Clear as mud.

December 20, 2024

Well, things are clear as mud and changing by the minute. In short, Elon Musk killed a bipartisan continuing resolution (CR) that would have funded the government until next March. Trump—realizing he was becoming irrelevant—shouted, “What about me? What about me?” In an attempt to make the continuing resolution about himself, Trump demanded that any CR eliminate the debt ceiling—a surprise demand the caught almost everyone off-guard.

Early afternoon on Thursday, Speaker-in-Name-Only Mike Johnson announced Republicans had (allegedly) agreed on a bill that met Trump's demands. Trump then posted “SUCCESS in Washington” and took a (premature) victory lap around the All-You-Can-Eat buffet at Mar-a-Lago

The Trump-approved CR needed two-thirds (273) of the voting members in the House to pass. It failed miserably—falling 99 votes short. Republicans have a narrow majority in the House but saw 38 of their members vote against the continuing resolution. Dissenting Republicans did so in large part because they opposed the suspension of the debt limit. Two Democrats voted in favor of the Trump-approved bill.

The CR proposed by Speaker Johnson removed the following programs from the original bill:

• $190 million for the "Give Kids a Chance" program for child cancer research

• Research on premature labor

• Treatment of sickle cell disease

• Breast and cervical cancer early detection

• Down syndrome research

Minority Leader Jakeem Jeffries posted the following on BlueSky after the Trump-approved CR failed:

The Musk-Johnson government shutdown bill has been soundly defeated.

MAGA extremists in the House GOP are not serious about helping working class Americans.

They are simply doing the bidding of their wealthy donors and puppeteers.

Unacceptable.

The post by Jeffries was brilliant for two reasons.

First, it referred to the “Musk-Johnson” bill—a phrase that will surely infuriate Trump and undermine the relationship between Musk and Trump.

Second, it referred to the “Musk-Johnson government shutdown”—a name that will not only sting but infuriate US military members, TSA staff, border security patrol members, and hundreds of thousands of federal workers who will not be paid over the year-end holiday season because a billionaire does not care about them one bit.

The path forward is murky. Who is in charge? Musk? Johnson? Trump? The 38 Republicans who voted against the Musk-Johnson proposed bill?

By the time most readers open this newsletter, there will be less than 24 hours before the current authorization for government spending expires (at midnight on Friday).

As I understand the situation in the House, any bill would need to pass under a “suspension of the rules” because of the short time remaining before the shutdown deadline. See Congressional Research Service, Suspension of the Rules: House Practice in the 114th Congress (2015-2016).

Under a suspension of the rules, a bill would need 273 votes to pass—while Republicans control less than 219 votes. To pass, a bill would need 54 Democrats to cross-over the aisle to support a Republican continuing resolution.

It seems unlikely that 54 Democrats would vote for a bill that removes the debt ceiling for two years—because that would grant Trump significant leeway in the 119^th Congress to pass expensive measures like extending his tax cuts for millionaires and corporations.

Opposing the removal of the debt ceiling now will give Democrats more leverage in the battles to come in 2024 and 2025. If Republicans cannot remove the debt ceiling on their own, Democrats would be foolish to do it for them—because Trump would then blame Democrats for removing the debt ceiling (even though that is the result Trump desires).

I have no idea how Republicans will find an exit strategy. They could simply go back to the bill they negotiated with Democrats on Tuesday. They could pass a short-term “clean” continuing resolution with no debt ceiling relief and vow to remove the debt ceiling at a later date.

Even if Republicans find a way out of the mess that Elon Musk created, the damage has been done. The Republican “landslide” victory has been overtaken by intra-party fights and confusion over who is leading the administration and the Republican caucus in the House.

To the extent that Musk has more power than Trump, it is because he can fund primary challengers against Republicans who do not surrender to Musk’s demands. Trump cannot make that threat credibly.

And the only reason that Musk has that power is because of the US Supreme Court’s decision in Citizen’s United.

Although many in the media claim that Musk is the new president, his only accomplishment thus far is blowing up agreements made by others. That skill will get him nowhere as a political leader.

At some point, the government must function in order to sustain the financial markets and infrastructure that impart value to Musk’s shares in his electric car and spaceflight companies. In that sense, Musk’s fortunes are aligned with every American who has a savings or retirement account or who owns a home or stock in a public company.

---

Georgia Appeals Court rules that District Attorney Fani Willis is disqualified in Georgia election interference case

Recall that Trump has been indicted under Georgia state law for election interference in the 2020 presidential election. Defendants in that case moved to disqualify Willis because she became romantically involved with an outside attorney hired as a special prosecutor on the case. The trial judge denied motions to disqualify Willis after a three-day hearing, ruling that the romantic relationship did not pose an actual conflict that warranted disqualification.

The Georgia appeals court ruled that the mere appearance of impropriety requires disqualification of Willis and her entire office. See NBC News, Appeals court disqualifies DA Fani Willis from prosecuting Trump Georgia case.

