LOTS OF POSTS IGNORED BY BLOGGER.....

ALL POSTS ARE AVAILABLE ON 

MIDDLEBORO REVIEW AND SO ON 

Trump's Lame Duck Karma Joyce Vance Dec 18 Last night, I closed out our preview of Jack Smith’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee today by writing, “We won’t be able to watch the proceedings because those members of Congress are afraid to let us see them. But there is more to come. This may well be a case of ‘Be careful what you ask for.’ Jack Smith undoubtedly has a lot to say.” And, bam. That turned out to be the case right out of the gate this morning. “Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power,” Smith told the Committee in his opening statement. Bad News in Congress In other bad news for the president, there are signs of his diminishing influence over his own party. With enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies that were passed during the pandemic set to expire at the end of the year, Democrats are circulating a discharge petition that would force a vote on a three-year extension. Most Republicans are opposed to extending the subsidies, but apparently unwilling to go on record with a vote, as evidenced by the fact that the Speaker has refused to allow one. This morning, four Republicans, enough to ensure passage of the petition, indicated they would join Democrats and vote for it. More may be on the way. They seem to understand that with insurance costs set to rise dramatically once the subsidies expire, they may find themselves vulnerable in midterm elections. That prospect seems to concern them enough to risk breaking with their party. So far, Republican Pennsylvania Representatives Brian Fitzpatrick, Rob Breshnahan, and Ryan Mackenzie, joined by Michael Lawler from New York, have indicated they will join the discharge petition. The Washington Post is reporting California Republican David Valadao told them he wants to sign the petition, too. All five are in vulnerable positions come the midterms. Trump is a lame duck president. Traditional politics are starting to exert a gravitational pull over Republicans who understand there will be life after Trump. There may be more. It’s a win-win for Democrats, who will either get the extension in subsidies they want for their voters (and were willing to shut down the government for) or put Republicans firmly on the spot for refusing to go to bat for their constituents. Bad News in Indiana The losses for Trump, who has always tried to maintain a veneer of invincibility, are mounting. If you blinked during the hectic news cycle last week, you might have missed the story of Indiana Republicans rejecting Trump’s call for unprecedented, and openly political, redistricting. It was a major loss for Trump, as Republicans in Indiana’s legislature rejected his demand that they create two more Republican seats in Congress by gerrymandering the state’s electoral maps. Twenty-one Republican state senators rejected Trump’s plan and joined with Democrats to reject the measure. It was something of a surprise after other red states, led by Texas, gave in to Trump. But as the tide continues to turn in this lame duck presidency, with Republicans defying the leader of their party on issues ranging from the Epstein files to congressional oversight of DoD strikes on alleged drug boats, Trump is no longer assured he will get his way. The Indiana vote is part of the slow rolling sea change that means Trump’s grip is no longer the death grip on Republicans it has been for the last nine years. The proposed maps in Indiana were designed to deliver all nine seats the state has in the House into Republican hands. Currently, seven seats are held by Republicans, with only two held by Democrats. But Indiana’s popular vote in the 2024 presidential election was 58.8% for Donald Trump and 39.4% for Kamala Harris, which suggests that even before the redistricting plan, the state was significantly gerrymandered. The Heritage Foundation’s @Heritage_Action Twitter feed put the Trump administration’s reaction to the Indiana legislature’s failure to bend the knee like this: If you needed any more proof (and Republicans apparently do) that Trump’s alignment with them is purely transactional and he will abandon them if they don’t serve him, well, there it is. Bad News from Jack Smith Some excerpts from Jack Smith’s comments on the Hill this morning remind us of what this country used to look like, back when our leaders respected and adhered to the rule of law and the Justice Department served the people, not the president: “I was taught as a young prosecutor to follow the facts and the law, and to do so without fear or favor. To do the right thing, the right way, for the right reasons. For nearly three decades, I have been a career prosecutor. I have served during both Republican and Democratic Administrations, and I have been guided by these principles in every role I have held.” “[Toll] records were lawfully subpoenaed and were relevant to complete a comprehensive investigation. January 6 was an attack on the structure of our democracy in which over 100 heroic law enforcement officers were assaulted. Over 160 individuals later pled guilty to assaulting police officers that day. Exploiting that violence, President Trump and his associates tried to call Members of Congress in furtherance of their criminal scheme, urging them to further delay certification of the 2020 election. I didn’t choose those Members; President Trump did.” “The decision to bring charges against President Trump was mine, but the basis for those charges rests entirely with President Trump and his actions, as alleged in the indictments returned by grand juries in two different districts.” “I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 presidential election. We took actions based on what the facts and the law required—the very lesson I learned early in my career as a prosecutor.” “If asked whether to prosecute a former President based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether the President was a Republican or Democrat.” We used to live in a country that understood politics had no place in prosecution. We were not perfect. But that isn’t the point. The point was that we had a goal that we were committed to, to keep working towards getting better, even if we still had a long way to go, to help bend Dr. King’s moral arc of the universe further toward justice. We need to get back to that important work. We need a country and a government that serve the people, not the president. Donald Trump’s hold on the country is no longer a stranglehold. We’re getting there. Keep going. Thanks for being here with me this year, reading Civil Discourse in these difficult times. I’m grateful for our community here. I hope you’ll share the newsletter with others if you benefit from reading it, and let them know that it’s free to subscribe, because knowledge and understanding are our superpowers. We’re in this together, Joyce