Democrats stand united as McCarthy is ousted.

October 4, 2023

          Kevin McCarthy was removed as Speaker of the House on a motion to vacate the chair—a first in our nation’s history. The unprecedented nature of the vote speaks to McCarthy’s unique unfitness, lack of moral character, and ever-present mendacity, as well as to the collapse of the Republican Party. The small margin by which McCarthy lost—eight votes—conceals the deeper division revealed by the defection of 90 Republicans on Saturday’s continuing resolution to fund the government.

•           McCarthy proved his unique unfitness to serve as Speaker when he made a pilgrimage to Mar-a-Lago to kiss Trump's ring on January 28, 2021—three weeks after Trump incited the assault on the Capitol.

•           McCarthy proved his lack of moral character when he voted to oust Liz Cheney from his Republican leadership team for standing up to Trump's treason.

•           McCarthy proved his venality when he promised to remove Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell from the House Intelligence Committee to gain votes for the Speakership.

•           McCarthy proved his untrustworthiness when he empowered a GOP representative to negotiate terms for a joint commission to investigate the events of January 6. When the GOP representative got everything Republicans wanted, McCarthy walked away from the agreement, forcing Democrats to form a special committee without Republicans (except for Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger).

•           McCarthy proved his lack of integrity when he granted Tucker Carlson exclusive access to surveillance tapes from inside the Capitol on January 6.  

• McCarthy proved his duplicity when he said that a vote was necessary to open an impeachment inquiry and then opened an impeachment inquiry of President Biden without an authorizing vote.

•           McCarthy proved his mendacity when he lied to the American people and President Biden about his commitment to funding levels in the 2023-24 budget when making a deal to raise the debt ceiling in May.

          Ultimately, McCarthy lost the Speakership because he had lied to everyone—friend and foe alike. No one trusted him. He will forever be a “double asterisk” in the history books—a speaker who was elected after fifteen contentious rounds of voting and the first speaker in our nation’s history to be removed on a motion to vacate. McCarthy deserves the humiliation and opprobrium attached to the inglorious end of his ignominious political career.

          But the House Republican caucus also lost on Tuesday. It does not have a governable majority. (It never did.) Despite ridding itself of McCarthy, the House GOP remains hostage to the extremist elements in the caucus, a fact that bodes ill for any effort to pass a budget or keep the government open— let alone pass legislation to advance the interests of the American people.

          The “Party of No” has entered a permanent Twilight Zone in which its sole reason for existence is opposition, its only unifying principle is grievance, and its lone tactic is chaos.

          It does not matter who Republicans elect as Speaker; the next Speaker will be controlled by eight Republicans who managed to oust McCarthy. Until Republicans acknowledge they do not have a functional majority and must reach out to Democrats to create a governing coalition, every Republican Speaker will be a temporary occupant of the office.

          Republicans will go through the motions of electing a speaker capable of governing their caucus. They will fail. In the meantime, Democrats maintained unity and discipline throughout the chaotic tenure of Kevin McCarthy. That is a hopeful sign for future Democratic control of Congress. The most important lesson of McCarthy’s loss on Tuesday is that the only path forward is through the Democratic Party. Tell a friend!

Coda.

          When the motion to vacate passed, GOP Rep. Patrick McHenry was appointed as acting Speaker under protocols relating to “continuation of government” in the event of a disaster.

          Rep. McHenry will likely occupy the “acting” role for ten days (or less) and has little authority other than ensuring the election of the next speaker. But Rep. McHenry’s first act was to order Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi to vacate her private “hideaway” office in the Capitol by Wednesday (a day when Pelosi will be at memorial services for the late Senator Dianne Feinstein. See Politico, McHenry ordered Pelosi to leave her Capitol hideaway office by Wednesday.

          Although the reason for Rep. McHenry’s communication is unclear, it appears that he wants to claim Nancy Pelosi’s office for himself. Per Politico, the email to Nancy Pelosi said:

“Please vacate the space tomorrow, the room will be re-keyed,” wrote a top aide on the Republican-controlled House Administration Committee. The room was being reassigned by the acting speaker “for speaker office use,” the email said.

          Rep. McHenry’s insulting first act is an inauspicious start to the post-McCarthy interregnum. Let’s hope that someone tells Rep. McHenry that evicting Nancy Pelosi from her private office while she is attending a funeral is a bad look.

New York Judge Engoron issues gag order against Trump.

          On Tuesday, Trump's daily threats against witnesses, court personnel, and prosecutors continued apace. Per the NYTimes, Trump posted a picture of Judge Engoron’s court clerk

with Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic majority leader. Mr. Trump mocked the [Judge’s clerk] as “Schumer’s girlfriend” and said that the case against him should be dismissed.

