A Night at the White House: Inside the Senate Drive to the Right and its Historic Consequences, by J.B. Biskupic
This is an excerpt from “NINE BLACK ROBES:” Inside the Supreme Court’s Drive to the Right and Its Historic Consequences,” by Joan Biskupic, published by William Morrow.
Trump said that every sitting Supreme Court justice would join them for the ceremony.
Justices had declined to attend similar White House events under previous presidents, resisting the optics that would conflict with separation of powers. They were worried about being used for political purposes and that an appearance by the full group of justices would appear to be an endorsement of the president.
Trump had a way of ensnarling the court in politics, fomenting rhetoric of personal destruction and conspiracy, all the while generating challenges to the rule of law.
The judge assigned the Witch Hunt case, a case that has NEVER been charged before, hates me. The same person who was picked by Bragg to take a ‘plea’ deal was also the one who railroaded my former CFO, Allen Weisselberg, to take a guilty plea. In jail.
Trump’s choice of Kavanaugh for his second Supreme Court appointment triggered an enormous political fight that had not ended with his Senate confirmation. News networks continued to cover the Senate hearings that October, especially Christine Blasey Ford’s accusation that she had been raped when she was a teenager.
The hearings were too painful to watch, according to some justices. The sessions stirred their own fears from their testimony in the witness chair and people who found Ford credible shuddered at the public humiliation of her. They knew he was destined to join their ranks and already felt some institutional allegiance.
Roberts quietly requested reassurance from the White House counsel office that the October 8 ceremonial swearing-in would not be politicized, after he was somewhat wary of an invitation from Trump.
With his fears calmed, Roberts and the associate justices went to the White House for the evening event. As the cameras flashed, they took their front-row seats in the East Room. Jane Roberts sat behind her husband. The other spouses were at her side.
He named them, like blue ribbons he had just won. Thank you. Justice Thomas. Thank you. Justice Ginsburg. Thank you very much. Justice Breyer. Thank you for the justice. Justice Alito. I appreciate it. Justice Sotomayor. Thank you very much. There is a Justice of the Supreme Court. Thank you very much. And Justice Gorsuch.” The audience applauded.
Trump wanted to begin tonight’s event differently than any other event of its magnitude. I apologize on behalf of our country for the terrible distress and suffering you have been through. A campaign of political and personal destruction should not be part of the evaluation of those who step forward to serve our country.
But that was not the case. There wasn’t a trial or investigation into Ford’s accusations. The truth did not matter to him or to a certain group of his supporters.
John Roberts: The Life of the Party, the Death of a Supreme Court Justice, and the Trial of Separation-of-Powers vs. Trump
Justice Clarence Thomas, however, was conspicuously enthusiastic, applauding heartily after Kavanaugh spoke. The Department of Justice spokeswoman said that Thomas was the “life of the party” at the event.
“I’m honored to serve on a Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice John Roberts,” Kavanaugh said. Chief Justice Roberts is an inspiring leader for the American judiciary. John Roberts is the chief justice of the United States.
The move showed that the two justices had established an early alliance at the high court. (A few weeks later Roberts would favorably cite Kavanaugh in a speech, for the ideal of judicial neutrality: “As our newest colleague put it, we do not sit on opposite sides of an aisle, we do not caucus in separate rooms, we do not serve one party or one interest. We serve one nation.
The sole time Roberts went public to counter Trump came – perhaps fittingly – when Trump railed against a federal judge in a way that struck at the heart of Roberts’ assertions of judicial neutrality. The heads of the two branches of government came to blows.
His preoccupation was apparent from the beginning. In the presidential campaign of 2016 he tried to portray US District Judge Gonzalo Curiel as a Mexican judge who was unlikely to give him a fair shake and who was hearing a case about Trump University.
Ginsburg told me that she was surprised that Trump had become the Republican president nominee. He doesn’t have any consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He has an ego. Trump said that she should resign because of her mind being shot.
Roberts leads a small conservative majority on the court which became more skeptical of Trump administration policies. Roberts voted against adding a citizenship question to the census in the spring of 2019. The plan that Roberts voted for was against the will of immigrant rights groups that feared it might diminish Latino participation in the census.
