v a l l e j o n o c t u r n o

Voting for Felons

 

Vallejo Nocturno 2024

David Frum writes at the Atlantic after Trump's conviction:

The wrong case for the wrong offense just reached the right verdict.

Donald Trump will not be held accountable before the 2024 presidential election for his violent attempt to overturn the previous election. He will not be held accountable before the election for absconding with classified government documents and showing them off at his pay-for-access vacation club. He will not be held accountable before the election for his elaborate conspiracy to manipulate state governments to install fake electors. But he is now a convicted felon all the same.

It says something dark about the American legal system that it cannot deal promptly and effectively with a coup d’état. But it says something bright and hopeful that even an ex-president must face justice for ordinary crimes under the laws of the state in which he chose to live and operate his business.

Over his long career as the most disreputable name in New York real estate, Trump committed many wrongs and frauds. Those wrongs and frauds are beginning to catch up with him, including his sexual assault upon the writer E. Jean Carroll, and then his defamation of her for reporting the assault. Today, the catch-up leaped the barrier from the civil justice system to the criminal justice system.

The verdict should come as a surprise to precisely nobody. Those who protest the verdict most fiercely know better than anyone how justified it is. The would-be Trump running mate Marco Rubio shared a video this afternoon on X, comparing American justice to a Castro show trial. The slur is all the more shameful because Rubio has himself forcefully condemned Trump. “He is a con artist,” Rubio said during the 2016 nomination contest. “He runs on this idea he is fighting for the little guy, but he has spent his entire career sticking it to the little guy—his entire career.” Rubio specifically cited the Trump University scheme as one of Trump’s cons. In 2018, Trump reached a $25 million settlement with people who had enrolled in the courses it offered.

Eight years later, Rubio has attacked a court, a jury, and the whole U.S. system of justice for proving the truth of his words.

We’re seeing here the latest operation of a foundational rule of the Trump era: If you’re a Trump supporter, you will sooner or later be called to jettison any and every principle you ever purported to hold. Republicans in Donald Trump’s adopted state of Florida oppose voting by felons. They used their legislative power to gut a state referendum restoring the voting rights of persons convicted of a crime. But as fiercely as Florida Republicans oppose voting by felons, they feel entirely differently about voting for felons. That’s now apparently fine, provided the felon is Donald Trump.

What has been served here is not the justice that America required after Trump’s plot to overturn the 2020 election first by fraud, then by violence. It’s justice instead of an especially ironic sort, driving home to the voting public that before Trump was a constitutional criminal, he got his start as a squalid hush-money-paying, document-tampering, tabloid sleazeball.

If Trump does somehow return to the presidency, his highest priority will be smashing up the American legal system to punish it for holding him to some kind of account—and to prevent it from holding him to higher account for the yet-more-terrible charges pending before state and federal courts. The United States can have a second Trump presidency, or it can retain the rule of law, but not both. No matter how much spluttering and spin-doctoring and outright deception you may hear from the desperate co-partisans of the first Felon American to stand as the presumptive presidential nominee of a major U.S. political party—there is no denying that now.

Juan Hitters Discusses his Album Photographs

Inauthentic Matter

 

From the Substack Slow Boring by Matthew Yglesias:

Florida governor Ron DeSantis banned lab-grown meat earlier this spring, swiftly followed by Alabama. Two states makes this an official trend, but it’s one that the press has mostly treated as a kind of cartoonish culture war story.

And it certainly is, on some level. But I think it also deserves more serious consideration. Cultured meat is still largely hypothetical at this point, but not entirely. It’s received some real investment, and (if there’s anyone reading who works in the rather large universe of climate philanthropy) is an area that deserves more funding. I think it could be a particularly impactful investment for wealthy countries and US states where residents are concerned about climate change but the jurisdiction is too small for local-specific climate targets to make a difference in a global problem.

Because if you managed to create an affordable meat alternative that was functionally identical to animal protein, that could have a gigantic impact on the global emissions trajectory — much larger impact than any conceivable local-only action or activism or advocacy. Right now, Europe is being torn apart by politically unsustainable efforts to force agricultural emissions cuts, when investing significant resources in science would be more sustainable and have a larger payoff.

At the same time, it’s worth acknowledging that proponents of a lab meat ban have a genuine theory of the case, not just a culture war troll.

 

Word Salad

Words that Trump recently garbled, or this a version of Queens speech?:

 

“President U-licious S Grant” (For Ulysses S. Grant)

“space-capsicle” (for space capsule)

“combat infantroopen”(for combat infantry)

“sahhven country”(for sovereign country)

“renoversh” (For renovations)

“Anonmmiss” (for anonymous).

“transpants” (for transplants)

“lawmarkers” (for lawmakers)

“supply churn” (for supply chain)

“Rusher” (for Russia)

“raydoh” (for radio)

“Liberal-ation (for liberation”)

“benefishers” (for benificiaries)

“con-ducking” (for conducting)

“stat-tics, suh-tic-six” (for statistics)

“crimakle” (for criminal)

“armed forsiva” (for armed forces)

“internate” (for Internet)

“transjija” (for transition)

“stanktuary” (for sanctuary)

Moscow on the Potomac

 

Here's an article from Substack's The Big Picture that manages to identify what has been sitting in front of our noses for many years. BTW, those are all Republican representatives behind Putin:

For years, critics of Vladimir Putin have been warning that the Russians have taken over parts of the Republican Party. They raised the alarm as Republicans defended the Russian leader, parroted clear Kremlin talking points, and became mules for disinformation campaigns.

In recent weeks, that criticism has shifted to include not just Republicans who have left the party, including former representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, but current GOP members. Recently, two powerful Republican chairs of the House Intelligence Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee warned openly about how Russian propaganda has seeped into their party and even made its way into speeches on the House floor.

Other members are now even openly questioning whether some of their fellow officials have been compromised and are being extorted. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) suggested in a recent interview that the Russian spies may possess compromising tapes of some of his colleagues. It’s unclear where he’s getting his information or how accurate it is.

And then there’s this: According to a report by Politico, a number of European politicians were recently paid by Moscow to interfere in the upcoming EU elections by Russians pretending to be a “media” outlet called “Voice of Europe.” The Kremlin-backed operation used money to influence officials to take pro-Russian stances. Authorities have conducted some money seizures and launched an investigation into which members of the European Parliament may have accepted cash bribes. This in turn raises an important question for our own politics: Are the Russians doing the same with U.S. politicians, directly or indirectly?

This piece walks through the three types of compromise—disinformation, extortion, and bribery—to give a sense of what we know and what we don’t really know, and, importantly, where we should be on our guard. As this summary will show, from the 2016 election till now, there’s enough Russian smoke now to assume there is a fire, one that compromises not only the integrity of our own system of elections, but the safety and security of the free world.

Support this Substack Writer