          Trump posted the picture and comment while he was seated in the courtroom before Judge Engoron, who is presiding over New York’s civil trial against Trump for fraudulent business practices. When Judge Engoron learned of Trump's post mentioning the court clerk, he recessed the trial, spoke to Trump and his counsel for over an hour, and entered a gag order. Trump removed the post.

          Judge Engoron explained his gag order, saying that Trump “posted to a social media account a disparaging, untrue and personally identifying post about a member of my staff.”

See New York Times, Trump Ordered Not to Comment on Judge’s Staff in Fraud Case. (This article is accessible to all.)

          Per the Times, Judge Engoron said that

‘[p]ersonal attacks on members of my court staff are unacceptable, inappropriate and I will not tolerate them under any circumstances. . . . Justice Engoron said that his statement should be considered a “gag order” forbidding any posts, emails or public remarks about members of his staff. He added that serious sanctions would follow were he to be disobeyed.

          Trump's actions are a sign of a mentally disordered mind and contempt for the rule of law. They are also part of a disturbing pattern of intimidation and brutish threats that should result in the immediate revocation of Trump’s pretrial release. He should be jailed pending trial in the DC, Florida, and Georgia criminal actions.

          Judge Engoron’s quick reaction is a good first step that should clear the way for Judges Chutkan, Cannon, and McAffee to act more aggressively against Trump. (Judge Engoron’s ability to order Trump jailed is limited compared to the judges presiding over Trump's criminal trials.)

          It is worth noting that Trump's threats did not cause a moment of consternation or hesitation in his base or on right-wing media. They are comfortable with Trump's fascist tactics—indeed, may even welcome them. I searched the Fox News website for any mention of the gag order and found nothing. (Indeed, the trial is not even mentioned.) Instead, on the day that the first Speaker of the House was removed by a motion to vacate the chair, the top Fox headlines screamed, “PACK YOUR BAGS, Pelosi evicted from her private office in the Capitol by interim House speaker.”

          Judge Chutkan will hear argument on special counsel Jack Smith’s motion for a narrow gag order on October 16, 2023.

The first Monday in October.

          The Supreme Court’s term begins (by tradition) on “the first Monday in October.” There are several blockbuster cases on the Court’s docket that could upend large swaths of American government, health care, and civil liberties. Whether the Court’s reactionary majority will accept the invitation to do so is not clear.

          On Monday, the Court heard a challenge to the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), an agency that regulates every consumer lending transaction in the nation. Experts predicted that a ruling striking down the CFPB could lead to another “great depression” as banks, stores, schools, and credit card agencies grappled with the disappearance of all federal regulations in an industry that holds $16.9 trillion in consumer debt. See Vox, The Supreme Court could trigger a second Great Depression in CFPB v. Community Financial Services Association.

          At the Court’s first session of oral argument on Monday, it appears that a majority of the liberal and conservative justices were hostile to the arguments made by those seeking to invalidate the CFPB. See Ian Millhiser, Vox, The Supreme Court’s uncharacteristic moment of sanity, in CFPB v. Community Financial Services.

          During oral argument, the justices lost patience with Noel Francisco, the former US Solicitor General, who is now a hired-gun for dark-money Republican business interests. Per Millhiser,

          The good news is that the Court appears unlikely to buy what Francisco is selling. All three of the liberal justices took turns beating up Francisco, with an exasperated Justice Sonia Sotomayor telling Francisco at one point that she is trying to understand Francisco’s argument and is at a “total loss.”

Sotomayor appeared to be joined in her frustration by Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, two Trump appointees who showed little patience for Francisco’s attacks on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) . . . Barrett also repeatedly pressed Francisco to explain how, exactly, his proposed interpretation of the Constitution would actually work.

By the end of the argument, even Justice Clarence Thomas—ordinarily the most conservative member of the Court—appeared fed up with Francisco’s inability to articulate a coherent argument.

          The case involving the CFPB is the first of three that emanate from the Trumpiest judges in the Fifth Circuit (including Judge Kacsmaryk’s decision banning mifepristone). To keep track of the decisions as they are argued and decided, see Vox’s tracker, here: Supreme Court begins a new term. Here’s what’s at stake.

          The good news is that in the Court’s first opportunity to consider the a dangerous yet whacky case on the Court’s docket during this term, it appears that sanity will prevail. A glimmer of hope!

          As a follow-up to my comments yesterday about Justice Thomas recusing himself from John Eastman’s appeal, two readers posted Comments worth noting:

Daniel Rathe:

Clarence Thomas's recusal has much to do with the highly effective reporting done by Pro Publica and The Intercept. If you are not already, please subscribe to and support these independent publishers!

And

OutOfHellTX:

Pro Publica is a 501(c)(3) organization. A subscription is tax deductible and they will send you a letter affirming your donation.

A “Thank You!” to Today’s Edition readers supporting The States Project / Giving Circles.