The following year, Roberts quietly brokered strong majorities against Trump as the president was trying to keep his personal tax and other financial records from the Manhattan district attorney and, separately, committees of the US House of Representatives. These were the two most direct separation-of-powers battles with Trump.
The pair of disputes traced to business activities Trump had engaged in before becoming president. It was not known if Trump directed money to the women who claimed they had affairs with him, but New York prosecutors were looking for more than a decade of documents about that. Trump denied the women’s claims. (This New York financial investigation helped lead to Trump’s current charges.)
Separately, committees of the House of Representatives, led by Democrats in 2020, were trying to obtain Trump’s accounting and banking records as they developed ethics legislation to tighten money-laundering prohibitions.
Source: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/03/politics/trump-supreme-court-roberts-kavanaugh-biskupic-nine-black-robes/index.html
The Trump-President’s 2021 arraignment and 2020 presidential run-up in Georgia: Investigating Trump’s case in Mar-a-Lago
Roberts declined to preside during Trump’s second impeachment trial, in 2021, when Trump had just left office and faced charges related to the January 6 attack on the US Capitol.
There are increasing signs that this new reality will come at a time when Trump is already facing the intense demands of another White House bid.
The documents case may not be the end of it. Smith is also investigating Trump’s conduct in the run-up to the US Capitol insurrection. Then there’s also a possible prosecution in Georgia led by a district attorney probing the ex-president’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election result in the swing state.
Smith’s prosecutors have secured daily notes, texts, emails and photographs and are focused on cataloguing how Trump handled classified records around Mar-a-Lago and those who may have witnessed the former president with them, CNN’s Katelyn Polantz and Evan Perez reported Monday. The new details coincide with signs the Justice Department is taking steps consistent with the end of an investigation.
Trump’s former lawyer, Ty Cobb, told CNN’s Erin Burnett that the developments represent a serious turn in the case for the ex-president. We have known that the investigatory steps were under way, but haven’t seen the alleged results yet. “I think these are highly consequential.”
Trump denies any wrongdoing in all of these investigations. He has described his behavior in Georgia as “perfect.” He criticized the sealed indictment in New York that has more than 30 counts related to business fraud, as an example of politicized justice.
On Monday, Trump arrived in New York for his scheduled court appearance. The motorcade of SUVs from the Secret Service to his private jet carried a message of power and strength in a power play meant to send a message of strength.
After court Tuesday, he will return to his Mar-a-Lago resort and reclaim the media spotlight with a primetime speech he will likely use to proclaim his innocence, attack the New York case as political persecution and try to distract from the fact he will be a criminal defendant.
The prosecution will not be a factor in shaping the political impact of the New York case. Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan, who will preside over Trump’s arraignment, is immune to his political pressure. It is possible that Trump will lose in a legal arena due to his attacks on prosecutors. And even a former president can’t disregard the choreography of a court case and rules of criminal procedure.
One criminal prosecution is enough. Trump hasn’t been charged in any of the other cases, but a multi-front defense in multiple cases would represent an extraordinary storm. The ex-president may no longer have the ability to dictate his political schedule. When he was under scrutiny in the Russia investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller, or during his two impeachments, Trump exploited his huge popularity with Republican voters to discredit accusations against him. He made most of the GOP senators realize that they would have to retire if he was convicted in an impeachment trial.
The situation is somewhat similar to the 2020 election, when the will of voters prevailed because Trump’s attempts to have votes thrown out and results changed foundered in multiple courts because of the fact-based standards of evidence and the law.
Source: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/04/politics/trump-legal-threats-analysis/index.html
A Time Machine for the New York Times: The Ex-President of the NY Times, Richard J. Merchan and the View of a Media Circus
In a late-night ruling, Merchan turned down the request for broadcast cameras. The five photographers are allowed to take pictures of the courtroom and Trump before the hearing begins.
The ex-president complaining about being the subject of a media circus was rich. He would not have been president if it weren’t for his salesman’s talent. Trump created a mythology about himself in New York, where he provided fodder for the city’s tabloids with his colorful personal life and business hits and failures. His entire 2016 campaign and his single-term presidency were pageants of outrage, scandal and lawlessness stoked by his often unchained Twitter posts.