The House of Hypocrites

Consider the following statements:

• The House is busy impeaching DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas (see below) for not defending the border.
• Mayorkas says he wants to defend the border but Congress won't give him the money to do so.
• The Senate is working on a bill to provide Mayorkas with the money to defend the border.
• Speaker Mike Johnson says he won't hold a vote on the Senate bill.

There's a word for this. We're sure it begins with "hypo." Hypochondriac? No. Hypothesis? No. Hypoxia? No. Hypodermic needle? No. Hypothalamus? No. Hypopotamus? No. Hypocrite? Yes, that's it! We knew it was in there somewhere. House Republicans want to make sure Mayorkas can't defend the border so they can impeach him for not defending the border. This kind of makes Johnson the poster child for operating in bad faith.

Republicans have been screaming about lax border enforcement for years. Now they have an actual chance to beef up enforcement and they are preemptively announcing that they are not even going to consider a bill that would do what they claim they badly want to do.

How come? It's all about politics. Donald Trump wants to run on a campaign of: "The border is out of control and only I can fix it." What he absolutely does not want, no way, no matter what, is that the problem gets fixed in a bipartisan way under Joe Biden. That would take away his strongest policy argument. He will fight tooth and nail to avoid fixing the border now, even though that is his supporters' highest priority. In reality, he doesn't give a hoot about what actually happens at the border. What he cares about enormously is that Joe Biden doesn't get the credit for fixing the problem. So he has ordered all his troops to kill the bill Sens. James Lankford (R-OK) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) are hashing out in the Senate. He sees now that he doesn't control enough senators to kill the bill in the Senate, especially when Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) wants it passed, so he is focusing on getting the bill killed in the House.

However, this strategy comes with some real risks. Right now, all of the above is inside baseball. Most Americans don't have a clue what is going on with respect to the border. What happens after the Democrats launch a $20 million ad campaign saying they desperately wanted to beef up border security but Donald Trump single-handedly blocked their efforts because he wants to use the border as a campaign issue? How will people react to hearing that 3 million more immigrants will get into the country in 2024 because Trump didn't want better enforcement to begin on Joe Biden's watch? This could be a potent issue for the Democrats. How many of Trump's supporters are going to say: "It is better to let another 3 million people get into the country than do something now and have Biden get credit for it?" They tend to look for results, not the politics of it. The ads could be brutal.

Biden has been in politics for a while. He understands how it works, so he is amping up the pressure. He has unambiguously announced that he will shut down the border if the Senate bill passes both chambers and comes to his desk. While Trump's hard-core supporters will oppose anything Biden says or does, there are surely some Republicans who would be happy to shut down the border and don't care who gets credit for it. In any event, it puts Johnson in an awkward situation. The Senate will probably pass a bill this week to beef up border security by providing billions of dollars to hire more Border Patrol officers and give them whatever equipment they need. Biden has said he will sign it in a heartbeat and shut down the border. And Johnson is required by Trump to refuse to even bring it up for a vote—because it would pass easily.

If Biden wants to play hardball, he could. He could announce a formal Oval Office speech to the country, and say something like this:

My fellow Americans. One of our most pressing problems is stopping the flow of immigrants on our southern border. Fortunately, the Senate has just passed a bill appropriating X billion dollars to hire thousands of new Border Patrol agents and give them the weapons, vehicles, helicopters, drones, sensors, and miles of razor wire they need to stop the flow. If the House passes the Senate bill, I will sign it within 10 minutes of it arriving on my desk. Unfortunately, House Speaker Mike Johnson refuses to even hold a vote on the Senate bill because Donald Trump has ordered him not to. Trump doesn't want to seal the border because he wants to use the border as a campaign issue. I want to seal the border now, not play politics with it. I urge you to contact Speaker Johnson and also your own representative by going to www.house.gov and telling them you want a vote on the Senate bill. Together, with your help, we can seal the border. Thank you.

Will Biden do this? Probably not, but it would put immense pressure on Johnson if his members began panicking and demanding he bring the bill up for a vote. Also, this would force Trump to explain why he is against a vote to give the Border Patrol billions of dollars to hire and equip new agents. We doubt he could do a convincing job of it.

