Campaign Trial vs. Campaign Trail (June 16, 2023)
Welcome to Home & Away. For neither the first nor the last time, Donald J. Trump dominated the news here at home. The high or, depending on your perspective, low point was his arraignment in Miami on Tuesday. 31 of the 37 counts against him involved unlawful retention of classified documents. Among the remaining six counts was obstruction of justice, which is critical as it suggests active intent and not simply neglect or accidental mishandling of documents. It is this mix of the large number of documents, their sensitivity, and the effort to conceal that distinguishes this from other cases involving public officials from Joe Biden to Mike Pence to Hillary Clinton.
A few thoughts. Trump, while pleading not guilty in court, did not bother to deny in public what he is alleged to have done. To the contrary, he talked about “my boxes” and claimed (wrongly) he was within his rights as a former president to possess the classified material. What we are seeing, then, is not a legal defense but a political one, premised on the ability to sell the notion that Trump is a victim of selective prosecution and a politicized or even weaponized Department of Justice controlled by the opposing party. That the charge is unfounded matters not. Trump will use it to fuel his campaign (and raise cash) at the same time he tries to run out the clock and delay any trial until after the election on the assumption that if he were to win his own Justice Department would drop the charges. I would also expect every Republican candidate will be pressed to agree in advance to do the same.
One big question is the extent to which the judge likely to preside over the case, Aileen Cannon, will put her thumb on the scales of justice to protect the man who appointed her to the bench. She went out of her way to frustrate the government when it moved against Trump last year on the possession of classified documents, only to be overruled (and chastised) by the relevant court of appeals. In the trial to come, her rulings on such critical issues as what evidence is admissible are subject to reversal, but like any judge she will have a good deal of discretion when it comes to the timing and pace of the trial.
The entire situation has become something of a litmus test for other Republicans. Thus far, Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy and Trump’s leading rival for the Republican presidential nomination Ron DeSantis are failing badly. Others, by what they say or avoid saying, are faring better. Here I’d include Senators Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney and, among the candidates, Chris Christie, Nikki Haley, Asa Hutchinson, and Tim Scott. The biggest takeaway thus far, though, is that the rule of law, and the notion that no one is above it, is not nearly as ensconced in this country as one would think or like to think.
Since this is after all Home & Away, it is interesting to contemplate how this spectacle makes us look to others. On one hand, there is respect for an America where everyone is held accountable. On the other, the news cycle underscores that Mr. Trump continues to be a present political reality and a future political possibility. This is especially relevant for those countries (such as the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) who are in an intimate intelligence-sharing relationship with us and to their surprise with whomever it is who happens to hang out at Mar-a-Lago.
On a brighter note, I want to circle back to a development that I held off writing about last week for lack of space. The Supreme Court issued a decision that was equal parts surprising and welcome. In the case of Allen v. Milligan, the Court waded into the realm of voting rights, overcoming its traditional reluctance to challenge the drawing of congressional districts by state legislatures even when the gerrymandering was considerable. Here the Court not only jumped in but did so in a manner that will increase the chances a Black candidate will win at least one additional seat in Alabama.
I cannot help but wonder how this Court reached this unexpected and out of character decision. I have no evidence to justify what I am about to say, but part of me wonders if Chief Justice John Roberts decided that in the wake of controversial decisions on abortion and guns, not to mention the questionable ethics of Clarence Thomas, the Court needed to do something to reclaim at least some legitimacy across the political spectrum.
Whatever the motives, and as Thomas Edsall wrote in the New York Times, the direct and indirect effects of this decision could contribute significantly to the Democrats’ prospects for winning back the House of Representatives in 2024. Their ability to do that could be critical for the future of American democracy, as there is a strong chance Republicans will regain control of the Senate given that the lion’s share of the races to be decided that autumn involve seats held by Democrats. American democracy would be at risk if Donald Trump were to return to the Oval Office and this Republican Party controlled both chambers of Congress and the Court continued to tilt right. (For the record, I have other fears, more related to specific policies than the future of democracy, if this Democratic Party were to hold the White House as well as the entire Congress.) Divided government may make it hard to get things done but it can buttress the very checks and balances essential for a robust democracy.
