F**king Mondays: "A King Above The Law", More Debate Fallout, & Tulsi Gabbard The Weirdo

The disastrous SCOTUS ruling, Biden's cognitive condition, and is Tulsi Gabbard a Russian asset?

Hello everyone, and welcome to another edition of “F**king Mondays!” In the roundup today:

Trump’s Supreme Court appoints him king in waiting

If you wanted further proof that Donald Trump must be defeated by any means necessary this November, here you go:

Here are the details:

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that former President Donald J. Trump is entitled to some level of immunity from prosecution, a decision that may effectively delay the trial of the case against him on charges of plotting to subvert the 2020 election. The vote was 6 to 3, dividing along partisan lines.

Mr. Trump contended that he was entitled to absolute immunity from the charges, relying on a broad understanding of the separation of powers and a 1982 Supreme Court precedent that recognized such immunity in civil cases for actions taken by presidents within the “outer perimeter” of their official responsibilities. Lower courts rejected Mr. Trump’s claim, but the Supreme Court’s ruling may delay the case enough that Mr. Trump would be able to make it go away entirely if he prevails in November.

…

The justices said that Mr. Trump is immune from prosecution for official acts taken during his presidency but that there was a crucial distinction between official and private conduct. The case returns to the lower court, which will decide whether the actions Mr. Trump took were in an official or private capacity.

This is essentially the legal basis for autocracy, or as Justice Sotomayor wrote in her extraordinary dissent: "The president is now a king above the law."

The ruling, she continued, "makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law."

Sotomayor went on to say that the conservative justices invented "an atextual, ahistorical, and unjustifiable immunity that puts the President above the law."

"That holding, which will prevent the Government from using a President's official acts to prove knowledge or intent in prosecuting private offenses, is nonsensical. Argument by argument, the majority invents immunity through brute force."

Of course the Biden administration (or any Democratic administration) isn’t going to take advantage of this insane ruling, but a future Trump administration absolutely will.

The stakes for November just got that much higher.

Reader response

I wanted to extend a huge thanks to the influx of new Banter Members who signed up in response to my post yesterday. We haven’t quite made up for the loss of members over my post calling for Biden to quit, but it lifted my spirits immensely. Notes like this from readers reminded me why I started The Banter in the first place:

I'm stunned, saddened, and a bit aghast that you lost subscribers over a single post -- seeing that I thought that uncompromised spirited debate was the entire point of joining the Banter Extended Universe (your posts, the podcast, and the community discussions). I don't agree with everything you say, but I love hearing other views, challenging my own, being proven wrong, being proven right, learning new things, and having a trusted perspective from people way closer to the Beltway than I am.

……..

I am really sorry to hear that so many subscribers decided to express their disagreement with your opinion/newsletter by unsubscribing. Although I disagree/d with you, I feel strongly that everyone should be able to express their honest, sincere opinion without fear of reprisal, especially financial reprisal. The Banter is a major source of political news and opinion for me, particularly since I feel that the NY Times, WaPo, and CNN have gone over to the corporate dark side.

………

I am sorry you lost readers, but you did the right thing by being honest about your thoughtful opinion. At age 76, I know what aging does to the brain, and it ain't pretty. However, I haven't the expert resources surrounding me to guide me when I'm feeling wobbly and tired. Joe has a great team, AND Kamala Harris, so I think he's got a next term covered.

As I mentioned in my post, I respectfully disagree with those who believe Biden should stay in the race. I cannot in good faith argue that he should continue his campaign if I genuinely think he is not physically up to it. His family and confidants believe he is, so that is obviously something I take into consideration. My concern is and always will be defeating Donald Trump at the ballot in November, and if Biden won’t drop out of the race, Democrats should rally around him.

