many of the latter would be likely to vote for him regardless of the conviction.

The impact is even more pronounced among independent voters, which Trump will also need to court if he hopes to defeat Biden. The poll found that, while 56 percent of independents say the conviction will not affect their vote, a quarter (25 percent) are less likely to support Trump. Eighteen percent said they are more likely to back Trump because of the trial. 

This shift among independents could be pivotal in a tightly contested race.

Trump’s legal woes could thus be a double-edged sword. While they may galvanize a segment of his base, they also risk alienating a critical fraction of Republican and independent voters. The upcoming election could hinge on how these dynamics play out, especially in key battleground states where independents often decide the outcome.

What are the polls saying right now? In a hypothetical three-way race including Trump, Biden, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., polling aggregates from FiveThirtyEight show Trump and Biden in a statistical tie, with Trump holding a slight 1.3-point lead over Biden. This margin is within the error range of the polls, indicating an exceedingly close race. Importantly, this data is mostly from before Trump's conviction on Thursday — indeed, the only two post-conviction polls that have occurred after his trial's conclusion (as of the publication of this blog post) show Biden ahead of Trump.