As for Away, a few things to note. Ukraine’s long-awaited counter-offensive is under way. There is lots of speculation about how the offensive is going, with some drawing conclusions based on scattered photos or isolated reports, but the reality is that it is way too soon to draw any conclusions. The pending question is what NATO ought to do when it meets in July in Vilnius. Talk of possible NATO membership for Ukraine is both premature and potentially divisive. But making a commitment to provide Ukraine with the military and economic support it needs to remain independent and capable of defending itself against Russia would not only be right but would also send a useful signal to Vladimir Putin that time may not be his friend here.
I am as well glad to report that diplomacy seems to be back in fashion. The Secretary of State visited Saudi Arabia, where he spent several days exploring what the Saudis would need from the United States in the way of security guarantees and help in developing an ostensibly civilian nuclear energy program in exchange for joining the Abraham Accords and establishing diplomatic ties with Israel. At least as significant might be what the Saudis would need from Israel in the way of modifications of its policy toward the Palestinians. This three-way dance has the potential to shake up the Israeli debate and government alike as it would be hard for Israel to turn down political normalization with Saudi Arabia even if the price were seen by many on Israel’s political right to be too high.
Secretary Blinken also made his long-postponed trip to China. For his part, the National Security Advisor spent part of the week in India, preparing for Indian Prime Minister Modi’s upcoming State Visit. Talks are even taking place between U.S. and Iranian officials on a new arrangement that would provide some sanctions relief in exchange for limits on Iran’s nuclear program. In principle all this activity is welcome. Diplomacy and high-level meetings should never be seen as a favor or reward and held back as a result. They are a tool that if used well can promote the nation’s security, no more and no less.
I’ll have more to say next week on both Blinken’s trip to Beijing and Modi’s visit to Washington, but a few initial scene-setting thoughts. These exchanges could not be more different. The Biden administration has taken pains to set low expectations for Blinken’s visit to China. Just read what the assistant secretary of state in charge of this relationship has to say: “We’re not going to Beijing with the intent of having some sort of breakthrough or transformation in the way that we deal with one another…it would be wise not to have expectations of a long list of deliverables because that’s not where we are, I think, in the bilateral relationship right now.”
The Biden administration is still pushing for guardrails and open lines of communication with China in an attempt to minimize the chances of an incident between the two militaries. In the short term, there could be some relaxing of tensions, as both sides gear up for a potential meeting between Biden and Xi Jinping on the margins of the APEC summit in San Francisco in November. If China’s economy is in as bad of a state as reports suggest, Xi could be more amenable to dialing back some of China’s assertiveness abroad in an effort to forestall additional measures (outbound investment screening for one, more export controls for another) that would add to the pressure on China’s economy. But the longer-term trajectory of the relationship remains worrying and will remain so until a floor can be established.
Expectations for Modi’s visit to Washington, meanwhile, are sky high and almost certainly unrealistic. Biden’s top Asia official on the NSC, Kurt Campbell, was characteristically candid when he said, “My hope is that this visit basically consecrates the U.S.- India relationship as the most important bilateral relationship with the United States on the global stage, and that we effectively make it into sort of escape velocity.” This despite the fact that India continues to purchase Russian energy and arms and has a history of strategic hedging.
On a lighter note, I want to return to a discussion of courts. Not district courts, not the Supreme Court, but rather those associated with tennis and basketball. On display this past week were two of the GOATs: Novak Djokovic, who at the French Open won his 23rd men’s singles grand slam title, and Nikola Jokic, who not only led the Denver Nuggets to the NBA championship but redefined the role of what a big basketball player can do. For one week at least, Serbia was the center of the sports world. That designation proved short-lived, however, and has already shifted to Los Angeles, the home of golf’s third major tournament of the year, the U.S. Open. More too on this next week.
As always, some links to click on. And feel free to share Home & Away.
Richard Haass in the news
Friday, June 9: Irish Times on U.S.-U.K. relations.
Monday, June 12: MSNBC Morning Joe on wave of right-wing populism and the war in Ukraine (43:34). The Michael Medved Show on The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens.
Tuesday, June 13: NHK World Japan Deeper Look on U.S.-China relations.
Thursday, June 15: The White House 1600 Sessions on The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens.
Check out The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens.