Congressional Leaders Make a Deal that Could Avoid a Government Shutdown

Absent a deal, part of the government will shut down on Jan. 19 and the rest will shut down Feb. 2. But the leaders of Congress have now reached an agreement to fund the government for FY 2023-24. Getting it passed by Jan. 19 in the face of expected vigorous opposition by the Freedom Caucus is something else, though.

The deal follows the general outline of what Joe Biden and then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy agreed on early last year. It does not contain many of the steep cuts the Freedom Caucus wants. One Republican priority did make it in, though: The IRS budget will be cut by $20 billion, making it easier for rich tax cheats to get away with it. Since these are the folks who finance the Republican Party, getting this one was a top priority for the GOP. But in return, they had to concede on a lot of other stuff, especially the social spending the Democrats really care about.

The agreement includes an increase in Pentagon spending to $886 billion. Nondefense spending will be the same as last year, except for a one-time $69 billion extra infusion Biden and McCarthy agreed to as compensation for inflation. The new amount of nondefense spending is $773 billion in total.

In a message to his caucus, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) emphasized the cut to IRS but deemphasized that nondefense spending will actually rise in terms of dollars spent.

Now this has to get through Congress. It should pass the Senate easily, with both Democratic and Republican votes. The House will be trickier. Since most Democrats will vote for it, only a handful of Republican votes will be needed. If House Republicans stick together, they will be able to kill it. If they don't, it will pass. Should that come to pass, the Freedom Caucus will be furious. The big question is whether one of them introduces a motion to vacate the chair—that is, fire Johnson. While that might feel good, they have to consider whether they can find enough votes to elect anyone even more radical than Johnson with even smaller margins than they had last time around. (V)

Trump and Biden Accuse Each Other of Subverting Democracy

At his campaign kickoff speech near historic Valley Forge, PA, Friday, Joe Biden lit into Donald Trump and called him a "dire threat to democracy." Biden noted that Trump has called for the Constitution to be suspended, his opponents to be prosecuted, and the nation's top general to be executed. Biden said: "Donald Trump's campaign is about him—not America, not you. Donald Trump's campaign is obsessed with the past, not the future. He's willing to sacrifice our democracy [to] put himself in power."

This kind of attack on a political rival is unusual, to say the least. But there has never before been a candidate like Trump, one who wanted to shred the Constitution and said so openly. Normally, campaigns are about issues like taxes, immigration, abortion, crime, and other policy issues. Not whether democracy was nice while it lasted, but maybe now is the time to end it and go for a (fascist) dictatorship, even for one day. It is not an exaggeration to say that the upcoming election is about the future of democracy more than anything else. In his speech, Biden said: "We nearly lost America—lost it all. We all know who Donald Trump is. The question we have to answer is: 'Who are we?'"

Trump did not take any of Biden's remarks lying down. He responded by doing what he does so well: telling lie after lie after lie. He continued to repeat his claim that Jan. 6, 2021 was "a beautiful day," and that the 1,240 people arrested so far are "hostages," not "prisoners." On Friday he said: "The J6 hostages, I call them. Nobody has been treated ever in history so badly as those people." We suspect that some Native Americans or older Japanese Americans who lived in California in 1942 might beg to differ. Trump also said that Biden is the actual threat to democracy due to his weaponizing the Justice Department and having it indict him. Last month, Trump said: "Joe Biden is not the defender of American democracy. Joe Biden is the destroyer of American democracy and it's him and his people. They're the wreckers of the American dream. The American dream is dead with them in office." And he has repeated that thought over and over in many contexts.

All of this is totally false, of course, but Trump has a good feeling for what his supporters want. They don't want to move on from Jan. 6. They want retribution. At a rally in Mason City, IA, Barbara LaGow, who drove 2 hours from Minnesota to hear Trump, said he "was cheated out of the last election." Gayle Lasley said: "There was no insurrection on his part at all." Ryan Sloth said: "I watched it on TV that day, and I said this is a complete joke. I could tell from the beginning that this was a setup. Plain as day." Michael, who wouldn't give his last name, said: "It was all a set-up. [Joe] Biden planted people in there."

