Former President Donald J. Trump’s classified documents case dominated the headlines again this week. There is a tentative trial date set for August. Postponement is likely, however, because of expected pretrial litigation. Trump, the first former president to have everyday Americans on a grand jury approve federal criminal charges, faces 31 counts of unauthorized willful retention of national security secrets among other charges, including conspiracy to obstruct justice. Second, a Georgia investigation has once again dismissed claims of election fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election. Finally, some elected officials in the Republican Party continue to use the January 6 insurrection as a political football — in some cases openly associating with participants in the Capitol riot.
Here’s what you need to know for the weekend:
Main Points for the Weekend:
1. Trump’s Classified Documents Trial: Tentative August Start Amid Legal Hurdles
Former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case is rapidly evolving, with the trial tentatively set for August, although this date is likely to be pushed back due to extensive pretrial litigation and the handling of classified materials.Trump has staunchly defended his conduct, suggesting he had been too ‘busy’ to return the classified documents promptly. Despite the seriousness of the charges, some of his ideological supporters continue to show remarkable support for the former president, disputing the classification of the contested documents and other facts in the case.
- Top point to make: The ongoing classified documents case involving former President Donald J. Trump should not be viewed through a partisan lens. Given the unprecedented nature of a former President facing federal criminal charges, it is crucial for every citizen, irrespective of political affiliation, to be invested in ensuring justice is served peacefully. We must resist the urge to rush to judgment based on our pre-existing biases or political leanings. Instead, let’s allow the legal process to take its course, ensuring a fair trial rooted in facts, evidence, and the rule of law. Only then can justice truly be achieved.
- If you read one thing: Washington Post, 6/19/23: How Classified Evidence Could Complicate the Trump Documents Case: Lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump have told the judge overseeing his documents case that they have started the process of obtaining security clearances, the first step of what is likely to be a major fight over classified evidence before his trial. Mr. Trump is facing 31 counts of unauthorized retention of national security secrets under the Espionage Act, along with accusations that he obstructed the government’s efforts to retrieve sensitive files — including by defying a subpoena. Here is a closer look at the tricky legal issues raised by the role of classified evidence in the case.
2. Georgia Authorities Yet Again Dismiss Trump-Backed Conspiracy Theories – Affected Election Workers Deserve Apologies And Gratitude
Claims of election fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election in Georgia yet again have been definitively debunked by investigators, further discrediting former President Donald Trump’s conspiracy theories about election misconduct. According to an investigative report released this week by the Georgia Elections Board, allegations against two Fulton County election workers, who had been targeted in Trump-backed theories, were found to be “false and unsubstantiated”. Despite Trump’s insistence on national television about fraudulent activities in the 2020 election, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger announced the closure of an investigation into these claims, reiterating that the allegations against the Fulton County Department of Registration and Elections were unfounded.
- Top point to make: Once again, the drumbeat of false narratives surrounding the 2020 Presidential Election has been resoundingly debunked, this time by the Elections Board in Georgia. The idea that our elections are unfair or riddled with widespread fraud is not only unfounded but also deeply dangerous. Such false allegations serve to undermine public trust in the electoral process, destabilize our democratic institutions, and sow division among citizens. And the heart-wrenching testimony from Ruby Freeman and Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss, who were targets of false claims from Trump and allies like Rudy Giuliani, in front of the House Select Committee on January 6 last year is just the tip of the iceberg of the personal harm that false claims can inflict. Poll workers like Shaye – who continue to face threats and harassment – are essential to our country’s democracy, and all Americans should be deeply grateful for their service to our nation. As we remain vigilant against misinformation, it’s heartening to witness the integrity and resilience of our legal and electoral systems. The conclusion of the Georgia investigation underscores the importance of our judicial system in discerning truth from fiction and upholding the rule of law.
- If you read one thing: ABC News, 6/20/23: Georgia poll workers accused in Trump-backed conspiracy theories cleared of election fraud allegations: Allegations of election fraud against two Georgia election workers who became the subjects of a Trump-backed conspiracy theory in the aftermath of the 2020 election were found to be “false and unsubstantiated,” according to an investigative report released Tuesday by the Georgia Elections Board. Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, both former election workers from Fulton County, faced threats of violence from conspiracy theorists after their election-night conduct on a polling place livestream proliferated online among right-wing election deniers who believed Donald Trump won the 2020 election.
3. Republicans’ Conflicted Stance on Jan. 6: Shifting Narratives and an Increasing Appeal to Extremism
The Republican party has demonstrated a conflicted stance regarding the events of January 6th, with narratives fluctuating between avoidance, playing the insurrection down, and placing blame. House Republicans have concurrently shown disinterest in revisiting the incident while also promoting misleading narratives that attribute fault for the attack to Democrats, police, or left-wing agitators. Furthermore, some GOP leaders have been observed interacting with fringe elements promoting inaccurate portrayals of the Capitol violence and visiting January 6 defendants in jail.
- Top point to make: The events of January 6th should never be used as a political football. It’s not only a dangerous practice, but it also undermines the severity of the persistent threats to our democracy demonstrated that day. The insurrection was an unprecedented attack on our nation’s core values and institutions, and, as the Select Committee on January 6 has outlined, was part of a multistep effort to overturn the results of a free and fair election. As citizens, we should demand from our elected officials a commitment to truth and accountability, not opportunistic narratives that can exacerbate divisions and stoke further unrest. We owe it to ourselves and future generations to ensure that January 6th is remembered for what it was – a violent attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power – and a stark reminder of the need for accountability and to safeguard our democracy.
- If you read one thing: Politico, 6/18/23: House GOP flirts with Jan. 6 extremism: House Republicans don’t want to talk about Jan. 6. They also can’t stop talking about it. At times, GOP lawmakers insist they’re uninterested in relitigating an attack that is political poison for the party outside of deep-red areas. But at other times, some Republicans have stoked narratives that falsely pin blame for the attack on police, Democrats or far-left agitators — or downplay the violence at the Capitol. The latter approach has seen a noticeable uptick of late. And it’s not just far-right conservatives who fall in that group — some House GOP leaders and key committee chiefs have shown they’re willing to flirt with the fringe without an outright embrace. Speaker Kevin McCarthy has shared security video of that day with far-right media figures who have minimized or fed inaccurate portrayals of the attack.
Expert Voices
Margaret Sullivan, host of new American Crisis podcast and former Washington Post media columnist as well as former public editor of the New York Times: “[O]ur crisis right now, which is really the focus of the podcast, more than looking back at Watergate, is whether our democracy is really under threat. And I think it absolutely is. It didn’t start with the Trump era, but what’s happened in right-wing politics and media puts us—we’re in a scary place. There’s a kind of creep. There’s an antidemocratic creep that’s happening in the United States. It’s very troubling. And it’s not about to stop anytime soon…I think everyone can understand that if a democracy is going to function and is going to endure, the citizens need to have a common basis of facts. They need to have a common basis of truth. They can disagree about things, they can disagree about policy or personalities or events, but there needs to be sort of a base, a foundation, of shared reality. And we really don’t have that anymore. There is reality. But there’s also a big swath of the country that doesn’t want to believe it…Probably the biggest one [example] is what people think about the election of 2020. I mean, there are lots of people who think that President [Joe] Biden is not the legitimate president. Right. I mean, that is a pretty big schism.” Vanity Fair
States United Democracy Center: Resources on John Eastman’s trial before the State Bar Court of California, including: context, overview of the 11 counts, key takeaways, what to expect, potential witnesses, and more. Backgrounder
Jeffrey B. Abramson, professor emeritus of government and law at the University of Texas at Austin, Eugene R. Fidell, a visiting lecturer at Yale Law School, and Dennis Aftergut, former federal prosecutor: “Legal experts (among others) lost trust in Judge Cannon as a fair-minded jurist in September when, without plausible legal authority, she appointed a special master to review the classified documents the government seized in the court-authorized search of Mar-a-Lago the previous month. The Eleventh Circuit bluntly corrected her for treating a former president specially. Cannon’s trial date order suggests that she ‘got the memo’ and may have learned a lesson. Still, there are many ways Judge Cannon could still tilt the process in Trump’s favor, from evidentiary rulings to jury instructions. Atop the list of ways she could tip the scales of justice is in how she conducts jury selection. Her responsibility is to weed out individuals with unshakeable, pre-formed opinions of innocence or guilt. How she does that—or doesn’t, as the case may be—could determine the outcome of the trial.” Bulwark
Joyce Vance, former US attorney: “The culture at the [Supreme] Court is not strong in the sense that it wholly fails to appreciate how all of us mere mortals view the justices’ failures to disclose: as efforts to avoid the accountability required of any other federal employee. The justices are so removed that they are unaware, or perhaps simply don’t care, that it damages not only their individual reputations but the reputation of the court and public confidence in the rule of law. It is a sick irony that the people who tell others how to resolve their most difficult disputes fail to see how serious their own issues have become. They have done nothing to rectify past errors, take responsibility for them, and move forward on a better path.” Civil Discourse
