Judge Refuses to Release Epstein Grand Jury Transcripts

Longstanding tradition holds that Jeffrey Epstein news always goes first, even if the news is pretty minor, so here goes. Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Richard Berman, a Bill Clinton appointee who is overseeing the Epstein case in New York, refused to unseal the Epstein grand jury transcripts.

Berman is the third federal judge to refuse to release the grand jury transcripts. Last week, U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer, a Barack Obama appointee, who is overseeing Ghislaine Maxwell's case in New York, also ruled that there was no compelling reason to break the secrecy of the grand jury proceedings. Before that, U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg in Florida, also an Obama appointee, refused to release the transcripts. In baseball, three strikes and you are out. In court, you can keep trying forever, it seems, but in each new case, the judge sees all the previous refusals, and the more there are going in one direction, the more the judge is likely to come to the same conclusion. Why haven't they tried the northern district of Texas? That's a surefire winner. The DoJ hasn't appealed any of the rulings yet, but could still do so. (V)

Newsom's Trolling Trump Is Getting Him Vast Attention

On Monday, we noted that Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) is trolling Donald Trump with over-the-top eX-Twitter posts mocking Trump's style. Trump is furious about this and doesn't know how to deal with it. Here is another tweet:

While the "Christopher Columbus" moniker is clever, Columbus was famous for not having a good map, landing in the wrong place, and insisting he was in the right place. But if it gets under Trump's skin, Gavin Columbus is fine with it.

Newsom may be doing more than irritating Trump. He may be redefining how the Democrats operate. Michelle Obama famously once said: "When they go low, we go high." Newsom's strategy is: "When they go low, we go low, and—backed by lots of AI-generated slop—end up high in the algorithm." Newsom's style has birthed a cottage industry of AI-savvy Democrats generating memes, including these from his own press office:

Then there is this one:

And these:

Democrats are giving this approach to Trump rave reviews. Not only are the tweets raising morale among Democrats, but also Newsom's nickname for Trump, TACO, really angers Trump and could cause him to make a serious mistake by saying something really harmful to himself.

Democratic strategist Jamal Simmons said: "Democrats are over being the 'nice guy' party." He also said that people who don't follow politics really like Newsom. A recent poll on the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination has Newsom in second place now, after Kamala Harris. This is entirely due to name recognition, but his name is being recognized, which is why Newsom is continuing to mock Trump. Newsom is also targeting J.D. Vance, who is almost as unpopular with Democrats as Trump and not nearly as popular as Trump with Republicans. The 2028 GOP nomination is definitely not his for the taking, and the more Newsom makes him look like a fool, the weaker his lead for the nomination will be in 2028, and the more bitter the Republican primary will be.

Democratic strategist Christy Setzer said: "I'm surprised it's taken Democrats this long to do it." She said it is brilliant and, as an attention-getting device, has already succeeded. Have you seen any other Democratic hopeful in the news as much as Newsom lately?

Newsom's big gamble isn't the tweets. There is no downside there. The big gamble is getting the redistricting initiative, called Proposition 50, passed in November. If it passes and the map is changed for 2026, 2028 and 2030, Newsom will be a hero among Democrats. If it fails, he will be a goat. A Democratic pollster reports that 57% of California voters are "Yes on 50" and 35% are "No on 50." We'd like to see more polls before believing it, but California is very blue and nothing Arnold Schwarzenegger can say will change that. The poll showed that how the measure is pitched matters. If it is pitched as abolishing the independent commission, it doesn't poll well. But when pitched as a temporary measure to combat what Texas is doing, it is a winner. Of course, if after the next census the Texas map is still gerrymandered badly, will Californians really want to revert to an independent commission? As expected, the Texas House passed the new map yesterday. It now goes to the Texas Senate where its passing is assured. So is the governor's signature.

Another interesting poll from the Citrin Center shows that in a head-to-head horse race for the 2028 presidential nomination, registered California Democrats prefer Newsom over Harris 25% to 19%. Take this with adequate salt and pepper, but if Harris loses the primary in her home state, she is toast. That doesn't mean Newsom will be the nominee—he has a lot of baggage—but it does mean she won't be. That said, at this point, name recognition is the dominant factor in polling. People such as Govs. Andy Beshear (D-KY), Josh Shapiro (D-PA) and Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) are not widely known yet. Everything could change once the campaign goes public. Keep in mind that it's only 2025, so the 2028 presidential campaign won't start in earnest for another 3, maybe 4 months. (V)

Democrats Are Hemorrhaging Voters Nationwide

A new study from The New York Times shows that Democrats are bleeding voters nationwide. So not only did many (young) people vote for Donald Trump in 2024, but they have also changed their partisan registration from Democratic to Republican. This is more ominous for the blue team than a one-time engagement of marginal voters who like Trump's style. Some of them are now becoming actual Republicans in the 30 states that have registration by party.