These interviews and more show that many Americans truly believe that Trump was robbed of the presidency. He has completely brainwashed them by simply telling the same lies over and over until many people believed them. It worked. A recent WaPo/UMD poll showed that 34% of Republicans believe that the FBI organized and encouraged the attack on the Capitol. That rises to 44% among Trump voters. Even 13% of Democrats believe that. The election campaign is going to be brutal and unlike any one ever before. (V)

Trump's Lawyer Tries to Pressure the Supreme Court

It is very likely that Donald Trump picked Alina Habba as one of his lawyers for five very good reasons: (1) She is pretty, (2) she is young (39), (3) she is conveniently located (her law office is a 6-minute drive from his Bedminster club; just turn right out of the gate and follow Lamington Road for 3 miles and you're almost there), (4) she graduated from a law school ranked in the top 160 law schools in the country (but barely, at #159) and (5) she was willing to take him on as a client. We don't know for sure, but we suspect her hourly rate is less than someone who graduated from Stanford (#1), Yale (#2), or Chicago (#3). After what she said on Friday, we're not so sure she was a great choice, even with five important things going for her.

Specifically, on Fox News she was asked about what she thought the Supreme Court would do in the case where the Colorado Supreme Court disqualified Trump from the primary ballot on the basis of the Fourteenth Amendment. She confidently said: "I think it should be a slam dunk in the Supreme Court; I have faith in them. You know, people like Kavanaugh who the president fought for, who the president went through hell to get into place, he'll step up." No doubt she really hopes that Kavanaugh will step up, but telling him in public "You owe us one" might not be the best way to tackle the problem. Maybe at Widener University Commonwealth Law School they teach the students to butter up the judges they are facing. However our view (and again, we are not lawyers) is that this remark puts Kavanaugh under pressure to vote against Trump to show the country that he is not bought and paid for. Later Habba tried to walk her statement back a little, but the damage had already been done. Here is the clip:

The three Democratic appointees can easily conclude that Trump participated in an insurrection against the United States, and thus the literal wording of the Fourteenth Amendment disqualifies him.

Then it all comes down to the chief, John Roberts. Nothing Roberts has done so far in cases involving Trump suggests that he likes Trump even a tiny bit. If we had to guess, we think his favorite president since World War II is probably George H.W. Bush, a principled, intelligent, conservative who respected the rule of law. We know (because Roberts has said it in public) that he sees himself as an umpire who just calls balls and strikes. In reality, most of his decisions seem to make Republicans happy and Democrats unhappy, so to balance things out and get some cred with Democrats, once in a while, he has to toss a few crumbs to them. Taking Trump off the ballot would be a very large crumb and get him a GOP candidate he could vote for in good conscience in November.

On the other hand, both Kavanaugh and Roberts know that a decision to disqualify Trump would tear the country apart. Justices read the newspapers. Consequently, although they might have their reasons for finding against Trump, they might decide to avoid the firestorm on a technicality, like ruling the Fourteenth Amendment applies only to insurrections begun before it was ratified in 1868 or it is not self-executing. This would get them off the hook. This is probably going to be the Court's toughest decision so far and it is impossible to predict what it will do. The Constitution is irrelevant here. Arguments can be made both ways on what the Fourteenth means. It is all about the politics and the public reaction and they know that very well. (V)

Democrats Want Biden; Republicans Want Trump; Nobody Wants Biden vs. Trump

There have been many polls showing that many voters don't want a rematch between Joe Biden and Donald Trump. The problem is that Democrats really want Biden and Republicans really want Trump. That naturally leads to Biden vs. Trump. That's just how it works.

Biden doesn't have any serious opponent (Rep. Dean Phillips, DFL-MN, is not a serious opponent). The reason is simple. While enthusiasm for Biden isn't high among Democrats, he is generally acceptable to most of them and there is no other single candidate waiting in the wings. If Biden were to die today, Govs. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) and Gavin Newsom (D-CA) would jump in along with Kamala Harris and probably half a dozen or more others. None of these have even 25% support among Democrats. The simple fact is that there is no obvious backup to Biden. Harris is just not so popular that she would be an instant shoo-in. She would have to fight tooth and nail for the nomination, and her performance in 2020 shows that she has the wrong stuff. Biden picked her because he wanted a Black woman for VP and he decided she was the best Black woman he could find.