Do Democrats have a way to get a bill that passes the Senate through the House if Johnson refuses to budge? Maybe, if Democrats can line up a handful of retiring Republicans who don't care about Trump but would like their legacy to be a tough new border-control bill. Then they could try to pass a discharge petition and force the bill out of committee when it gets there. Johnson would be beyond furious if three or four Republicans joined with the Democrats to force a floor vote and then voted for it. But for Republicans who are retiring, there isn't a lot Johnson could do to punish them. Yes, he could strip them of their committee assignments, but since the House won't be passing any other bills this year, committee slots don't mean much. Is this approach likely? We don't think so, but it is theoretically possible.

What the Democrats can also do is start running targeted ads now and blame the Republicans for refusing to fix the border. That could put pressure on Johnson as members of his caucus, especially the Biden 17, start hearing from constituents who want something done now and are hearing that he is blocking that something. Would a pressure campaign work? It is possible. (V)

House Republicans Release Articles of Impeachment against DHS Secretary Mayorkas

James Madison is probably rolling over in his grave. The clause in the Constitution empowering Congress to impeach federal officials was intended to remove a corrupt president or other officials who had misused the powers of their offices. It was not intended as a tit-for-tat "you impeached one of our guys so we are entitled to impeach one of yours." But that is where we are headed, as House Republicans have now released two articles of impeachment in an (undoubtedly futile) attempt to impeach DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

Article 1 accuses Mayorkas of violating immigration laws. Article 2 accuses him of falling short of his duties, misleading Congress, and obstructing their investigation. House Homeland Security Chairman Rep. Mark Green (R-TN) said of Mayorkas: "These articles lay out a clear, compelling, and irrefutable case for Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas' impeachment. He has willfully and systemically refused to comply with immigration laws enacted by Congress. He has breached the public trust by knowingly making false statements to Congress and the American people, and obstructing congressional oversight of his department."

Now take this in the context of the item above. They want to impeach Mayorkas for not defending the border, but the Speaker of the House has said in advance that he won't even consider the upcoming Senate bill that would give Mayorkas the funding to defend the border. They don't want to defend the border. They want to campaign on it not being defended. It is grandstanding at its worst. Democrats, DHS officials, and even some conservatives see this as an abuse of power by House Republicans. Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), the ranking member of the DHS Committee, said: "What is glaringly missing from these articles is any real charge or even a shred of evidence of high crimes or misdemeanors—the Constitutional standard for impeachment."

DHS officials have—not unexpectedly—complained that Congress has never provided enough funding to catch and detain every individual who enters the country illegally. After all, when Donald Trump was president and wanted to build a wall along the Mexican border, after Mexico refused to pay for it, so did Congress. He used DoD funds to build 458 miles of wall. If Congress had ponied up at least some of the money, more miles of wall would have been built. Now the Republicans want to impeach Mayorkas for not catching all the immigrants. Maybe our memory fails us, but we don't recall House Republicans attempting to impeach then-DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen who served under Donald Trump, when the border was just as porous as it is now.

It is not even certain that Mayorkas will be impeached. No House Democrat will vote for impeachment. A vote to impeach on Trumped-up charges could also be painful for Republicans who represent districts with a large number of college-educated voters who can easily see that this is all politics with no basis in reality. Needless to say, if the impeachment passes the House, Democrats will start running ads that Republicans have no interest in governing. If Mayorkas is actually impeached, the Senate trial probably won't last much longer than a day or two. We expect that quite a few Republicans will vote to acquit Mayorkas; they will probably include Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Mitt Romney (R-UT), Thom Tillis (R-NC), and maybe even Mitch McTurtle (R-KY), who generally doesn't like stupid moves like this that give the Democrats campaign material. (V)

Trump May Have Committed Tax Fraud

Judge Arthur Engoron is expected to rule this week on how big a fine Donald Trump will get for defrauding banks and insurance companies. But now the plot thickens. The judge already determined that Trump broke the law. That isn't at issue (though there could be a finding of additional lawbreaking). After Engoron ruled that Trump broke the law, he appointed a monitor, former judge Barbara Jones, to keep track of Trump's financial affairs.

On Friday, Jones had a letter delivered to Engoron. In the sixth footnote of the 12-page letter, Jones remarked that Trump apparently claimed $48 million he received was a loan and thus not taxable income. Jones claims that when she asked for the loan agreement, she was told there was no loan. It never existed. If her allegations are true, this means that Trump received $48 million in income that he didn't report on his tax forms. This is tax fraud, pure and simple.

