The saga around Trump’s handling of classified documents continues to unfold. Allegations, propelled by statements from ex-press secretary Stephanie Grisham, suggest a pattern of carelessness with sensitive material. It’s reported that Trump frequently exposed classified documents to guests at Mar-a-Lago, which if true is a serious violation of national security protocols. This news comes amidst Trump’s rallying calls for protests against what he brands “massive prosecutorial misconduct.” Meanwhile, Trump is also accused of pressuring Arizona Governor Doug Ducey to overturn the 2020 election results, including claims that he repeatedly requested Vice President Mike Pence “to call Ducey and prod him to find” voter fraud evidence. Pence and others have maintained that while the Vice President did call Ducey more than once to discuss the election he did not comply with Trump’s reported efforts to coerce the Arizona governor to help overturn the state’s presidential election results. Lastly, the Supreme Court upheld a Mississippi voting law rooted in the Jim Crow era, designed to suppress Black votes.
Here’s what you need to know for the weekend:
Main Points for the Weekend:
1. Classified Chaos: Trump Grapples with Legal Challenges Amid Calls for Protests
The specter of legal troubles continues to hover over former president Donald Trump as he faces growing accusations regarding the mishandling of classified documents. These allegations, fuelled by statements from his ex-press secretary, Stephanie Grisham, assert that Trump demonstrated a reckless disregard for the importance of sensitive material. Recent claims of classified documents being shown casually to guests at his Mar-a-Lago resort and the continuing federal criminal investigation – where the grand jury in Miami reportedly issued a handful of subpoenas after the former president was indicted on 37-charges, including obstruction of justice and willful retention of national security secrets – raise serious questions about Trump’s respect for national security protocols. Instead of retreating from public view, Trump is rallying his supporters. He is escalating calls for public protests, airing his grievances in vehement all-caps posts on his Truth Social platform. In these posts, he is casting himself as the victim of what he terms “massive prosecutorial misconduct,” denouncing the state of the country, and portraying his legal challenges as evidence of the country’s decline.
- Top point to make: The emerging revelations and claims from the classified documents case surrounding former President Trump continue to raise alarming questions and concerns about the handling and treatment of critical, sensitive information. The alleged casualness of Trump sharing classified materials with guests at Mar-a-Lago if true showcases a shocking disregard for the significance of such information and the potential dangers of its mishandling. Moreover, Trump’s continuous efforts to rally his supporters to protest legal decisions poses a disconcerting threat to the rule of law that our democratic system is built upon. The persistence of such behavior from a former president underscores the necessity for a thorough, transparent, and fair process in holding individuals accountable, regardless of their current or former status.
- If you read one thing: The New York Times, 7/5/23: Judge Unseals More of Affidavit Used to Seek Mar-a-Lago Search Warrant: A federal magistrate judge unsealed on Wednesday additional portions of the affidavit that the F.B.I. used last summer to obtain a warrant to search for sensitive documents at Mar-a-Lago, former President Donald J. Trump’s private club and residence in Florida, revealing a few new details about how that extraordinary process had unfolded. The newly unredacted sections of the affidavit suggested that prosecutors had based their search, in part, on surveillance footage from cameras near a storage room in the basement of Mar-a-Lago showing Walt Nauta, a personal aide to Mr. Trump, moving dozens of boxes in and out of the room days before federal prosecutors arrived to collect any sensitive records still in Mr. Trump’s possession.
2. Trump Accused of Pressuring Arizona Governor to Overturn 2020 Election
Former President Donald Trump is alleged to have attempted to pressure Arizona Governor Doug Ducey to overturn the 2020 election results, according to sources familiar with a late-2020 phone call. It is reported that Trump suggested that discovering sufficient fraudulent votes could reverse his narrow defeat in the state. Trump also apparently urged then Vice President Mike Pence to nudge Ducey to find supportive evidence for Trump’s unfounded fraud allegations. Pence, however, insists that no pressure was applied during his calls to Ducey or other governors. The former vice president maintains that his goal was simply to gather updates about the ongoing legal reviews of election results, which were then passed on to Trump. These revelations surface amidst a broader scrutiny of Trump’s actions surrounding the 2020 election, as recent activity from federal investigators and Fulton County prosecutors suggest they are nearing decisions on potential criminal charges.
- Top point to make: The allegations that former President Donald Trump pressured Arizona Governor Doug Ducey to overturn the 2020 election results represent an alarming threat to our democracy that demands serious attention. As a country built on the principles of fair and free elections, any attempt to manipulate election results, especially by an incumbent President, is a gross violation of the democratic norms that underpin our society. While former Vice President Mike Pence’s claims of no pressure during the discussions about the election results provide some context, they do not negate the necessity for a comprehensive investigation. Regardless of the person involved, or their position in government, actions that undermine the democratic process need to be fully investigated and, if proven, held accountable.
- If you read one thing: Washington Post, 7/1/23: Trump pressured Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey to overturn 2020 election: In a phone call in late 2020, President Donald Trump tried to pressure Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R) to overturn the state’s presidential election results, saying that if enough fraudulent votes could be found it would overcome Trump’s narrow loss in Arizona, according to three people familiar with the call. Trump also repeatedly asked Vice President Mike Pence to call Ducey and prod him to find the evidence to substantiate Trump’s claims of fraud, according to two of these people. Pence called Ducey several times to discuss the election, they said, though he did not follow Trump’s directions to pressure the governor.
3. Supreme Court Upholds Jim Crow-Era Mississippi Voting Law Amid Controversy
In a decision that has sparked controversy, the Supreme Court rejected a challenge to a constitutional amendment in Mississippi originating from the Jim Crow-era, upholding a voting law that bars certain felons from voting. The ruling maintains that the law, despite its racist origins aimed at suppressing Black votes, has been divested of its initial discriminatory intentions due to subsequent updates. The court’s decision has elicited staunch opposition, notably from liberal Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor who voiced sharp dissent. This ruling supports a 2022 decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that alterations to the list of disenfranchising crimes have remedied the original discriminatory intent in the state’s constitution.
- Top point to make: The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Mississippi voting law, which originated in the Jim Crow era, is deeply concerning due to its inherent discriminatory origins. The intent behind the law’s inception was unmistakably to suppress the votes of Black individuals and dilute their political influence, an effort that harkens back to one of the most oppressive periods in American history. Despite the state’s claims that subsequent updates have purged the law of its original racist intentions, its roots in systemic racial suppression should not be overlooked. The refusal of the Supreme Court to even hear the challenge to this law raises serious questions about the responsibility we bear to confront and rectify historical injustices.
- If you read one thing: NBC, 6/30/23: Supreme Court rejects challenge to Jim Crow-era Mississippi voting law: The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a challenge to a constitutional amendment adopted by the state of Mississippi during the racist Jim Crow era aimed at preventing Black people from voting. The justices left in place a law barring certain felons from voting, which the state says is no longer tainted by the racist intentions of its original authors because it has subsequently been updated on two occasions. The court’s decision not to hear the case prompted a sharp dissenting opinion from liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by fellow liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor. She contrasted the decision on Friday with the court’s ruling a day earlier that effectively ended the consideration of race in college admissions.
Expert Voices
Joyce Vance, former US attorney, re: Mar-a-Lago search warrant: “It looks like DOJ knew, when they asked for the search warrant, that a significant number of boxes Trump took out of the WH weren’t included in the storage area he identified as the only repository of his materials. Early evidence of significant obstruction of the investigation.” Tweet
Barbara McQuade, former US attorney: “University of Michigan Law Professor Barb McQuade appeared on MSNBC late Wednesday night to discuss potential changes to the Supreme Court. McQuade was asked about why there is still so much material being covered up in the Trump documents in the Mar-a-Lago case. She replied, ‘I still think that the real story is what is left that is redacted.’ ‘And we know from other reporting that the grand jury is continuing to do its work. To continue to investigate. That means there could be additional charges. Or additional defendants who get charged,’ McQuade said. ‘And so my guess is that that is the kind of material that they are trying to protect. Ordinarily public documents should be fully unredacted.’ McQuade noted that, in the public, in order to have them redacted like this, there has to be ‘some legitimate law enforcement reason for it.’ ‘And so there could be some witnesses that they are trying to protect. Or some lines of inquiry they are trying to protect. Until they finalize and complete the remaining steps in that investigation, I am very curious to find it what it is.’” MSNBC via Raw Story
Lisa Rubin, former litigator and MSNBC legal analyst: “Until recently, few had more access to Trump than his closest legal advisors. 1/ Trump understood attorney/client privilege, deploying his lawyers with and without their knowledge as instruments of his alleged crimes. So it likely was with the post-election crew. The 1/6 boots on the ground were worlds from Trump, but the lawyers were not. 2/ They had his ear, & more importantly, he spoke right into theirs. They heard what he knew, and they know what he nonetheless directed. And besides Meadows, Pence, & small group of WH lawyers (Cipollone, Philbin, & Herschmann), the lawyers are the most critical witnesses. FIN” Twitter Thread
Marc Elias, founder of Democracy Docket: “An independent judiciary and judicial review are hallmarks of democracy. That is why the independent state legislature theory, which would have curtailed state court judicial review of election laws, was so dangerous. However, Roberts ignores the obligation of the Court’s majority to maintain its own legitimacy. It is not the job of the dissent to make the majority opinion seem reasonable. That is the job of the majority. If six justices can’t convince the American public that their decisions are consistent with the U.S. Constitution and the proper judicial function, that is a failure of the majority alone.” Democracy Docket