          The States Project, and its fundraising project Giving Circles, has become an important force in reclaiming state legislatures for the Democratic Party. See New York Times,  How a Little-Known Group Helped Resurgent Democrats Wield Power. As explained in the Times,

An increasingly prominent player in this liberal push [for control of state legislatures] is a little-known group called the States Project, which was founded in 2017 and made a financial splash in state legislative elections last year, pouring $60 million into races in five competitive states: Arizona, Michigan, Maine, Nevada and Pennsylvania.

That investment reflects a broader recognition by Democrats that with Congress often deadlocked, many of the nation’s most urgent battles over abortion access, gun control and voting rights are now unfolding in state capitols. . . . The States Project focuses solely on them.

          I have promoted participation The States Project and readers of this newsletter responded enthusiastically by forming Giving Circles composed of readers of this newsletter. The States Project began to track the total contributions from Giving Circles identifying themselves as “Today’s Edition” readers. I received this note today from Melissa Walker, the Direct of Giving Circles:

I'm cleaning out my inbox and found this note from 2022. It reminded me to express more gratitude in 2023! So far this year, Giving Circles inspired by Today's Edition have collectively raised over $200,000! Along the way these leaders are becoming incredible organizers, bringing their communities together to focus on too-often-ignored state legislatures.

As word about the scope of our work spreads, y'all were here early on, shining a light!

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

          I am deeply grateful for the generosity of Today’s Edition readers in supporting the important work of The States Project by pooling donations to support critical races that can flip control of state legislatures. As Melissa said, “Thank you, thank you, thank you!”

          If you are interested in supporting the work of The States Project / Giving Circles, check out this website: Welcome to Giving Circles - the States Project.

Reader comment of the day.

          When I posted my photo yesterday of the Air Force Thunderbirds air show, I anticipated receiving comments from readers that were critical of the size of the military budget. I defensively included the phrase, “Whatever you think of the military and weapons of war, the pilots and ground crew were all young men and women with toddlers and infants playing in the sand at the beach as their parents zoomed by at 600 miles per hour.”

          As expected, I did receive a handful of responses that questioned the size of our military budget, but I also received this moving Comment from reader Sheila B (MN), which deserves the attention of every reader of this newsletter (edited slightly by me where ellipses “. . . .” appear).

Thanks also for the photos of the air show and highlighting the young military families. I am the daughter, sister and widow of WWII and Vietnam veterans. My late husband died of ALS, which sadly is a service-related illness - upwards of 20% of people diagnosed with ALS in any one year are current or former military. When Trump called disabled veterans “losers” and demanded that he never again see any wounded warriors, well I won’t say what I said about him. You’ve asked us to keep our language clean and I respect that.

What I would like though is for Trump to be forced to silently walk through any VA hospital in the country. To see the broken, mangled bodies in wheelchairs, to hear the gasps of pain from those undergoing physical therapy, and to have to listen to the anxious, bored young kids in the waiting rooms—who would much rather be outside playing but instead sit with a parent or grandparent in the waiting room while the other parent gets the medical care they need.

I will issue a special invitation [to Trump] to go to the spinal care unit at the Minneapolis VA where my husband and I spent many hours. He should be forced to watch the slow, painful, devastating progression of ALS . . . and to witness the incredible competence of the entire staff of that unit including the legless Vietnam Vet who greeted Glen and me to ensure we were masked up and used the hand sanitizer before we entered. [The Vietnam Vet] would gently pick up Glen’s useless hands, rub the sanitizer over them, and thank us for our service to our country. Made our day better. Every time.

That same VA hospital is now treating many wounded Ukrainian soldiers. Regardless whether McCarthy survives [the motion to vacate], I sincerely hope we find a way to continue to support the fight against Putin and autocracy. . . . .

          Thank you to Sheila B and her husband, father, and brother for their service, and to all veterans and their families who serve our country. There are good faith questions about the allocation of resources among competing needs, but there is no question that active-duty military personnel and veterans deserve our gratitude.

Concluding Thoughts.

          During a wild and historic day, Democrats maintained their unity and discipline. I watched the vote on the motion to vacate in real time on MSNBC. It could have been an anxiety-producing experience, but I was calmed and assured by the fact that Democrats understand that the way forward is with a resolute and unified caucus that is focused on the needs of the American people. It simply doesn’t get any better than that.

          Are there anxious days ahead? Of course! There always are. The unceremonious defenestration of Kevin McCarthy was predictable and predicted on the day he assumed the Speakership. The remarkable fact is that he lasted this long.

Democrats need only six Republicans to form a governing majority. That goal is achievable, though it won’t be easy. So, let’s get on with finding a way to govern in the House with a unified Democratic caucus and the shambles of the GOP conference. The sooner, the better.

          Talk to you tomorrow!