As of this morning, the story is beginning to spread. ABC News has it and by later today it is probably going to be elsewhere as well and NY AG Letitia James is surely going to notice it. We suspect she is going to contact Jones and ask for the details, and then subpoena Trump's New York State tax returns. If he is guilty of evading New York State taxes, well, that falls within the purview of the NY AG, no matter what the feds do. This is what is known as a "developing story." Keep an eye out. There is surely more to come. (V)

Biden Is Trying to Reach Out to Black Men

Joe Biden and the Democrats are aware that Black men are very disillusioned with them, in contrast to Black women, who are the Democrats' most loyal demographic group. In places like central Detroit, whole blocks that once had houses and thriving small businesses now lie in waste and have been like that for years. Every 4 years Democratic campaign workers come around and promise to fix the problem but they never do. Black men are tired of all promises and no action, and many of them are talking about not voting in November. This scares the hell out of the Democrats.

A recent Siena College poll of six battleground states, including Michigan, shows that 71% of Black men will support Biden and 22% will support Donald Trump. The rest are undecided or won't vote at all. Among Black women, only 4% will vote for Trump. It's definitely a man problem. The Biden campaign is going to attack the problem with a $25 million ad campaign in the swing states on media popular with Black and Latino men. Among other points, the ads will note:

• Black unemployment is at a historic low of 4.7%.
• The administration has created a special program to help historically Black colleges.
• The DoJ is investigating local law enforcement agencies suspected of racism.
• Biden has appointed large numbers of Black judges to the courts.
• Biden has created a program to replace lead pipes in majority-Black areas.

Many Black men are very disappointed that Biden failed to pass a bill forcing police reform and also failed to pass a new Voting Rights Act. They don't want to hear that he didn't have the votes in the Senate or that the Republicans would have filibustered it if he had.

Some Black men feel that Biden is shortchanging them in favor of other groups. Many of them think that Biden favors Asians or Latinos or women or some other group rather than Black men. They feel Biden is taking them for granted. Others don't like what Trump did as president, but feel he tells it like it is. Trump also gets credit with Black men for the stimulus payments during the COVID pandemic. They say he was passing out free money to them. They also say that he never made promises he couldn't keep.

Trump is also exploiting his 91 indictments to get street cred with Black men. He is saying: "The Democrats are coming after me, just like they come after you. I know what you are feeling."

Another sore point with some Black men is Ukraine. They complain that Biden can send $800 million to Ukraine but can't cancel student loans or end homelessness in America. What this line of thinking misses is that 90% of the Ukraine money is actually spent in America, in factories that make the weapons and ammo Ukraine is getting. This translates into good-paying jobs for Americans working in defense plants.

The situation isn't hopeless for Biden. One thing he could do is try to work through Black women, who strongly support him. He could try to get them to talk to their boyfriends, husbands, sons, and fathers, and explain what Biden has done for the Black community and how Trump despises them. It is clearly a struggle, but Biden is at least aware of the problem. (V)

MoveOn Plans to Spend $32 Million to Help the Democrats

The liberal activist organization MoveOn is planning to spend $32 million to reelect Joe Biden and a Democratic Congress. This is the largest push in the organization's history. The group thinks it can raise that much money.

The organization is going to focus like a laser on young, marginal voters in swing states and swing House districts. It is going to aim at holding Senate seats in Arizona, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin, plus holding or winning about two dozen House seats. These undoubtedly will include most of the Biden 17 seats and a few districts that Trump narrowly won in 2020 or new districts formed after the 2020 redistricting. Here is a map with MoveOn's priorities.

We largely agree that these are good choices if the goal is a Democratic trifecta. Our only disagreement is that we don't think defending Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) is a priority. He has been elected lieutenant governor once, governor once, and senator twice. That's four statewide wins. Yes, Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R-VA) won in 2021 by 1.9%, but that was against a somewhat sleazy retread. Youngkin got 1.66 million votes in his gubernatorial win, whereas Kaine got 1.91 million votes for the Senate in 2018. In 2022, Democrats won both chambers of the Virginia state legislature. Virginia isn't really a swing state anymore. It is a blue state where a strong Republican can sometimes (barely) beat a weak Democrat in an odd-numbered year. Kaine is also a good fundraiser. No reason for panic. We think money MoveOn is going to spend for Kaine would be better spent in Montana or Ohio.

The arguments that MoveOn is going to make to young voters will revolve around how the Republicans at every level are trying to ban abortion and end democracy. The group has some experience in political advocacy. In 2020, it ran 6,700 phone-banking shifts and in 2022 contacted 42 million voters. The goal is to contact 11 million young (marginal) voters across the target states and districts. (V)

Kennedy Gets on the New Hampshire Ballot

Democrats are worriers. There's always something to worry about, so here we go again. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has now announced that he has enough signatures to get on the New Hampshire ballot as an independent. In a close race, it is possible he could pull in enough low-information Democrats who somehow assume that he is more-or-less like Dad—which he is definitely not—and vote for him. Early polling is what gets the Democrats' worry juices flowing, but historically, third-party candidates rarely do anywhere near as well as early polling shows. Yes, Ross Perot did well in 1992, but he was a billionaire who spent a lot of his own money on his campaign. He was also an oddly captivating personality. Kennedy is neither a billionaire nor captivating. Also, the thing he is most famous for—opposing vaccinations—is something that will appeal to more Republicans than Democrats.

New Hampshire is a small state and you don't need a lot of signatures to get on the ballot (only 3,000). Arizona, Michigan, and Georgia are much bigger states and many more signatures are needed. Kennedy has perhaps created a workaround that might help, but that is far from sure. In some states, it is easier for a new political party to get on the ballot than an independent candidate, so Kennedy has created a new party, called "We the People," and may succeed in getting on the ballot in California, Delaware, Hawaii, Mississippi, and North Carolina. Of these, only North Carolina is a swing state. But Kennedy is also trying in Arizona, Georgia, and Nevada. With enough money (from rich Republicans), he might succeed, but if he can't get on the ballot in a number of the bigger swing states, his candidacy will fizzle out. One Democratic campaign operative said: "Who cares that he is polling at 10-12 percent nationally right now? It is a mirage; it only matters if he gets on the ballot in the five states that will determine the election."

Possibly a bigger threat is the No Labels group, backed by millions of dollars from big Republican donors like Clarence Thomas' best friend, Harlan Crow. On the other hand, while No Labels has enough money to pay thousands of people to circulate petitions, what it doesn't have yet is a candidate. Getting on the ballot in a lot of states but running some county commissioner no one has ever heard of is not going to work. If Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) were to sign up, No Labels could be a threat, but so far Manchin hasn't given any serious indication that he wants to be a spoiler and elect Donald Trump. If Larry Hogan were to sign up, which is also far from clear, he would probably cost Trump more votes than he would Biden.

Cornel West is probably not a threat to anyone. He doesn't have any money and the people who might vote for him really hate Trump and in the end would probably decide stopping Trump is more important than making a statement. Jill Stein is running on the Green Party ticket again. In 2020, the Green Party candidate, Howie Hawkins, got 0.26% of the total vote and wasn't much of a threat. Stein is better known than Hawkins was, but her likely supporters also know that the dangers of a Trump presidency are so great that most likely in the end, they will hold their collective noses and very grudgingly vote for Biden, just to stop Trump. In 2016, Stein got 1.07% of the vote, less than a third of what the Libertarian Party candidate, Gary Johnson, got. We think that was her high-water mark and in this year's competitive election, where democracy itself is at stake, her supporters are also going to be so afraid of the possibility that 2024 is the last presidential election ever, that they will screw their courage to the sticking place, put clothespins on their noses, vote for Biden, and then puke as soon as they have exited the polling station. (V)

Nevada Is a Real Mess

The next Republican contest is the Nevada primary on Feb. 6. The next one after that is the Nevada caucuses on Feb. 8. Huh? We're going to make a prediction here. Write it down. Nikki Haley will win the Nevada primary and Donald Trump will win the Nevada caucuses.

You might be wondering: What's going on here? We don't blame you. Here is the story.

For decades, Nevada held party-run caucuses. However, in 2020, the Nevada Democratic Party botched the caucus as badly as the Iowa Democratic Party botched ITS caucus. The Nevada legislature then threw up its hands in disgust and passed a law requiring all parties to have state-run primaries. So the primary on Feb. 6 is required by state law. Nevada holds mail-in elections, like Oregon, Washington, Colorado, and a few other states. Republicans don't trust mail-in elections, so they decided to run their own caucuses. Parties are free to run caucuses whenever and wherever they want to since they pay the full costs of them. But the RNC decided to allocate all of Nevada's 26 delegates at the caucuses and none at the primary. It further decreed that any candidate who filed for the primary would be banned from the caucuses.

Undaunted, Nikki Haley filed to run in the primary, along with Mike Pence and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC). Neither of the latter two are still in the race. This is why the smart money (us included) is betting on Haley winning the primary. She is the only candidate still running whose name will be on the ballot. Meanwhile, all the other candidates opted for the caucuses. Donald Trump is the only candidate still running who will be on the ballot at the caucuses. The smart money (again including us) is betting that Trump will win the caucuses. The big difference is that while the headlines on Feb. 7 will read: "Haley wins the Nevada primary," she won't get any delegates. In contrast, the headlines on Feb. 9 will read: "Trump wins the Nevada caucuses" and he will pick up 26 delegates.

So the whole exercise is semi-pointless. No one will campaign in Nevada since the outcome is known already. This is why all the attention is now on South Carolina, which will hold a state primary on Sat. Feb. 24, with 50 delegates at stake. Now you know what is going on. (V)

Democrats Are Going to Hang Trump Around the Neck of House Republicans

House Democrats have a secret weapon they are planning to use in many House races: Donald Trump. They are going to accuse every House candidate of being a Trump supporter and enabler. In some districts this won't work, but in some it is expected to work extremely well—in particular, in New York State, where there are five districts Joe Biden carried in 2020 and which are now represented by first-term Republicans. These are probably the Democrats' top targets in the entire House.

The chairman of the New York Democratic Party, Jay Jacobs, said: "Trump was a motivator for the Democratic vote when he was a lot closer to normal than he is now. As he's gotten crazier, I think this will sound the alarm bells for Democrats, Republicans, and independents across the country." However, it is not a given that this will work. A recent Siena College poll of New York put Biden only 9 points ahead of Trump. Among Latinos, Trump is actually leading. These dynamics will be on display (or not) in the Feb. 13 special election to replace "George Santos."

Specifically, in 2017, Trump signed a tax cut bill that limited the deduction for state income tax plus property tax to $10,000. In high-tax New York, this provision is exceedingly unpopular. This is going to be a huge issue and even Republican representatives who weren't in Congress when it passed are going to be tarred with guilt by association, as in: "My opponent's party voted to slash your tax deduction and I want to restore it."

Trump is probably going to pressure all of the vulnerable Republicans to endorse him or else. That will make it even easier for Democrats to hang him around House Republicans like a millstone.

In New York especially, Trump is merely millstone #1. They also have millstone #2: Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), who is (currently) Trumpier than Trump. Democrats are going to use her as the poster girl for "All Republicans are totally crazy." As a consequence of this line of attack, neither Stefanik nor Trump will be able to campaign for the five endangered Republicans. That would only prove the Democrats' point.

The endangered Republicans will try to talk about crime or the economy or anything except Trump, but that is unlikely to work with the Democrats harping on it continuously. How will that play out? We got a demo in California recently when Senate candidate Steve Garvey refused to say whether he would vote for Trump a third time. Democrats jumped all over him, saying even Republicans can't stand Trump. This demonstrates the problems Republicans have running in blue states and districts. And the problem is only going to get worse. Remember, 17 House Republicans are in blue districts that Biden won in 2020. (V)

Another Democrat Calls it Quits

Rep. Charles Albert "Dutch" Ruppersberger III (D-MD) got his J.D. from the University of Baltimore School of Law and initially worked as an assistant state's attorney prosecuting organized crime, drug trafficking, and political corruption. He got into politics in 1985 when he was elected to the Baltimore County Council. He served until 1995, when he took over as Baltimore County Executive. After two terms, he ran for the U.S. House and was elected in 2002, where he has been ever since, rising to be the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee. He just announced that at age 77 and after 38 years in elected office, he's had enough and just wants to retire.

His district, MD-02, has a PVI of D+7 and he has been winning elections with 60% or more of the vote for years, so he could continue for another decade if he wanted to, but after nearly four decades in politics, he has had enough. He is still married to his high school sweetheart and has five grandchildren and probably just wants more time to play with them. He has had a good career with no scandals and can be fairly certain that some other Democrat will take his place; it was just time for the next generation. Happy retirement.