Here is the change in registered voters from 2020 to 2024 in all the states that have partisan registration:

In every single state that registers voters by party, the share of registered Democrats went down during the Biden administration. The changes are from very little to as much as 8%. That's a lot. In contrast, Republican registration is up in many states, but not all. It is actually down in Alaska, Nevada, Colorado and some other states. When both parties are down, it means people are reregistering as independents. In many states, this is a dumb move. All it means is that you can't vote in any primary, depending on whether state primaries are open, semi-open, or closed.

All in all, Democrats lost 2.1 million registrants and Republicans gained 2.4 million registrants. Democrats went from an 11-point registration margin in 2020 to a 6-point edge in 2024. But these numbers have to be treated carefully, as California and New York have partisan registration whereas Texas and most states in the South do not. This means millions of Republicans don't show up in the registration statistics. In 2024, for the first time, more new voters signed up as Republicans than as Democrats. All four battleground states that do partisan registration—Arizona, Nevada, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania—show Democrats losing ground. A lot of the loss is in nonwhite working-class voters.

Registration is a lagging indicator. People typically stop voting for a party for years before they go to the trouble of traipsing down to city hall to formally change their party registration. Kentucky and West Virginia have been voting Republican for years, but the Republicans only recently had a registration majority there. So, in a sense, the registration changes are a formalization of what we already knew: Republicans are getting more popular and Democrats are getting less popular. Most of the changes are Democrat to Republican. A change like that is a statement. It says people are fed up with the Democrats.

Some of the details are grim for the Democrats. In 2020, 59% of men newly registering picked the Democrats. In 2024, that was 39%. Among new Latino voters, in 2020, 52% were Democrats; in 2024, that was 33%. This has serious implications for how Democrats operate. They used to set up nonprofits to go out and register young people and Latinos. But if these people are choosing to register as Republicans, the plan needs to be rethought.

Step 1 would probably be to figure out why the Democratic brand is struggling so badly. It could be that no one knows what the Democrats support—including the Democrats. The Republican Party is fairly homogeneous and it is easy to formulate what it stands for and against. It is for lower taxes, and less government except for a strong military. It is against crime, abortion, immigrants, brown people, gay people, DEI, and wokeness. Democrats are a big-tent party and all over the map.

The most obvious change for the Democrats is to go all in on jobs, wages, and the economy. This would mean dropping or deemphasizing some issues that part of the party thinks are really important, like climate change, DEI, gay rights, and definitely trans rights. It might even mean that Democrats need to tell some of the more progressive Democrats to kindly shut up. They are not likely to take that well. That might require the DCCC to actively recruit and fund primary opponents to people like Jasmine Crockett (D-TX), Ilhan Omar (MN-05) and Rashida Tlaib (MI-12), who say things that cause many voters to dislike the Democrats. This will not go over well with everyone. But the reality is that when some random Democrat yells "Defund the police," Republicans pick that up and make that person the face of the Democratic Party. It simply doesn't work the other way. There is no way the Democrats can make Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) the face of the Republican Party. It isn't doable. So Democrats may have to control their extremists but Republicans don't. That's politics. (V)

How to Influence Trump

One good way of influencing Donald Trump is being Laura Loomer. Bill Maher suggested Laura Loomer's influence over Donald Trump comes from her sleeping with him. Loomer denied that and sued him for defamation. She was defended by The Bulwark's Tim Miller (who hates her), because there have been no "pu**y-grabbing" incidents for years, which led Miller to surmise that such an affair would not be technically possible. Nevertheless Loomer's influence continues.

What are some of her greatest hits? First, she got the issuance of visas to people from Gaza halted. After all, they might like it better in the U.S. and just stay. They are also (mostly) Muslims, and Loomer has made it very clear that she despises Muslims. Second, she got five members of the National Security Council cashiered for suspicion of not being sufficiently Trumpy. Third, she got the FDA's top vaccine regulator fired (but he was later reinstated). Since she has Trump's ear, she likely has many more successes without it being known it was her work.