I’m not exactly sure how to balance criticism of Biden with the need to support him, but I believe it is important to discuss it. I’m seeing a lot of name calling and aggressiveness from Biden supporters, calling anyone who voices concern “bedwetters” and “traitors” for refusing to have the president’s back. There are of course attempts to racialize this too. According to some, it’s only white men freaking out about Biden, and those who want to bypass Kamala Harris for another white male are sexist and racist:

Given Biden’s support amongst African Americans has been dropping dangerously over many months, it’s hard to see how this makes any sense. Black voters are already freaking out about Biden and Harris. Furthermore, Kamala Harris’s poll numbers are only marginally better than Biden’s (in the high 30’s). No one who wants to win an election against Donald Trump believes she is the best candidate to do that. If Barack Obama were Biden’s VP, it would be a different story and no one would be bringing up his race.

These issues can’t be wished away and Democratic voters can’t be gaslit by people telling them that what they saw wasn’t what they saw. A CBS News/YouGov poll released on Sunday showed that a terrifying 72% of registered Democratic voters now “believe the president does not have the mental and cognitive health to serve as president.” Trying to bully Democratic voters concerned about Biden’s physical and mental state isn’t the way to handle a very serious crisis, particularly given they are now in the majority.

I have no idea how this gets resolved, but my job is to tell readers what I think, not what they might want to hear. I’m generally an optimist so I do believe a replacement could beat Donald Trump, and if Biden stays in the race, there is a possibility he can still win. I hope I am wrong about Biden, and that it was an off night, and not indicative of his general health. But Biden isn’t going to get any younger over the next four months, so I’m not sure what the logic is.

The next few weeks are going to be pivotal, so let’s hope a clearer picture of Biden’s health emerges, and that we know one way or the other which candidate to support to prevent Trump retaking the White House.

Tulsi Gabbard, weirdo

Former Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard was on Bill Maher over the weekend, and her behavior reminded me why I find her so utterly creepy. Gabbard spent most of the night avoiding Maher’s questions and going on weird, conspiratorial tangents about the ‘Democratic elite’, non-existent attacks on free speech, and why the Biden Administration is the most evil force in American history. Most bizarre was her attack on Biden for calling climate change the biggest "existential threat" to Americans. According to Gabbard, “The true existential threat to humanity is the fact that we are closer to nuclear holocaust now than we ever have been before."

A perplexed Maher tried to keep the conversation on track, agreeing that it was a threat, but there were lots of existential threats to consider, like AI. But Gabbard continued to push, warning of mothers and babies having their skin melted off by a nuclear fallout. Maher thankfully reprimanded Gabbard for the grotesque descriptions and told her it wasn’t necessary to go into that kind of detail.

Gabbard has been talking about the threat of a nuclear holocaust since Russia invaded Ukraine, blaming Democrats for being under the “complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness,” who “believe in open borders, weaponize the national security state to go after political opponents, and above all, dragging us ever closer to nuclear war.”

Gabbard, who exemplifies the horseshoe theory of politics, is now a key figure in both the alt left and alt right circles. Touted as a potential VP pick for Trump, her conspiratorial, pro-Russian politics resonate across what you might call the ‘weirdo spectrum’. Gabbard, like all good conspiracy theorists, isn’t interested in debate, she is interested in promoting her ideology. In Gabbard’s weird world, Democrats must be blamed for everything. Russia isn’t responsible for invading Ukraine, it is NATO. And NATO is supported by the Biden administration and the Democrats, therefore the Biden and the Democrats are pushing the world towards nuclear war. Never mind the fact that NATO (America included) hasn’t invaded anyone, threatened anyone with nuclear weapons, and has pledged only to respond to Putin’s aggression.

I’m not suggesting Gabbard is a Russian asset, but her unwavering pro-Russian politics and regurgitation of Kremlin talking points are troubling to say the least. If Gabbard turns out to be Trump’s VP pick — a role she said she would be “honored” to accept — she deserves a lot more scrutiny.

See you next week!

If you’d like to support The Banter, please consider becoming a paid subscriber here: