Today Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg filed a lawsuit against Gym Jordan to keep him from further interfering in the Trump case.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg filed a lawsuit Tuesday against Republican House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, asking a court to block elements of the congressional inquiry into his case against former President Donald Trump.
Calling it an “unprecedently brazen and unconstitutional attack” of an ongoing investigation, Bragg said in the suit that allowing Jordan’s demands, including subpoenaing former Assistant DA Mark Pomerantz, would cause “imminent irreparable harm if the secret and privileged material is compelled to be disclosed.”
Bragg’s suit asked the court to block Jordan’s subpoena of Pomerantz. Jordan, R-Ohio, wants Pomerantz to sit for a deposition as part of the Judiciary panel’s investigation into the indictment of Trump.
Gym is whining that the suit is an attempt to block congressional oversight, but since when does a U.S. House committee have oversight over a local District Attorney? Since never, I’m pretty sure. The suit was filed in in federal court in the Southern District of New York.
Speaking of courts — the abortion pill decision out of Amarillo highlights a big problem for Republicans. For years they strove mightily to seed the judiciary with right-wing zealot judges. And the problem they have now is, they’ve succeeded. Jennifer Rubin writes,
Given that Kacsmaryk’s decision has heaped fuel onto the conflagration caused by the overturning of Roe v. Wade, Republicans might want to ponder: Is the right-wing judiciary as a whole a threat to the MAGA movement’s viability?
It is one thing to gin up the base on invented threats from critical race theory or the “great replacement theory.” But when the MAGA movement’s judges begin to inflict radically unpopular edicts on those outside the right-wing audience, that risks sparking a counter-response: a determined, broad-based movement insistent that the United States not turn the clock back on decades of social progress. …
… Republicans cannot very well tell their appointees to cool it; they certainly cannot contain the blowback their judges unleash. The greatest irony of Donald Trump’s presidency might be that the “accomplishment” that most thrilled right-wingers may accelerate the vanquishing of a movement that is at odds with the values and sensibilities of most Americans. And the power of the judiciary itself may be one of the casualties.
Maybe we’re about to see what Shakespeare meant by “Hoist with his own petard.” It’s also notable that the media narrative has flipped from “abortion is a difficult issue for Democrats” to “abortion is a difficult issue for Republicans.” And it looks like the same metamorphosis is happening on the issue of guns.
Republicans have, over a period of decades, cultivated a base of screaming zealots who will accept no compromises. Republicans are just now waking up to the difficulty of keeping the base happy while not scaring off the less extremist majority. Jonathan Weisman writes at the New York Times,
Republican leaders have followed an emboldened base of conservative activists into what increasingly looks like a political cul-de-sac on the issue of abortion — a tightly confined absolutist position that has limited their options ahead of the 2024 election season, even as some in the party push for moderation. …
… The problem goes beyond abortion. With each mass shooting, the G.O.P.’s staunch stand against gun control faces renewed scrutiny. Republicans courted a backlash last week when they expelled two young Democratic lawmakers out of the Tennessee state legislature for leading youthful protests after a school shooting in Nashville that left six dead. Then on Monday came another mass shooting, in Louisville, Ky.
Republicans thought they had a lock on two safe issues — abortion is always bad, guns are always good. Keep restricting abortion; stop all restrictions on guns. What could go wrong? Well, what went wrong is the messy, complicated, real world, which refuses to behave in accordance with right-wing talking points. More guns do not result in less crime. In the real world, the opposite is true. People are starting to notice. And abortions often are medically necessary, in spite of decades of anti-abortion propaganda saying otherwise. Again, people are noticing.
If the abortion pill case is reviewed by the Supreme Court, the wingnut majority may want to let it stand, but they are in a precarious place now. Justice Clarence Thomas’s open corruption is just part of it. Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion in Dobbs was all about how the courts could wash their hands of the abortion issue now that it had been returned to the states (again, the real world is not cooperating). Let’s see Beer Bong Brett wiggle out of that. And I suspect John Roberts will want the court to not do anything that rocks the boat or scares the chickens right now.
Speaking of scaring the chickens, Tennessee House Speaker Cameron Sexton appears to have more or less admitted his primary residence really isn’t in his district. I can’t tell if his story is getting much traction in Tennessee yet, but surely someone is already planning the television ads for the 2024 statehouse races …
If Gym Jordan does decide to come to NYC next week, my money's on him beating Marjorie Toilet Green's land-speed record 10 minute retreat and departure!
And while you're in the city for those few minutes, Gym, don't get mugged!
Because if you are, all NYers will do what you did when you were an ASSistant wrestling coach:
Look away, and say no one saw a thing!
(Not at all) Sorry.
Step back and look at how this developed. Trump claimed he was about to be charged and hollered to McCarthy to intervene. McCarthy called on the three stooges (Comer, Steil, and Jordan) to use their committees to pressure Bragg to back off. (IMO, the plan was to bully Bragg into reversing course before charges were filed.) Trump was celebrating that it worked – it seemed the Grand Jury was not going to meet again until the end of this month. Turns out the Grand Jury didn't need to meet again – they were voting on charges. Not enough people have given Bragg credit for a head-fake that fooled everyone, including me.
As I see it, Trump's strategy to deal with the criminal cases in multiple jurisdictions is to lump them as all "political" and threaten the two state prosecutors to break off (NY & GA) investigations and prosecutions of Trump. The federal cases Trump has to delay until after the 2024 election. How much control (I selected the word "control" not "influence") does Trump have over key players in the House? This year, the House has to do the debt ceiling and budget. A potential economic crash and federal shutdown hang in the balance.
