A morality play in a NY courtroom.

January 12, 2024.

On Thursday, President Biden ordered a coordinated attack on Houthi rebels in Yemen who have been attacking civilian ships in the Red Sea. Per a statement by President Biden,

50 nations have been affected in 27 attacks on international commercial shipping. Crews from more than 20 countries have been threatened or taken hostage in acts of piracy. More than 2,000 ships have been forced to divert thousands of miles to avoid the Red Sea — which can cause weeks of delays in product shipping times. And on Jan. 9, Houthis launched their largest attack to date — directly targeting American ships.

Biden convinced American allies Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, and the United Kingdom to join in the coordinated strike. The members issued a joint statement warning the Houthi rebels against future attacks.  

Biden issued his own statement, which is notable for its description of the escalating warnings and diplomatic steps taken by the US to avoid armed confrontation—exactly the type of measured but resolute leadership we should expect from an American president. Biden said,

Last week, together with 13 allies and partners, we issued an unequivocal warning that Houthi rebels would bear the consequences if their attacks did not cease. And yesterday, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution demanding the Houthis end attacks on merchant and commercial vessels.

Today’s defensive action follows this extensive diplomatic campaign and Houthi rebels’ escalating attacks against commercial vessels. These targeted strikes are a clear message that the United States and our partners will not tolerate attacks on our personnel or allow hostile actors to imperil freedom of navigation in one of the world’s most critical commercial routes.

And Biden capped his message with a clear warning about future action:

 I will not hesitate to direct further measures to protect our people and the free flow of international commerce as necessary.

Biden’s actions entail risk. Some readers of this newsletter might reasonably disagree with the action on principle or because they may lead to retaliation by the Houthi rebels (which they have promised to do). But doing nothing also entails risk.

As the members of the joint strike force said in their statement, the Red Sea provides shipping lanes for “8 percent of global grain trade, 12 percent of seaborne-traded oil and 8 percent of liquefied natural gas.” Allowing the Houthi rebels to shut down commercial shipping in the Red Sea could lead to a global recession, oil price shocks, and energy increases.

I do not mean to glorify war or armed confrontation. But if it is unavoidable, having Joe Biden at the helm during fraught times is preferable to any of the GOP alternatives—most especially the mercurial and unpredictable Donald Trump, who could not be bothered to read his Daily Presidential Briefing on intelligence and security. Once again, the difference could not be starker—or more important.

---

House “Freedom” Caucus pressures Speaker Mike Johnson.

The GOP extremist “Freedom” Caucus is hammering Speaker Mike Johnson to walk away from his “top-line” spending deal with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. If they succeed in causing Johnson to cave, they will force a government shutdown. Media reports on the stiffness of Mike Johnson’s spine are conflicting. Per Talking Points Memo’s article, Far-Right Confident Johnson Will Let Them Continue Hijacking Government,

Hardline Republicans, who are throwing a literal House floor temper tantrum over Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-LA) deal with Democratic leadership, emerged from a meeting with the speaker Thursday confident he’d soon hand over his spine.

“It’s not going to be the current deal,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) said this afternoon after leaving the meeting.

“There’s going to be a new deal drawn up, and that’s what we’re in the process of doing,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) said, according to several reports.

If Marjorie Taylor Greene and Ralph Norman are in charge of drafting a new deal, it will be dead on arrival.

But other House Republicans are fed up with Marjorie Taylor Greene and the “gang of eight” who took down Speaker Kevin McCarthy. See The Hill, Conservative calls for Johnson to rip up deal frustrate other Republicans. As reported in The Hill,

Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio) had sharper words for the conservatives pressing to renegotiate the deal: “They’re just feckless people. It’s just easier for them to scream and vote no, because it takes a lot of courage to explain a “Yes” vote and everything that’s inside of it. If I said I was gonna vote “No” on any of this stuff, my job would be a lot easier.”

Speaker Mike Johnson wants a one-year “continuing resolution” because if he doesn’t get one, he will face a repeating series of short-term leadership challenges.

Time is running out for Republicans to decide whether they are capable of accepting “Yes” from Democrats to get the deal done. The first of two existing continuing resolutions expires on January 19.

---

Don’t believe the lies about Joe Biden and the border.

The GOP lies about Joe Biden and the border are relentless—and they are working. The most frequent criticism I hear from readers who are Democrats is that Joe Biden has failed to address the border crisis. That is simply not true, and those readers have fallen victim to Republican disinformation.

We have to snap out of it! We cannot retreat in defensive embarrassment every time a Republican falsely claims Joe Biden has allowed for “open borders” or allowed an “invasion” on our southern border.

The latest example is an op-ed by Bret Stephens in The New York Times, Opinion | The Case for Donald Trump By Someone Who Wants Him to Lose. Among the many demonstrably incorrect statements included in Stephens’ article is this:

Many of Trump’s opponents refuse to see virtually unchecked migration as a problem for the West at all. . . . Only now, as the consequences of Biden’s lackadaisical approach to mass migration have become depressingly obvious on the sidewalks and in the shelters and public schools of liberal cities . . . .

What—exactly—is Biden’s “lackadaisical approach” to mass migration? Congress sets immigration law—and Joe Biden is enforcing it. Indeed, Biden is enforcing current immigrations laws much more effectively and aggressively than did Trump—a point of contention among many progressive Democrats.  See, e.g., The Hill, Progressive Democrat has ‘serious concerns’ about Biden’s ‘heavy-handed’ border policies.

Why are progressives upset about Biden’s enforcement of immigration laws? That answer is explained in a recent article by The Cato Institute, New Data Show Migrants Were More Likely to Be Released by Trump Than Biden.

As explained by Cato Institute article,

In absolute terms, the Biden DHS is removing 3.5 times as many people per month as the Trump DHS did. These figures are important for understanding how each administration has carried out border enforcement.

During the Trump administration, DHS made 1.4 million arrests—what it calls “encounters”—in fiscal years 2019 and 2020 (24 months). Of those people arrested, only 47 percent were removed as of December 31, 2021, which includes people arrested by Trump and removed by Biden, and 52 percent were released into the United States.

Under Biden, DHS made over 5 million arrests in its first 26.3 months, and it removed nearly 2.6 million—51 percent—while releasing only 49 percent. In other words, the Trump DHS removed a minority of those arrested while the Biden DHS removed a majority. Biden managed to increase the removal share while also increasing the total removals by a factor of 3.5.

On every metric—in absolute and relative terms—the Biden administration has enforced immigration law more aggressively than did the Trump administration.

So, what changed? Why the misperception that Biden is “soft” on immigration?

First, the absolute number of immigrants fleeing violence in Central and South America is increasing dramatically. That is not Biden’s fault. Indeed, Biden is attempting to address the root causes of forced migration—violence and poverty—in the countries that are contributing most to mass migration into the US.

Second, in the face of a sharp increases in immigration that is overwhelming US border security, Biden has made the wise decision to focus enforcement efforts on immigrants who pose national security or criminal threats in the US. Even with that enforcement focus, Biden’s efforts are significantly more aggressive than Trump's.

Which brings us to the current refusal of House Republicans to authorize $13.6 billion in supplemental funding for border security. If they were truly concerned about the immediate crisis, they would pass the supplemental bill. But they don’t want a solution; they want a campaign issue.

I also hear from readers who criticize Biden for not “explaining” what he is doing to address the crisis at the border. I have two observations.

First, Biden is doing his job by enforcing immigration laws. Biden can’t make new law—that authority lies with Congress. So quit blaming Biden for Congress’s failure.

Second, if you want to know what Biden is doing, check out WhiteHouse.gov. There you will find Fact Sheet: The Biden-Harris Administration Takes New Actions to Increase Border Enforcement. As explained in the Fact Sheet, the Biden administration is

• Working with international partners to speed removals and returns. Since May 12, we have removed or returned over 253,000 individuals to 152 countries. This compares to 180,000 removals and returns during the same period in 2019, which was the comparable pre-pandemic and pre-Title 42 period. This was enabled by a more than doubling of ICE international removal flights from the first to the second half of FY 2023 and new agreements with multiple countries to streamline returns.

• Deploying a military personnel surge to support border efforts

• Expediting family removals nationwide.

• Adding DHS holding and processing capacity.

• Improving Processing of Work Authorizations and Directly Communicating with Work Eligible Individuals. Only Congress can change the law to allow asylum seekers to get work authorization sooner than six months after filing their claim. Right now, six months is the law.

In short, any objective observer should conclude that Biden is doing a good job under difficult circumstances. If refusing to “send the US military to attack the cartels in Mexico” or “closing the border” is being “lackadaisical,” then the problem is not Biden—it is the fact-free critic who does not understand how US or international law works.

---

Opportunity for reader engagement.

Airlift is a great organization that vets on-the-ground grass-roots groups in swing states and then organizes fundraising to help those groups “get out the vote.” Airlift is hosting an event focused on Georgia. The invitation is below. Check it out!

Airlift presents “Georgia on Our Minds,” Tuesday, January 16, at 5:00 p.m. Pacific/8:00 p.m. Eastern. We will hear from Steve Phillips, best-selling author of Black is the New White and How to Win the Civil War, along with organizers from Black Male Initiative Fund of Georgia. Learn why Georgia is critical for winning in 2024, and how BMIF plans to mobilize the all-important Black male constituency. 

Airlift is an all-volunteer organization raising money for grassroots groups in key battleground states. Although this is a fundraiser, no donation is required to register or participate.

Register here for what will be an inspiring discussion about what's at stake in Georgia.

---

Concluding Thoughts.

Trump hijacked court proceedings in the NY civil fraud trial on Thursday. Trump asked for permission to give a closing statement—a request that was repeatedly denied. When Trump's lawyer asked again in open court, Judge Engoron gave a qualified “Yes,” but only if Trump followed rules regarding relevance and admissibility.

As soon as the judge began explaining the qualifications, Trump interrupted Judge Engoron’s instructions and began violating them instantly. Trump spoke for five minutes in a tirade that should have resulted in his immediate jailing for contempt. See Mother Jones, Trump Ends His Fraud Trial By Lashing Out at the Judge—Again.

That’s the problem with Trump. Even when it is obvious that he will break the rules, people who believe in the rule of law and due process give him another chance to behave himself—which he never does. He sees fairness as weakness and those who play by the rules as suckers.

I am not criticizing Judge Engoron, who has suffered massive abuse at the hands of Trump and his followers. (Judge Engoron received a bomb threat at his home a few hours before the hearing.) Despite that abuse, Judge Engoron was willing to give Trump one more accommodation to which he was not entitled. The unfortunate outcome was foreseeable and foreseen.

The incident is a morality play for our times. We cannot allow our innate goodness to become a lever and our commitment to justice to become fulcrum used by bad-faith actors to overturn the law.

Yesterday, I wrote “We must not become them.” While that is true, we must also refuse to give Trump—or his followers—any presumption of good faith or special consideration. He is not special—nor are they.

Life is hard and unfair for hundreds of millions of Americans—but only Trump's followers claim “victimhood” as an excuse to end democracy. Other Americans accept that life is difficult and unfair but see democracy as a path to a better future for their children and grandchildren.

Trump lied to bankers, brokers, and insurers in the New York real estate market for decades. He told the world on Thursday that he is the victim in the civil fraud trial and deserves to be awarded damages against the state. The perpetrator portrays himself as the victim. Perverse logic delivered in bad faith.

What’s my point? We must be fair but unyielding in our refusal to accept the pretense of good faith. Trump was always going to violate Judge Engoron’s rules for a closing statement. We knew it; Trump knew it; Judge Engoron knew it. “No” means “no”—and there is nothing unfair about that.

Talk to you tomorrow!