Driving the Day
Must Read Stories
Trump faces historic federal indictment over mishandling of classified documents
- New York Times: What to Expect From Trump’s Court Appearance on Tuesday: The political world’s eyes will turn to the federal courthouse in Miami on Tuesday when former President Donald J. Trump is expected to surrender for his first appearance on charges that he illegally retained national security documents after leaving office, obstructed efforts to retrieve them and made false statements. The extraordinary event will be the former president’s second courtroom appearance as a criminal defendant, after his arraignment in April in a New York courthouse on state charges that he falsified business records in connection with a hush-money payment to a porn star just before the 2016 election.
- Washington Post: Miami braces for Trump in court on classified documents charges: Former president Donald Trump awaited his first scheduled court appearance to face federal criminal charges here Tuesday while authorities pledged to keep their city safe despite potentially large crowds surrounding the event. The logistical and security planning ahead of the hearing underscored the unprecedented nature of Trump’s court appearance — no ex-president has ever been a defendant in a federal criminal case — along with the uncertainty about what might unfold on Tuesday. Trump and his supporters have called for demonstrations opposing the case, with some of his acolytes sometimes using violent rhetoric in denouncing the charges.
- New York Times: Trump Put National Secrets at Risk, Prosecutors Say in Historic Indictment: Federal prosecutors laid out an evidence-packed case in an indictment unsealed on Friday that former President Donald J. Trump had put national security secrets at risk by mishandling classified documents he took from the White House and then schemed to block the government from reclaiming the material. The 49-page, 38-count indictment said the documents held onto by Mr. Trump included some involving sensitive nuclear programs and others that detailed the country’s potential vulnerabilities to military attack. In some cases, prosecutors said, he displayed them to people without security clearances and stored them in a haphazard manner at Mar-a-Lago, even stacking a pile of boxes in a bathroom at his private club and residence in Florida.
- New York Times: Trump Indictment Shows Critical Evidence Came From One of His Own Lawyers: The two indictments filed so far against former President Donald J. Trump — one brought by the Manhattan district attorney, the other by a Justice Department special counsel — charge him with very different crimes but have something in common: Both were based, at least in part, on the words of his own lawyers. In the 49-page federal indictment accusing him of retaining classified documents after leaving the White House and scheming to block government efforts to retrieve them, some of the most potentially damning evidence came from notes made by one of those lawyers, M. Evan Corcoran.
- New York Times: Trump Appointee Will Remain Judge in Documents Case, Clerk Says: The criminal case against President Donald J. Trump over his hoarding of classified documents was randomly assigned to Judge Aileen M. Cannon, a court official for the Southern District of Florida said on Saturday. The chief clerk of the federal court system there, Angela E. Noble, also confirmed that Judge Cannon would continue to oversee the case unless she recused herself. The news of Judge Cannon’s assignment raised eyebrows because of her role in an earlier lawsuit filed by Mr. Trump challenging the F.B.I.’s search of his Florida club and estate, Mar-a-Lago. In issuing a series of rulings favorable to him, Judge Cannon, a Trump appointee, effectively disrupted the investigation until a conservative appeals court ruled she never had legitimate legal authority to intervene.
- New York Times: Trump’s Case Puts the Justice System on Trial, in a Test of Public Credibility: Former President Donald J. Trump has a lot at stake in the federal criminal case lodged against him. He could, in theory, go to prison for years. But if he winds up in the dock in front of a jury, it is no exaggeration to suggest that American justice will be on trial as well. History’s first federal indictment against a former president poses one of the gravest challenges to democracy the country has ever faced. It represents either a validation of the rule-of-law principle that even the most powerful face accountability for their actions or the moment when a vast swath of the public becomes convinced that the system has been irredeemably corrupted by partisanship.
Indictment of Trump leads to denials by GOP leaders and threats of violence from supporters
- Vice: ‘We Need to Start Killing’: Trump’s Far-Right Supporters Are Threatening Civil War: In what is becoming a now all-too-familiar trend, former President Donald Trump’s far-right supporters have threatened civil war after news broke Thursday that the former president was indicted for allegedly taking classified documents from the White House without permission. “We need to start killing these traitorous fuckstains,” wrote one Trump supporter on The Donald, a rabidly pro-Trump message board that played a key role in planning the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Another user added: “It’s not gonna stop until bodies start stacking up. We are not civilly represented anymore and they’ll come for us next. Some of us, they already have.”