Of course, for people and companies that want to affect U.S. policy and who aren't Loomer, that won't work. For them, Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen at Axios have put together a list of things folks who want to influence Trump need to be aware of. Here it is (thank you, Jim and Mike):

• Put a Sock in It: There are only downsides for saying nasty things about Trump, his policies, and his allies. There are many Loomeroids out there looking for signs of disloyalty and who are ready to pounce on anyone exhibiting any. Make sure you have not said anything that could be seen as being critical.
  
  
• Put a Sock in the Mouths of Others: If any of your friends, associates, partners, or anyone connected to you says anything nasty about Trump or Trumpworld, you could be blamed. Guilt by association is the law of the land. Make sure everyone around you understands this completely.
  
  
• Don't Overreact: If Trump says something terrible that might have an undesirable effect on you, your company, your country or your anything, keep quiet. Don't respond. He might forget. He often does. Remember: TACO.
  
  
• Trump Has Two Ears: One ear is open only to MAGA purists. You need to understand these people. Alternatively, you need to hire a Trump whisperer who can make your case to him. But the other ear is open to more rational actors, like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. Ideally you need to get through to both ears to have a good chance.
  
  
• Everything's Negotiable: Trump loves to make big deals. Apple's promise to invest $100 billion sometime, some place, somehow is music to his ears. Blackmailing Nvidia into paying a 15% export tax on advanced chips needed for AI sold to China is a deal. Banning the export of key AI chips to China is not a deal, even though that would be good for America. Make sure you have an easy-to-explain deal.
  
  
• It's WWE or Reality TV: To Trump, it is all about the 3 Ps: pageantry, posturing and PR. It has to make a good show. If you can make what you want into a good show for him, with a win at the end, do it. One problem is that for him a win is really only a win if the other side loses. He doesn't like win-win situations.
  
  
• Kiss Ass: Trump loves gifts, especially if they are gold. But he has gotten surprisingly good at sniffing out toadies. Grandeur is good, but simple bootlicking is not. Explain how your deal will benefit him personally.
  
  
• Get Face-to-Face: Trump is basically a coward. He will say and write horrible, disgusting things about people but he is afraid to say it to their faces. You need to get one-on-one time with him in private. Not easy, so you need to work the gatekeepers—for example, by emphasizing how what you want helps Trump personally.
  
  
• The Deal Is Never Done: After you have worked out a deal completely and it is ready to be executed, Trump could change his mind. He often does. He sees reneging on promises as a perfectly valid negotiating technique. Even if the contract is signed and the work carried out, he could still change his mind. Expect this.
  
  
• Play the Long Game: We are barely one-sixth of the way through Trump's term. You need to keep these things in mind for many months—in fact until Jan. 20, 2029.
  
  
• Pony Up: The best way to get through to Trump is to pony up. Consider buying a couple of plates at a MAGA Inc. dinner. For a mere $1 million/plate, you get some rubber chicken and a few minutes talking to Trump. This gets your foot in the door, but make sure you have an elevator pitch that gets you more face-to-face time later on.
  

All of this may go against your basic principles, but this is how it works now. You have been warned. (V)

Sooner or Later It's about the Grift

The most important guiding principle in all of Trumpworld is: It's all about the grift. Everyone eventually gets caught up in it and takes what they can. Although AG Pam Bondi has a full plate, she also has a lot of power and power leads to g(r)ifts. People give her things that are not always inherently valuable, but become valuable on account of who gave them. A box of cigars is not normally valuable, but one from mixed-martial-arts star Conor McGregor (who recently lost an appeal in a civil case where he was found liable for sexual assault) might be. Bondi is a government employee and, as such, is bound by federal rules concerning gifts. She doesn't like these rules and pushes back when ethicists in the administration tell her she can't keep all the little doodads that she is given.

Sometimes it is about intangibles rather than shiny objects. In July, Bondi wanted a seat in the president's box at the FIFA Club World Cup finals. Ethics officials said no. She argued that maybe Trump might need to be briefed on something during the game. She and her husband got in, but she later claimed that she didn't stay there for the entire game, so it was OK.

Trump is much more experienced at grift. He took the Club World Cup Trophy and a medal and went on stage with the winners. (V)

Tulsi Gabbard Is Spending Her Time Punishing Democrats

Is Tulsi Gabbard a Russian asset? We don't know, but it is hard to see how her recent move to revoke the security clearance of Obama and Biden administration officials helps national security. In a crisis, they could possibly provide useful advice if they are well informed. Gabbard said: "All personnel are reminded that holding a clearance is a privilege, not a right, and this privilege is contingent upon continued adherence to the principles and responsibilities of our profession." English translation: "Lack of support for Donald Trump will result in your security clearance being pulled."

In particular, Gabbard went after intelligence professionals who were part of the team that said Russia influenced the 2016 election in Trump's favor. A spokesperson for Barack Obama noted that the intelligence community's assessment was later supported by a 3-year investigation by the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee. The report was supported by then-Sen. Marco Rubio, who was chairman of the panel at the time. The punishment of the intelligence professionals is simply part of Trump's retribution tour. It has nothing to do with national security.

Mark Zaid, a national security attorney, said: "The vast majority of these individuals are not household names & are dedicated public servants who have worked across multiple presidential administrations." Larry Pfeiffer, who worked as chief of staff at the CIA, said: "The skill and talent that Trump and Gabbard deprive the U.S. national security and intelligence communities, govt & private sector, is huge. Makes one wonder who they are really working for, directly, indirectly, or as useful idiots." His post on eX-Twitter ended with a Russian flag. (V)

MAHA Meets MAGA

The MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) movement is one of the pet projects of HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. The whole idea of MAHA is a misnomer because it implies that America was once healthier than it is now. When might that have been? Still, Kennedy is committed to a lot of crazy stuff that will make Americans unhealthier going forward.

One area where MAHA and MAGA are starting to drift apart is that MAHA hates Big Pharma, Big Ag, and Big Chemical. A House appropriations bill contains provisions that will shield pesticide and chemical manufacturers from accountability for the damage their products cause to people's health. MAHA people don't like that. But those provisions are in there because MAGA people (e.g., Donald Trump) put them there as paybacks for campaign contributions. Thus, MAHA and MAGA are not on the same page here.

The flagship MAHA group is Children's Health Defense. Its CEO, Mary Holland, said: "It's obvious that there are tensions within this newfound coalition between MAHA and MAGA, and there are some big issues there."

What she means is that conservatives have traditionally sided with Big Pharma, Big Ag, and Big Chemical (to honor their bribes campaign contributions). They want fewer environmental rules limiting what these companies can do, regardless of the effects on public health. MAHA wants tighter environmental protections, putting it in conflict with the companies that thought they had bought their way out of having pesky rules imposed on them.

A specific ongoing battle is that Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID), chairman of the Interior-Environment Appropriations subcommittee, inserted a provision in the appropriations bill stating that states may not require a pesticide label different from the federal one. This is what the pesticide companies want. They don't want California to impose more stringent requirements than what they have gotten the feds to require. The current law gives states additional power, to, for example, state that a pesticide cannot be sprayed within 250 feet of a school. MAHA supports that, but Simpson does not. MAHA is worried about labels because that can affect lawsuits if a product damages people's health.

Another sticking point between MAHA and MAGA is "forever chemicals," which stay in the environment, well, forever. Simpson's bill prohibits the EPA from banning food from farms contaminated with forever chemicals. MAHA doesn't like this. Not that the EPA is likely to do that, since many people who used to work in the chemical industry now have leading roles in the EPA. They want to reduce restrictions on cancer-causing chemicals.

The fight goes on, but even though Kennedy may actually be on the side of the angels here, Trump is the decider and he is for letting industries that have paid him off get what they want. (V)

U.S. Trans Woman's Request for Political Asylum Heard by Dutch Court

A U.S. transgender woman, Veronica Clifford-Carlos (28), fears for her life in the U.S. as a trans person. She claims she could be persecuted for being trans. She applied for asylum in the Netherlands, claiming that she is not safe in the U.S. The Dutch government's position is that while the situation in the U.S. is concerning, it is not so bad as to justify granting asylum to every trans person who asks for it. The Dutch government has pointed out that trans people have won cases in U.S. courts.

Another point is medical care. Clifford-Carlos has stated that her access to gender-affirming treatment could be cut off at any time. The Dutch immigration service said that she didn't provide any proof of that and that asylum can't be granted because some future action could endanger her. She filed suit in a Dutch court in the Hague yesterday. The ruling is expected in a few weeks. (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, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger