THIS WEEK IN POLITICAL NEWS -- 1/7/18

Ed. Note: By necessity, I will be making these a little shorter and more focused. Unfortunately I just can’t keep the same pace I had before!

THE RULE OF LAW IS STEADILY SLIPPING AWAY: There can be only one take-away from the news this past week: The rule of law -- the bedrock of American civil society -- is very much on its sickbed. The New York Times issued a bombshell piece detailing the many varied efforts of the Trump White House to stymie the Russia investigation. First, we learned that Trump lobbied, both directly and through his White House Counsel Don McGhan, for Sessions to not recuse himself from the investigation, “saying he needed his attorney general to protect him.” This echoes a widely-overlooked portion of the bananas interview he gave to the Times from his golf club last week in which, after declaring that he had the “absolute right to do what I want with the Justice Department,” he insisted an attorney general’s role was to cover up a president’s crimes (exclaiming his “great respect” for the way Bobby Kennedy and Eric Holder supposedly covered up President Kennedy’s and Obama’s various crimes). As Chait explains, Trump “now says the Department of Justice should protect the president even if the president has committed what Trump himself considers to be serious crimes. There is no plausible defense of this principle of Executive power that is consistent with democratic government.” Second, we learned that that the Sessions (presumably at the White House’s behest) asked for help from a Congressional staffer to discredit James Comey even before Comey was fired. “The attorney general wanted one negative article a day in the news media about Mr. Comey, according to a person with knowledge of the meeting.” Third, we learned that Trump’s original letter firing Comey, which was later jettisoned in favor of Rosenstein’s utterly bullshit cover letter, did in fact mention the Russia investigation -- in its very first sentence, despite the White House previously insisting that the letter never said anything about the investigation. This obviously supports Trump’s own words, on national TV, that he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation -- after the White House had insisted for days that it was really because Comey was too unfair to Hillary Clinton. (Can you believe they actually asked us to believe that shit? And how now the GOP is obsessed with the idea that the FBI is full of liberal stooges who were out to elect Clinton?? I cannot get over the massive gaslighting exercise this entire administration has been.) This Times piece was only the latest in a string of rule-of-law-bending occurrences:

• This week Trump again demanded that the FBI investigate Hillary Clinton and -- calling up on old favorite of right-wing fever dreams -- Huma Abedin. And days later, the DOJ let it be known that it was, in fact, reopening its investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server and investigating the Clinton Foundation. In other words, the Trump Administration is -- openly and without shame -- using the levers of its power to directly go over political opponents.
• “Republican senators Charles Grassley and Lindsey Graham have made a criminal referral to the Justice Department against Christopher Steele. It is unclear what crime they have in mind.” A year into investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 election -- interference that US intelligence agencies are unanimous in believing did occur and continues to this day -- the only person Congress has seen fit to refer for prosecution is the person who was so concerned about the information he found about this interference that he contacted the FBI to inform them.  
• Sessions named Geoffrey Berman as Acting US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, a man who was law partners with Rudy Giuliani. Trump had personally interviewed Berman, an unprecedented move. As an acting USA, his appointment will expire in 120 and does not need Senate confirmation. It’s not clear if he will actually be nominated to the post and go before the Senate.
• We learned last month that, after Neil Gorsuch criticized Trump’s attacks on the judiciary last year, Trump threatened to pull rescind nomination because he “worried that Gorsuch would not be ‘loyal.’” Which is what Supreme Court justices are supposed to be, obviously.
• Trump started the new year by hosting a party at his private, for-profit club (that he has not divested in) and hiking the price of admission for members and guests. So Trump is literally making money from people who are paying to have access to him, and also making money from the free publicity the club gets from his visits. Cool and totally normal!
• “The former spokesman for President Donald Trump's private legal team quit this summer because he believed a statement dictated by the president aboard Air Force One may have obstructed justice.”

THE STAKES OF 2018 COULD NOT BE HIGHER: Matt Yglesias and Jonathan Chait both wrote must-read pieces explaining why 2018 will be the year that determines whether American democracy survives. That sounds hyperbolic, but if you read these pieces, I think you’ll agree with them. So read them please!

DREAMERS IN PERIL: You’ll recall that last year, Trump canceled the DACA program -- but then urged Congress to fix the mess he had created. In the fall, it seemed like Democrats had the momentum to set up an end-of-year showdown over a DACA fix (meaning a Dream Act, that would allow these Americans to stay in the only country they’ve ever known). But at the last minute, Congress (with Democrats’ help) passed a temporary measure funding the government through January 19. So once again, we are faced with whether to shut down the government over the Dream Act and funding CHIP. Trump has now insisted on $18 billion for his border wall to go along with protection for the Dreamers. I think Democrats have the upper hand on the politics (let alone the policy) here, and they should hold first. First, Trump himself, along with scores of Republicans, have said that the Dreamers should be protected and be treated with “heart.” Polling shows overwhelming support for allowing these young people to remain in the country. This is a bipartisan and popular issue that Trump and the GOP have repeatedly promised to fix. Let’s make them stand behind their words. Second, Trump promised over and over and over again that Mexico would pay for this absurd wall of his. Why should we appropriate billions and billions of dollars to pay for something that was never supposed to be our responsibility? Third, we’re not in the majority; Democratic votes (in the House at least) are only needed to make up for the Nutjob Caucus that refuses to vote for any government appropriations at all. That’s their problem, not ours. Finally, it’s officially an election year. We have an incredibly motivated and engaged base, but we will need every ounce of that motivation to last through November to have any hope of winning back Congress. Starting the year by relenting on a popular issue about which Democrats have made repeated, vociferous promises would be terrible on policy and massively demoralizing for the people -- especially young people -- who we will need to vote in massive numbers in a few months. So that’s my case for settling for nothing less than a full Dream Act, full CHIP funding, and no funding for the wall. (I will accept modest funding for border security.)

Endorsements:

• Please take 5 minutes and read this harrowing account of a person who almost got shot and killed by police -- because he was black and wearing headphones.
• These publicity photos for Corey Lewandowski will give you a well-deserved laugh.
• This New Year’s twitter thread from Barack Obama, trying to remind people that not all is awful in the world.