- Washington Post: GOP response to Trump indictment shows shift away from law enforcement: Scores of Republican elected officials and activists have sought to discredit the integrity of federal agencies that have investigated and charged Donald Trump, marking another step away from the GOP’s longtime positioning as the party of law enforcement. Trump and many of his GOP presidential rivals have argued without evidence that the Justice Department has unfairly targeted the former president, even as some of those candidates also asserted Monday that the federal charges he faces should be taken seriously. Republicans on Capitol Hill and beyond have similarly aimed to portray the Justice Department and the FBI as politically motivated actors, echoing Trump’s claim of the government being weaponized against him under President Biden.
- New York Times: Trump Supporters’ Violent Rhetoric in His Defense Disturbs Experts: The federal indictment of former President Donald J. Trump has unleashed a wave of calls by his supporters for violence and an uprising to defend him, disturbing observers and raising concerns of a dangerous atmosphere ahead of his court appearance in Miami on Tuesday. In social media posts and public remarks, close allies of Mr. Trump — including a member of Congress — have portrayed the indictment as an act of war, called for retribution and highlighted the fact that much of his base carries weapons. The allies have painted Mr. Trump as a victim of a weaponized Justice Department controlled by President Biden, his potential opponent in the 2024 election. The calls to action and threats have been amplified on right-wing media sites and have been met by supportive responses from social media users and cheers from crowds, who have become conditioned over several years by Mr. Trump and his allies to see any efforts to hold him accountable as assaults against him.
- Washington Post: Lindsey Graham and the GOP’s amazing spin: At least Trump isn’t a spy: Donald Trump was charged under the Espionage Act. Donald Trump was not charged with espionage. But almost immediately upon his indictment late last week, key Trump defenders have sought to obviate this distinction in the service of arguing that there’s not much to see here. While in some cases acknowledging that perhaps Trump did something wrong, they have argued that at least there’s no evidence he gave these documents to America’s enemies. They’ve also effectively suggested that, absent such a breach, it’s time to move on since the documents have been recovered.
- New York Times: House Republicans Rally Behind Trump, Seeking to Discredit Indictment: Top House Republicans rallied around former President Donald J. Trump on Friday after his indictment, perpetuating his false narrative that the prosecution had been ordered by President Biden, as they stepped up their efforts to use their power in Congress to discredit the case against him. It was the latest instance of top Republicans in Congress closing ranks behind the former president and helping to spread unfounded accusations against the government, in the process undermining public confidence in the rule of law and stoking intense anger in their party’s base against the nation’s institutions. “Let’s be clear about what’s happening: Joe Biden is weaponizing his Department of Justice against his own political rival,” said Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 2 House Republican. “This sham indictment is the continuation of the endless political persecution of Donald Trump.” Mr. Scalise’s comments followed those of Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who vowed to “hold this brazen weaponization of power accountable.”
- Washington Post: Trump’s disdain for intelligence rules foretold his indictment: During his four years in the White House, Donald Trump routinely flouted the laws, rules and conventions that govern the handling of classified information. He tweeted a photo of an Iranian missile launch site, which revealed the capabilities of U.S. spy satellites. He tipped off the Russians to a foreign ally’s source inside a terrorist organization, potentially putting the life of an agent at risk. He took transcripts of his calls with foreign leaders as well as photos and charts used in his intelligence briefings to his private residence with no explanation, and aides sometimes lost track of the sensitive documents. The way President Donald Trump handled classified information, which some of his own advisers considered reckless, was his official prerogative. Now, as a private citizen, it’s allegedly a crime.
In The States
ALABAMA: What the Supreme Court decision on Alabama redistricting could mean for states
-
New York Times: Supreme Court Ruling on Voting Rights Could Resound Across the South: When the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that Alabama’s congressional map had diluted the power of Black voters, it was a long-sought victory for voting rights activists, who had grown increasingly alarmed at the court’s previous decisions that have hollowed out the Voting Rights Act. The decision also is likely to reverberate across the South, and could force multiple states with pending Voting Rights Act challenges to redraw their own maps. In Alabama, a state with a tortured history of Jim Crow laws and voter suppression, the court’s ruling against the legislatively drawn maps was a significant victory for Black voters. The court affirmed a lower court’s decision to create a second congressional district “in which Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.” And the ruling offered many Alabama voters a much-needed assurance that the Voting Rights Act’s other protections held strong, especially in a state that was the origin of one of the most damaging decisions to the landmark act.
-
NPR: Court ruling on Black political power in Alabama could affect maps in other states: Alabama lawmakers have to redraw congressional district lines after a significant U.S. Supreme Court ruling that could affect political maps across the South for years to come. In a 5-4 decision released Thursday, the justices upheld a key section of the Voting Rights Act as they found that a congressional map drawn by Alabama’s Republican-controlled legislature after the 2020 census diluted the power of Black voters in a state where 1 in 4 residents is Black. “The point of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act emphasizes that you cannot dilute political voting power,” said JaTaune Bosby Gilchrist, executive director of the ACLU of Alabama. “And that’s exactly what this was: a dilution of Black political voting power in the state.”
-
Nevada Current: Ruling in Alabama case could boost suits increasing Black voters’ power in other states: In one sense, the Supreme Court’s surprise ruling striking down Alabama’s 2022 congressional maps maintains the legal status quo. By 5-4, the justices rejected the state’s attempt to restrict the ability of the Voting Rights Act to block gerrymanders that suppress the power of minority voters. But that dramatically understates the impact of the case, titled Allen v. Milligan, election law experts say. Though it simply reaffirms existing law, the ruling — authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, who was joined by Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, and, in part, by Justice Brett Kavanaugh — is likely to provide a major boost to lawsuits challenging racial gerrymanders from Georgia to Washington state. That could help Democrats in the battle for control of the U.S. House and state legislatures in the 2024 election. A top political analyst cited the ruling in shifting five House seats in the party’s direction, four of the five moving to toss-ups.
OHIO: State Supreme Court orders rewrite of an anti-democratic constitutional ballot question ahead of special election
- Cleveland.com: State Issue 1 ballot language must be rewritten, Ohio Supreme Court rules: The Ohio Supreme Court handed a limited victory to opponents of State Issue 1 on Monday by ordering Republican state officials to rewrite ballot language summarizing the measure’s effects. The decision, issued by the four Republicans who hold a majority on the seven-member court, orders the Ohio Ballot Board to fix errors in the ballot language, including one that incorrectly described a new minimum number of voter signatures that amendment campaigns must collect from each Ohio county to qualify for the ballot. The court, however, declined to take a more expansive role in ordering the language to be rewritten, rejecting some of the core arguments from the group whose lawsuit prompted the court’s Monday decision.
NEW YORK: Legislature passes “Early Mail Voter Act” as session ends
- Spectrum News: Early voting expansion to mail-in ballots will head to Hochul’s desk: New York voters would be able to cast ballots early through the mail under a proposal that will be heading to Gov. Kathy Hochul’s desk. The measure was applauded by good-government organizations after New York officials allowed for voters to cite COVID as a reason for voting absentee. Republicans, however, have been leery of expanded voting to include more mail-in ballots. New York requires voters to provide a reason for why they need an absentee ballot to vote, such as being out of the county in which they are registered to vote or having an illness or disability. Voters in 2021 rejected a constitutional amendment to create a system of no-excuse absentee ballots in New York. “Allowing New Yorkers to vote by mail increases voter turnout in harder to reach populations, including young people and voters of color. We know vote by mail works: New York did it successfully in 2020 when faced with the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Common Cause New York Executive Director Susan Lerner.
CONNECTICUT: Governor signs law establishing early voting system into law
- NBC Connecticut: Governor signs early voting into law in Connecticut: Governor Lamont has signed a law creating an early voting system in Connecticut. The legislation, known as Public Act 23-5, will impact general elections, special elections and primaries in the state. It was passed in the Senate on June 1 with a 27 to 7 vote, and it passed in the House of Representatives with a 107 to 35 vote. Connecticut was just one of four states that didn’t allow in-person voting, but with this bill, that has changed. Now, Alabama, Mississippi and New Hampshire are the only states that don’t permit early voting. The bill gives Connecticut voters 14 days to cast their general election ballots early and in-person. Every town in the state will now be required to establish at least one early voting location beginning Jan. 1, 2024. It also allows seven early voting days for most primaries and four for presidential primaries and special elections.
What Experts Are Saying
Cynthia Miller-Idriss, who leads an extremism research lab at American University: “A key, dangerous part of the legacy of Jan. 6 is the ‘normalized political violence we’ve seen grip the country[.]’…She and other extremism researchers said they have observed no letup in the targeting of members of Congress, local officials and marginalized communities. ‘We should continue to take them seriously,’ she said, ‘and not assume that this handful of convictions [of Oath Keepers and Proud Boys leaders] in any way solves the problem.’…Miller-Idriss, of American University, said the Jan. 6 prosecutions have helped clarify for the public the threat posed by movements that built paramilitary wings and pushed hateful ideologies for years before they were taken seriously by authorities. ‘It feels like some small measure of justice to see the both the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys convictions come down like this and confirm what people in the field have been saying for years, which is that this is not just some street-fighting boys’ club,’ she said. ‘They’re violent. They’re dangerous. And now they’ve been found guilty.’” Washington Post
Timothy J. Heaphy, the lead investigator for the select House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and Mr. Trump’s efforts to remain in the White House after his presidency: “People who we interviewed for the Jan. 6 investigation said they came to the Capitol because politicians and the president told them to be there. Politicians think that when they say things it’s just rhetoric, but people listen to it and take it seriously. In this climate politicians need to realize this and be more responsible.” New York Times
Jacob Ware, an extremism researcher at the Council on Foreign Relations: “likens the widespread embrace of such positions [like regarding Trump’s latest indictment as a liberal plot to pave the way for a broader crackdown on conservatives] to a ‘mass radicalization.’ ‘Donald Trump still retains that ability to bring all of these disparate groups on the violent far right together,’ Ware said. ‘He remains the most important factor.’” The Washington Post
Headlines
The MAGA Movement And The Ongoing Threat To Elections
New York Times: Fox News Tells Tucker Carlson to Stop Posting Videos on Twitter
Washington Post: Conservative Republicans embrace culture-war extremes
Nation: It’ll Take More Than an Indictment to Make Donald Trump Face Justice
Trump Investigations
New York Times: How Walt Nauta, a Personal Aide, Came to Be Charged as Trump’s Co-Conspirator
Washington Post: Georgia is likely next ground zero for Trump’s battle with law enforcement
January 6 And The 2020 Election
MSNBC: MAGA conspiracy theorists hit with big fine over 2020 robocalls
New Hampshire Union Leader: Hudson woman gets 11 months in prison for role in Jan. 6 riot
NBC: DOJ seeks 14 years for Jan. 6 rioter who called Trump ‘dad,’ drove stun gun into Michael Fanone’s neck
Opinion
New York Times: Trump’s Case Puts the Justice System on Trial, in a Test of Public Credibility
Washington Post: The impossible challenge of telling Trump fans the truth
New York Times: Time Is Running Out for John Roberts and the Supreme Court
Washington Post: Roberts isn’t an institutionalist. He’s a weather vane
New York Times: Speaking of Forest Fires, Let’s Talk About Trump
Washington Post: The classified documents indictment is a stunning display of Trump’s narcissism
New York Times: DeSantis Finds a New Set of Laws to Ignore
Washington Post: Trump’s indictment is tragic for our country but an imperative for justice
In the States
Spotlight PA: ACLU sues PA county for rejecting primary 2023 ballots
WUWM: Wisconsin Assembly’s elections committee turns new leaf with election denier no longer at helm
Texas Tribune: Texas is set to improve in-person and mail-in voting for people with disabilities