Will the economy ultimately hang on a deal to permanently immunize Trump from all prosecutions, state and federal? If Trump has his way, that's the deal we will face a year before the general election. If Trump does NOT have his way, then he's lost his grip on the party and he's going down for some of these crimes – or all of them. For which Trump will blame the GOP – before the 2024 election.
Trump has recently brought up defunding the FBI and DOJ. This line of discussion should be fringe-lunatic but McCarthy and Jordan seem to be on-board. How far will the rest of the House go just to rescue Trump from his crimes? It has to be almost every Republican in the House – only a few defections prevents a majority. And under the new rules how easily might a slender minority of Republicans working with Democrats remove McCarthy?
I think Jordan is WAY out of his lane trying to affect the NY prosecution. I think a federal judge will agree – a "cease and desist" seems likely to me, (And I'm not a lawyer.) HOW that order is worded will be very interesting but I suspect the hands-off order to the House will set a boundary of "while the case and any appeals are pending." AFTER the case is history, it may be appropriate for consideration by the House for legislation. Jordan is trying to use legislative power to affect the process and outcome of a case that's underway. I can't see any federal judge allowing that. The decision will also set the boundaries for the GA case.
Maybe I'm seeing a mirage but Bragg is also protecting the case against Trump for financial crimes – the case Pomerantz wrote a book about. As I read stuff, the criminal case that's the exact counterpoint for the civil case that's scheduled for October in NY. Bragg is also seeking to prevent Pomerantz from testifying before the House – the only legitimate reason I can see is to prevent Trump from seeing details of what WOULD be in a criminal prosecution – is if Bragg is planning to wait on the civil trial before he files the criminal. (Also, inside information from Pomeantz may aid Trump's defense in the civil case.)
The governor of TN, Bill Lee (R), urged Assembly members to bring forward red-flag legislation. This isn't a breakthrough, but it's progress. I hope Democrats embrace the suggestion and try to move forward and not play politics. If it turns out Lee isn't sincere, call him out for it BUT today, treat the suggestion as real.
Regarding the TX knuckle-dragger in a black robe…. I agree Roberts will want a way out that doesn't further inflame an issue that is decimating Republicans in elections. Will any of the other conservatives cross over and join Roberts? If so, by what rationale? IF the reasoning by the Supremes is that NO court can pull the approval of an approved drug, they end future attempts to use a federal judge to invalidate abortions by presciption. Which they really want. (I think the most the courts can legitimately do is request/require an internal review of an approval, to be followed by repeating the process of testing and certification if there were flaws. It should be up to the FDA to decide to pull a drug – or not – depending on the evidence of risk to patients vs the damage of removing the drug from the market. If that's the decision, the line of attack used in TX is ended.
If the Supremes sustain the decision in TX, FDA will re-approve the drug eventually but the bias of the court will stiffen the calls to pack the court now!
Gym got sued today!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtppG2DtNkg
TN Republican Governor signs executive order to strengthen background checks, and supports red flag laws. I will never understand why Newtown was not enough to sway these people 10 years ago, but whatever, okay. Keep the pressure on.
"again, the real world is not cooperating"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYhqlOQ1vHY&t=8s
Joyce Vance takes apart the tussle between Jordan and Bragg, and Pomerantz. She hints that Pomerantz and Bragg aren’t necessarily opponents in this matter.
She also mentions that Jordan is going to NYC to hold hearings on “Victims of Violent Crime in Manhattan”, in essence, a smear campaign / PR exercise against Bragg. No subpoena can stop that, but I like what Gulag said: “If Gym Jordan does decide to come to NYC next week, my money’s on him beating Marjorie Toilet Green’s land-speed record 10 minute retreat and departure!” Unfortunately, I would take the opposite bet, because Jordan, true to his wrestling background, is given to just grinding people down, unlike flash-in-the-pan MTG, who would absolutely flee when the going got tough.
Maybe we’re about to see what Shakespeare meant by “Hoist with his own petard.” It’s also notable that the media narrative has flipped from “abortion is a difficult issue for Democrats” to “abortion is a difficult issue for Republicans.” And it looks like the same metamorphosis is happening on the issue of guns.
I like the phrase “the dog caught the car”. Pretty astute point^ about how the narrative has flipped, regarding which party is in trouble. Let this be the tipping point, that portends the downfall of the fascist party. I well remember how Hurricane Katrina was the tipping point of the Bush era, it never really recovered after that. It’s really important to watch for these signs that signal a big shift is underway.
To me, the real game is the Supreme Court, Mitch McConnell’s backstop, the ultimate arbiters of all of this. I expect this corrupt court to come up with some sort of fishy compromise that pleases nobody, in abortion and guns. I expect that: their actions in cahoots with the extremist Republican legislators will absolutely energize the Democratic base (it already has), which will ultimately focus people on the remaining impediment: the Supreme Court. I’ve read that Ted Cruz is trying to get a constitutional amendment passed that limits the size of the court to the current nine justices. Cruz understands the key strategic issue and is mobilizing to defend it.
Hmmm.
How's this: Dems concurrently propose a constitutional amendment that sets the Supreme Court size at 13.
See how that plays out with two similar amendments proposed… do you think either one will pass?
Or would it be a fool's errand to do this? Maybe a Dem Senator should just talk about it. Maybe Sheldon?