He is the 23rd House Democrat to announce a retirement. So far 16 House Republicans have announced their retirements. In 2022, 33 Democrats and 17 Republicans called it quits. It is slightly surprising that so few Republicans are retiring this cycle, although retirement season is still ongoing. The chances of the Republicans being in the minority in January are probably more than 50%, just due to the Biden 17 alone, plus redistricting in Alabama and Louisiana. Republicans will probably pick up 4-5 seats in North Carolina, but that could be canceled out by the New York state legislature regerrymandering their state. (V)

Fox Admits That Trump Will Have to Pay $83M--as Proof He is a Victim of the Left

Here is the front page of FoxNews.com yesterday.

We were curious if Fox even mentioned the $83 million award to E. Jean Carroll. It was indeed there, as the fourth item, after items about Biden wearing his hard hat backwards at a campaign stop in Wisconsin, Gov. Kristi Noem (R-SD) endorsing Bernie Moreno (R) in the Ohio Senate race, and one about the resolution to impeach DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

The item about the $83 million was an opinion piece by Victor Davis Hanson. It said: "The Carroll suit was just settled against Trump for $83.3 million! It was largely subsidized by Reid Hoffman, a billionaire capitalist and mega-donor to the Democratic Party and left-wing causes." We don't believe a word of that with one exception. Yes, Hoffman, the co-founder of LinkedIn, is a billionaire capitalist, but since when is that a sin on Fox? However, Carroll's lawyer, Robbie Kaplan, is very wealthy herself from previous big wins. If she lost the case, Kaplan wouldn't be eating dog food all of February. In this kind of case, almost always done on contingency, she will probably get about 30% of the $83 million, meaning $25 million for herself and her team. Many lawyers, even those of modest means, would take on a case where the upside for them could be $25 million or more, even if the downside is $0. Kaplan didn't need Hoffman's help and it probably wasn't offered.

The hit piece goes on and on about how Carroll could remember that she was sexually assaulted by Trump 30 years ago but couldn't remember the exact year. We are not women, but we suspect that women who are sexually assaulted remember it for the rest of their lives quite vividly, even if they don't remember the exact year. Then he goes on to say that the fact that she lost her job at age 76 does not merit an $83 million judgment.

Next on the hit list is the New York law that gave victims of sexual assault a 1-year window to file civil suits, even way beyond the usual statute of limitations. Clearly the New York State legislature passed that law just to get Trump.

Then Hanson moans that all criminal charges against Trump are left-wing hit jobs and the prosecutors have synchronized the timing of the trial dates for maximum damage. Would he have preferred four trials on the same date? He advises Trump to stay calm in the face of this vicious left-wing onslaught from hostile prosecutors. Followed by this: "So what we are witnessing is not even the extralegal efforts of Steele/Fusion GPS, Perkins Coie/DNC/Hillary Clinton in 2016, or the 2020 'Russian disinformation' ruse/change the voting laws/infuse half a billion dollars to absorb the work of the registrar machinations against Trump." If the $83M award doesn't get your blood boiling, surely all these things, none of which are germane here, will.

Finally, Hanson ends by giving Trump sage advice: "He must stay controlled amid the tsunamis, not play into the hands of his accusers, and remember that he may soon be the only eleventh-hour hope to stop this mockery of American law, customs and traditions." Kind of a repeat of Trump's oft-made remark that only he can save America.

We can't wait to see how many gallons of foam come out of Hanson's mouth (well, his keyboard) if Judge Arthur Engoron fines Trump the $370 million NY AG Letitia James has asked for. Engoron said he will try to make his ruling before Jan. 31. That's Wednesday. Hold onto your (MAGA) hat. The fine could be a dilly.

But let's give Fox credit where credit is due: It did cover the story.

As an aside, after Kaplan takes her $25 million or so, Carroll will still have something like $63 million left over. She just turned 80 in December. She was married and divorced twice and has no children. What is she going to do with $63 million at age 80 and no kids? It might be a couple of years before she gets any money, but she said the only luxury she is going to get now is premium dog food for her dog (the staff dachshunds say they approve). She is nevertheless thinking about what she will do with the money when she gets it. She did say she intends to do good with it. With $60+ million, you can do a lot of good. (V)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up in school, at work, etc., please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend or share some other way.

---The Votemaster and Zenger