Trump has a cult-like following. It is very deep. Some of his supporters worship him as a god, but not all. A poll from Suffolk University shows that on a scale of 1 to 10 for enthusiasm, 44% of Republicans gave Trump a 10 vs. 18% of Democrats who gave Biden a 10. However, the average response was similar. Trump got a 7.2 and Biden got a 6.3. Almost identical percentages of Republicans (78%) and Democrats (76%) gave their frontrunner a 5 or more. In simple terms: Republicans want Trump and Democrats want Biden.

The reality is that Democratic voters and Republican voters want different things and their candidates give each group what it wants. Democrats care about policy issues (e.g., abortion and democracy) and Biden's positions are at least acceptable to almost all Democrats. Sure, progressives would prefer Bernie, but he's not running and there is nothing Biden has done that angers progressives. They are just disappointed that he didn't do more, although many of them realize he was two votes short in the Senate to get more done than he did.

In contrast, for the most part, what a lot of Republican voters want more than anything is to "own the libs," to make their blood boil, and to punish them for treating them like a bunch of dumb yahoos. Policy is largely secondary. Yes, many care about abortion and immigration, but all the Republican candidates agree on these policy issues. The only one who really drives the libs into paroxysms of rage is Trump. That is why the base is sticking with him.

So despite everybody saying they don't want Trump vs. Biden, Republicans really do want Trump and Biden is the only Democrat with anywhere near majority support, so we are going to get Trump vs. Biden. (V)

The Canaries Are Singing

ABC News has a scoop about which canaries are singing to Special Counsel Jack Smith and what their songs are about. Dan Scavino has known Trump for 30-odd years. He knows Trump very well. Scavino refused to speak to the Jan. 6 Committee because he suspected the Committee would just grimace and do nothing. When Smith hit him with a subpoena, he did the canary thing because he understood that he would be in prison in a couple of weeks if he didn't. Smith doesn't mess around. According to ABC, Scavino told Smith that on Jan. 6, 2021, Trump was told over and over that a riot was brewing and he had to do something to stop it, yet he had no interest in doing so. None. When Trump was told that Mike Pence's life was in danger, Trump said: "So what?" Scavino and aide Nick Luna told Smith that Trump was willing to have a long-time loyalist and vice president of the United States be harmed because he refused to violate the Constitution. How's that going to go over with a jury?

When Scavino and others finally got to Trump and he posted a tweet to Twitter saying that Pence "didn't have the courage to do what should have been done," his staff was shocked. They wanted him to tell the rioters to go home. White House counsel Pat Cipollone thought Scavino wrote the tweet (he had the power to tweet for Trump and often did it). Cipollone chased down Scavino and accused him of writing the tweet. Scavino said he didn't do it. It was Trump himself this time. After that, Cipollone and others went back to Trump and told him that was "not what we need." Trump said: "But it is true."

Scavino was very worried things would get out of hand. He composed some potential tweets to calm the situation. After half an hour of arguing with him, Trump OKed a tweet saying only "stay peaceful." This was 2:38 p.m. Even after darling daughter Ivanka showed up in the Oval Office to try to get Trump to tell the rioters to go home, he wouldn't budge. Scavino said: "He was just not interested at that moment to put anything out." Mark Meadows told the Jan. 6 Committee the same thing: "He didn't want to do anything." Not even after then-House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, other members of Congress, other family members, and even Fox News personalities told him he had to do something to prevent it from getting really ugly, Trump still refused to take action. He just continued to watch Fox News on TV.

Finally, Darling Daughter's husband, Jared the soon-to-be real estate investment mogul with $2 billion of Saudi money to play with, convinced him to make a video that he posted to Twitter at 4:15 p.m. In it, he said, "We have to have peace, so go home. We love you. You're very special." Then he went back to watching Fox. When Fox started showing clips of the ongoing riot, Trump told Cipollone's deputy, Pat Philbin: "This is what happens when they try to steal an election." Philbin then told Trump: "It doesn't justify this."