The three-judge panel split on the question of disqualification on a 2-1 vote. The majority wrote,

While we recognize that an appearance of impropriety generally is not enough to support disqualification, this is the rare case in which disqualification is mandated and no other remedy will suffice to restore public confidence in the integrity of these proceedings.

In a blistering dissent, Judge Benjamin Land wrote

For at least the last 43 years, our appellate courts have held that an appearance of impropriety, without an actual conflict of interest or actual impropriety, provides no basis for the reversal of a trial court’s denial of a motion to disqualify.

Where, as here, a prosecutor has no actual conflict of interest and the trial court, based on the evidence presented to it, rejects the allegations of actual impropriety, we have no authority to reverse the trial court’s denial of a motion to disqualify. None.

The Georgia Supreme Court should reverse the court appeals’ decision if it follows the law and applies the correct standard of review. But all nine of the justices on the Georgia Supreme Court have been appointed by Republican governors. There is little reason to expect a fair and impartial hearing by the Republican-controlled court.

If the Georgia Supreme Court upholds the decision of the court of appeals, the case will be re-assigned by a Republican-controlled commission. Chances are high that the case will be assigned to a Trump-friendly prosecutor who will seek to dismiss the case.

Republicans in Georgia have been searching for a way to remove Fani Willis from the case even before the indictment was issued. They have now succeeded in manufacturing a baseless reason that is unsupported by the law of Georgia. This outcome serves only to further undermine the (correct) impression that Republicans do not care about the rule of law; only about the outcome—a lesson modeled by the US Supreme Court.

---

Holiday Schedule

I will continue to publish the newsletter over the next ten days but will take off for Christmas Eve and Christmas Day.

Here is the schedule for the next few days:

• Saturday, December 21, 9:00 a.m. Pacific / 12:00 noon Eastern—regular Substack live Saturday session for all readers.

• Monday, December 23, 3:00 p.m. Pacific / 6:00 p.m. Eastern – Founding Member Holiday Zoom (Watch for email with details.)

• Monday, December 23, 4:00 p.m. Pacific / 7:00 p.m. Eastern –Substack Live Holiday Party for all readers. (No politics; just a moment to raise a glass to one another.)

• December 25, Christmas Day (no newsletter so that I can take off Christmas Eve)

• December 26, Day after Christmas (no newsletter so that I can take off Christmas Day).

---

Opportunity for Reader Engagement

There is still time to phonebank for two Democratic candidates for the January 7 special election in the Virginia legislature. See the details here: Phone Bank for Kannan Srinivasan and JJ Singh.

“Make calls and help us keep a blue majority in the State Senate and House of Delegates!

Whether you're an experienced phonebanker or joining your first, we'll provide the training and resources necessary for you to make an impact in this election!”

---

Concluding Thoughts

As we move into the holiday week and the new year, I close this newsletter with two items forwarded by readers that seem apt.

The first is an article from America Magazine / The Jesuit Review, entitled Dear Catholic Boomers: Don’t get too comfortable during Trump’s next four years. The article is thought-provoking—even if you are not Catholic or a product of Jesuit education (as are my wife and I).

One passage in the essay (by Valerie Schultz) that was particularly powerful was a reframing of The Beatitudes:

When I was hungry you cut off my access to food stamps.

When I was thirsty you left the lead in my drinking water.

When I was naked you made sleeping outside illegal.

When I was sick you defunded my health insurance.

When I was in prison you sped up the schedule for federal executions.

When I was a stranger you separated me from my family and caged me.

Valerie Schultz concludes,

I cannot be comfortable with this cruel agenda and still call myself a person of faith. . . .

We people of faith don’t get to remove ourselves from the public square and live out our days in comfortable oblivion. . . .

“You’re not allowed to give up,” the anti-corruption activist Alexei Navalny said before being jailed and martyred . . . We older Catholics may not be leading an international movement, but our work is clear . . . Our Catholic mandate is not to turn a blind eye to racism or misogyny or hatred or persecution, but to embrace the victims of those systemic injustices wherever we find them.

Most of you are familiar with Amanda Gorman, who recited The Hill We Climb at Joe Biden’s Inauguration. My wife and I have a three-degrees of separation connection to Amanda. Jill taught Amanda’s mother in the Loyola Marymount University Ed.D. program in education and social justice.

But I digress. Amanda has written a new poem called New Day's Lyric. It is apt for this difficult moment as we look forward to the new year. I excerpt portions below. I recommend the entire poem for your review and contemplation:

New Day’s Lyric by Amanda Gorman

May this be the day

We come together.

Mourning, we come to mend,

Withered, we come to weather,

Torn, we come to tend,

Battered, we come to better.

Tethered by this year of yearning,

We are learning

That though we weren’t ready for this,

We have been readied by it.

[¶¶]

Come over, join this day just begun.

For wherever we come together,

We will forever overcome.

I have enough self-awareness not to add to or explain Amanda’s words.

Talk to you tomorrow!

Daily Dose of Perspective

NGC 2403 is an intermediate spiral galaxy 8 million light-years from Earth and 50,000 light years in diameter.

Enjoy!