This leaked account is no doubt only a small part of what Smith knows. In any event, it shows that Trump was urged over and over again to do something to stop the riot and he refused over and over. During the trial, Trump's lawyers may try to say: "He wasn't even aware of what was going on," but when Smith puts Scavino, Luna, Cipollone, and Philbin on the stand to tell what they saw firsthand, we think Trump's arguments aren't going to work well. (V)

Where's Lloyd?

The Biden administration is now stuck in a miniscandal whose details are still obscure. What is known is that a week ago today, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin checked into Walter Reed Medical Center for an as-yet-undisclosed surgical operation. Something went wrong and he is still there. Top officials get sick from time to time and are hospitalized, so what is the big deal?

The big deal is that the DoD treated Austin's hospitalization as a military secret and didn't tell anyone, not even the president, and certainly not the media. Given that the U.S. is closely watching two active wars at the moment, one in Ukraine and one in Israel, maybe the president and Congress ought to know that the Secretary of Defense was offline in a hospital. If Austin had announced that he was going to the hospital for an operation and Deputy Secretary Kathleen Hicks or the #3 would be taking over temporarily, it wouldn't have even been newsworthy, but by keeping everything secret, it has blown up in his face.

In addition to Austin not telling Biden he was indisposed, he also didn't tell National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan. At a meeting of the National Security Council last week, Austin didn't show up, but sent a top Pentagon official, Sasha Baker, in his place. In and of itself, that isn't unusual, but why all the secrecy with no official announcement until last Friday?

This situation is coming at a difficult time of rising tensions. Hezbollah, which is much larger than Hamas, is threatening to invade Israel, which would create a two-front war in a country with the size and population of New Jersey. If Israel were not able to hold its own, some big decisions would have to be made about whether and how much the U.S. would intervene and Austin would be expected to play a major role in the administration's discussions.

As expected in these polarized times, Republicans are trying to exploit Austin's silence to the hilt. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has called Austin's silence unacceptable and suggested he should resign. Fortunately for Austin, Biden seems to be on his side. The two spoke by phone on Saturday and a White House official said Biden has complete confidence in the Secretary. But a serious mistake was made and somebody is going to have to take the blame. Austin tried to preempt that by taking the blame himself on Saturday. Whether that quiets everything down remains to be seen though. (V)

Abortion Measure Will Be on the Florida Ballot

Activist groups all over the country are working on getting measures about abortion on the ballot. Most of them are pro-choice, but a few are against it. In Florida, a pro-choice group has collected more than enough verified signatures to qualify for the Nov. 2024 ballot. The measure reads in part: "No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient's health, as determined by the patient's healthcare provider." Other Florida laws define "viability" as 24 weeks into pregnancy. However, a current Florida law bans abortions after week 6 of pregnancy, a time when many women do not even realize they are pregnant. If the measure were to pass, it would be a gigantic slap in the face for Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL), who signed the 6-week ban. Some Florida voters might not be so unhappy with that.

Is it a done deal? No, not at all. First of all, under Florida law, a measure must get 60% of the vote to pass. In many other states with similar measures, the vote was in the mid-to-high 50s, but not 60%. In Ohio, Issue 1 got 57%. That was enough in Ohio. In Kansas, a measure to ban most abortions was defeated with 59% voting against the abortion ban. This is somewhat different from an affirmative measure guaranteeing that abortion is legal, but it still didn't hit 60%. Will the measure in Florida hit 60%? We don't know.

In fact, we don't even know if it will be on the ballot. Florida's AG, Ashley Moody (R), doesn't like it and doesn't give a hoot what the people of Florida want or what the Florida laws say. She doesn't want abortions to happen in her state, so she has filed a case with the state Supreme Court to keep the measure off the ballot, despite the secretary of state having announced that a sufficient number of valid signatures were filed and all the other requirements were met. She will argue that the measure does not define "viability" (because other Florida laws do that) and it also doesn't define "health-care provider." Would a manicurist count? A podiatrist? A yoga instructor? A psychologist? A pharmacist? A dentist? A speech pathologist? A sex therapist? The bill could have specified that a health-care provider is an M.D., physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, or midwife, but the people who formulated the measure wanted to keep it broad since some people may get their health care from people with other job titles. Moody also says the measure doesn't specify whether "protect the patient's health" means physical health, mental health, or both.

The state Supreme Court is likely to take up the measure, although the timing is unclear. It could rule that the wording is fine and Moody should go back to her real job of catching crooks, not mucking around with ballot initiatives. It could rule that the wording is too vague and kill the measure outright. It could also choose a course between these and order the group that proposed the measure to add some definitions to it, ask the Court if they are all right, and then approve it as modified.

The Florida initiative is not the only abortion-related case in the courts. The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hold hearings in a case from Texas in which an anti-abortion judge restricted the use of mifepristone, which is used in the majority of abortions. If the Supreme Court upholds that decision, the firestorm will be as big as after the Dobbs decision. The decision is expected in June, just in time for the national conventions. (V)

Letitia James Ups the Ante to over $370 Million

In Sept. 2022, New York AG Letitia James filed a civil lawsuit against Donald Trump's business empire, claiming he defrauded banks and insurance companies by giving them false financial information. He inflated his net worth so that the companies would give him better deals. He also deflated the value of his properties so he could pay less property tax. She claimed that just making up numbers to give to these organizations violated state law.

Judge Arthur Engoron has already ruled that she is right and Trump committed fraud. During the fall of 2023, there was a trial in Engoron's courtroom; its purpose was to determine how much Trump's fine would be for violating state law. All the witnesses have been heard and all the evidence has been presented. On Thursday, both the AG and the defense will make their closing statements. The prosecution will say Trump cheated the banks and insurance companies by claiming he was a much better risk than he really was. The defense will say that the organizations which got his false statements should have known he was lying on them and done their own research. Starting Friday, Engoron will begin writing his decision about how much Trump has to pay. Remember, this is a civil case, so the result will be a fine, not prison time. State law gives Engoron wide latitude in determining Trump's fine, possibly including some punitive damages.

Initially, James was asking for a fine of $250 million. Now that all the testimony is in, she has changed her mind. She now says that based on the actual testimony the judge heard, the fine should be $370 million. Engoron doesn't have to pay any attention to her request. He could go higher or lower. In any event, Trump will appeal both the decision that he violated state law and the fine.

Recently, two Georgia election workers got a judgment of $148 million against Rudy Giuliani. His net worth is probably below $10 million, so they will never collect most of it. Trump is different. Even if the fine is $500 million, he has real estate that could bring $500 million at auction. And unlike Giuliani, Trump can't hide his assets—58-story buildings on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan won't fit in a bathroom at Mar-a-Lago. Also, when all the appeals have run out, if the higher courts sustain Engoron's ruling and fine, the judge could simply send an order to the county recorder to change the ownership of, say, Trump Tower, to New York State, and then hire Sotheby's to sell it. The process could run for a while, but in the end Trump would lose one or more properties which would then be sold or auctioned.

It is hard to say what the political fallout will be. Most people won't understand the details, but Joe Biden could make commercials that said: "Donald Trump made his money by lying and cheating banks. He got caught and was hit with a massive fine for breaking the law. He is a crook."

That alone might not move the needle much, but there is another case starting Jan. 16. E. Jean Carroll claimed that Trump raped her in a New York department store. He repeatedly called her a liar and she sued him, twice. She won the first defamation case last year and the jury awarded her $5 million. After the verdict came down, he defamed her a second time and she added those comments to her remaining, still-pending defamation lawsuit. The second defamation trial will start Tuesday of next week.

On Saturday, Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled that Trump's lawyers cannot bring up the fact that in the first case, the jury determined that Trump committed sexual assault but not rape, due to the rigid definition of the latter in New York State law. Trump's lawyers wanted to bring that up and now they will not be allowed to do that.

The jury is likely to conclude that Trump knew exactly what he was doing, knew it was defamatory, and did it anyway. Carroll's lawyer is undoubtedly going to point out the $148 million judgment against Giuliani and say what Trump did was worse because he had been clearly warned by the award in the first case. She could ask for $200 million, $300 million, or whatever she wants to. The lawyer will probably get about 30% of the take, so she has every incentive to shoot for the moon. Carroll's lawyer is Roberta Kaplan, one of the savviest and best lawyers in the business. A sympathetic jury could award Carroll whatever she is asking for. By Feb. 1, Trump could have verdicts of somewhere between $500 million and $1 billion outstanding. These might be reduced on appeal, but might not be. Some voters, especially independents, might come to the conclusion that he is a crook.

Trump cares a lot about money. He values his worth as a person by his net worth. Judgments of $500 million and up could really get to him. This might lead him to say things that convince other voters that he is not mentally fit to be president. In the close elections we frequently have, a shift of even 2% could mean the difference between a President Biden and a President Trump on Jan. 20, 2025. (V)

Michigan Republican Party Votes to Boot Kristina Karamo

On New Year's Day, we had an item about how the Michigan Republican Party was in meltdown mode. Now it has reached its denouement. On Saturday, the state Republican Committee voted to oust the Party chair, Kristina Karamo. She didn't bother even going to the meeting. She's going to fight it in the courts, but there is no reason to think the courts will tell the Republican Party who its leader should be.

Karamo is a hyper-Trumpist and election denier who ran for Michigan secretary of state and was crushed. She then managed to get elected chair of the state party. She is great at supporting conspiracy theories but terrible at fundraising and keeping the peace within the state committee. She is also really good at making enemies and now that has come back to bite her in the rear.

Michigan is a key swing state with an open-seat Senate election as well. Democrats have a two-seat margin in the state Senate and a tie in the state House, with two vacancies. There will be crucial battles up and down the line in Michigan in November. The state Republican party is $600,000 in debt and in shambles. How is it going to get organized to help Republicans up and down the ballot when it doesn't have a chair and is beset by infighting between the MAGA and non-MAGA members? The RNC doesn't want to give it money because it is afraid the state party will just use it to pay down its debts and not use it to support candidates for office. (V)

Another Colorado Republican Tosses in the Towel

They are dropping like flies so fast it is hard to keep track of them. Now another member of the House has announced that he won't run for reelection: Doug Lamborn (R-CO). He has represented Colorado Springs since 2007, but after nine terms, he has had enough. The district is R+9, so some other Republican is likely to win it.

What is especially interesting now is that all three of the Colorado districts represented by Republicans will have open-seat races. CO-03 is represented by Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), who is moving to CO-04. It is R+7. CO-04 is Ken Buck's district, which may have a dozen candidates running in the primary, including Boebert. It is R+13. CO-06 is Lamborn's district. On the other hand, all of the Democrats are running for reelection. Most are in heavily Democratic districts and are in no danger. Only Rep. Yadira Caraveo (D-CO) will have to fight hard. Her district is EVEN.

In other House news, Nevada assemblywoman Heidi Kasama (R) is dropping out of the U.S. House race in NV-03, a highly competitive D+1 district that she could have flipped. This leaves two relatively unknown other Republicans to battle it out for the GOP nomination. Kasama was the best known and best money raiser of the group and now she is gone, greatly improving the chances that Rep. Susie Lee (D-NV) can keep her job. Kasama is going to run to keep her Assembly seat as Republicans try to break the Democrats' two-thirds majority in the state Assembly. If the Democrats can pick up one more seat in the state Senate, then with two-thirds majorities in both chambers, they can pass any bill they want and override all the expected vetoes of Gov. Joe Lombardo (R-NV). It is relatively rare for an up-and-coming politician to give up a decent shot at a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives to help his or her party avoid irrelevancy in the state legislature.

Kasama is not entirely home free running for her Assembly seat, though. She will face a primary against Clark County GOP Chair Jesse Law. He has been indicted as a fake Trump elector in 2020. Being an indicted fake elector in the modern Republican Party is probably something of a plus and Law may well campaign on his loyalty to Trump and get his endorsement. (V)

---

If you have a question about politics, civics, history, etc. you would like us to answer on the site, please send it to questions@electoral-vote.com, and include your initials and city of residence. If you have a comment about the site or one of the items therein, please send it to comments@electoral-vote.com and include your initials and city of residence in case we decide to publish it. If you spot any typos or other errors on the site that we should fix, please let us know at corrections@electoral-vote.com.

---

Email a link to a friend or share:

---The Votemaster and Zenger