Sizing up Ron DeSantis

March 3, 2023

          Here’s my point: Ron DeSantis is a small, mean-spirited, intentionally ignorant, aspiring dictator who vaulted to prominence by opposing public health regulations designed to stop the deadliest pandemic in a century. He is intoxicated with the possibility of becoming president. He has concluded that his only path to the Oval Office is by plumbing the depths of depravity and hate that threaten the unity of our country. He is thin-skinned and angry but simultaneously boring and dull. Above all else, he is a bully—a defense mechanism designed to conceal his yawning insecurity, just like his two-inch heels.

          I think that about covers it, although I am happy for readers to add color and flair in the Comments section of today’s newsletter.

          Why am I writing about Ron DeSantis today? Because I receive emails from readers every day warning me that Democrats must not underestimate DeSantis because he is “worse than Trump, but smarter.” I resolved weeks ago not to give DeSantis unnecessary oxygen because that would fuel his efforts to slip into office by distracting us with dozens of small arson fires in the culture war. But at some point, his tyrannical tendencies cannot be ignored. Indeed, they must be condemned. Vehemently, and in words of one-syllable, as in “He is a bad man.”

          I will condemn DeSantis’s fascistic tendencies, but before I do, I want to raise a word of caution to those who rail against DeSantis (and that includes me). In condemning DeSantis, we must be careful not to create an aura of inevitability and invincibility about a man who has accomplished almost nothing in a decade-plus of political life. But for his opposition to Covid public health measures, he would be a forgettable governor of Florida, just as he was a forgettable member of the House of Representatives (where he was a leader in the effort to name post offices after local politicians).

          To be clear, I am not saying that we should dismiss or underestimate Ron DeSantis. Far from it. He is a threat to America, and we must do all we can to defeat him. So, please don’t send emails claiming that I am dismissing DeSantis. Did I mention he is a threat to America?

          But we must not ascribe to DeSantis strength, popularity, charisma, or electability that he does not possess. We made that mistake with Trump to our everlasting regret. Ron DeSantis is beatable every day of the week. Indeed, every day of the week he takes evermore preposterous actions that decrease his prospects for victory. For example,

• His efforts to impose “thought” control on students at Florida’s public universities.

• His vow to “control” the content published by Disney.

• The Florida GOP’s effort to dissolve the Democratic Party in Florida.

• The Florida GOP’s effort to force bloggers—like me— to register with the State of Florida and file a report each month that I mention Ron DeSantis in a blog.

• His efforts to erase Black history from American history.

• His efforts to stigmatize LGBTQ students and punish parents who seek to provide their LGBTQ children with healthcare.

• His efforts to strip tenure from university professors and punish grade-school teachers for providing “unapproved” books to children.

• His efforts to deny the right to vote to felons who have completed their sentences—as overwhelmingly approved by the people of Florida in a statewide initiative.

• His efforts to exclude Trump supporters from book signings and stealth campaign appearances.

          While DeSantis is not the sole author of every measure above, he is the inspiration for each of them. It is, therefore, fair to hang each of those albatrosses around DeSantis’s neck in the 2024 campaign.

          Together, the above measures (and more) describe a fascist state that is antithetical to the powerful undercurrents of personal liberty and collective freedom that define the American identity. Ron DeSantis believes that he can become president by running against what it means to be an American. That is an exceedingly stupid idea that has yet to be tested outside the confines of cable news studios and social media flame wars. It is an idea that will not fare well.

          We should trust in the ability of American voters to see past DeSantis’s two-inch heels and false bravado. He is a small man not because of his height but because his ever-present insecurity drives him to use pettiness and hate as elevator shoes for his ego.

          That is how I size up Ron DeSantis. How about you?

DOJ files brief opposing Trump’s claims of presidential immunity.

          The DOJ filed a brief in a civil lawsuit that should keep Trump awake at night. Democratic members of Congress and Capitol Hill police filed suits against Trump seeking civil damages for injuries inflicted on January 6^th. Trump moved to dismiss those lawsuits claiming, among other things, that he was immune from damages relating to January 6^th because he was acting in his capacity as President of the United States.

          I will spare you the details, but that argument is usually successful and dispositive when civil claims are filed against the US President. Usually, the DOJ files a brief that asserts or supports the claim of presidential immunity. But in the cases brought by members of Congress and Capitol Hill police, the DOJ filed a brief that argued Trump was not protected from civil liability in this case. See CNN Politics, Justice Department pushes back on Trump’s sweeping claims of presidential immunity for January 6 speech.

          The DOJ wrote:

No part of a president’s official responsibilities includes the incitement of imminent private violence.

          The above position is bad for Trump for two reasons.

          First, the DOJ will apply that standard in every case in which Trump claims immunity—including criminal cases.

          Second, if the DOJ acted responsibly in filing the brief, it secured special counsel Jack Smith’s agreement to that language—down to the last word. “Imminent private violence” is not a phrase we have seen before in litigation involving Trump. It may become the catchphrase in prosecuting Trump for his role in the January 6^th insurrection.

More on the “lab leak” theory.

          I will not belabor this story other than to say that the reporting in the media on the Department of Energy report has been collectively misleading. In short, the media is treating the DOE and FBI intelligence assessments as having equal weight as other assessments, including genetic studies that strongly suggest a natural transmission from animals to humans in a small area that contains the Huanan meat market. For example, the author of one genetic study concludes,

“In a city covering more than 3,000 sq miles, the area with the highest probability of containing the home of someone who had one of the earliest Covid-19 cases in the world was an area of a few city blocks, with the Huanan market smack dab inside it.”

          Moreover, the “lab leak theory” continues to shift in the face of genetic evidence that undermines the theory. As noted in the articles below, proponents of the lab leak theory have now shifted which “lab” allegedly caused the leak—and in doing so, undermined their “bioweapons” claim. The details are too complicated to discuss here, but if you are interested in the story, I strongly recommend Jonathan Katz, The Racket News, There is no lab leak theory, and Talking Points Memo, Readers on the “Lab Leak Theory” #1.

          As before, I am not rejecting the lab leak theory. I am saying that scientists have disclosed their evidence in published studies while intelligence agencies have said, “We have weak evidence, but trust us.” Those two things are not alike. Moreover, the low to moderate confidence levels of the intelligence assessments are not definitive conclusions. Until China cooperates with the international community, as it should, it will be difficult to come to a firm conclusion.

Supreme Court signals it will dodge Independent State Legislature case.

          In the case of Moore v. Harper, the Supreme Court heard arguments that touched on a minor branch of the so-called “independent state legislature” theory. In the underlying case, the North Carolina Supreme Court set aside congressional district boundaries set by the North Carolina legislature. The question in Moore v. Harper was whether the “time, place, and manner” clause of the Constitution invested state legislatures with the exclusive, unreviewable power to set congressional boundaries for congressional elections.

          The North Carolina legislature appealed its loss to the US Supreme Court, which heard oral argument in December 2022. After argument before the US Supreme Court, the partisan composition of the North Carolina supreme court flipped from a Democratic majority to a Republican majority. The new Republican majority on the North Carolina supreme court granted review to reconsider its original ruling against the North Carolina legislature.

          Because it is apparent that the North Carolina supreme court will reverse its underlying ruling in Moore v. Harper, the US Supreme Court has asked the parties whether that development changes any of their arguments in the appeal to the Supreme Court. See Vox, The Supreme Court signals that a terrifying attack on voting rights will vanish, in Moore v. Harper.

          With all of that as background, here is the likely outcome: The US Supreme Court will dismiss its review of Moore v. Harper and will thereby delay the day on which it first rules on the Independent State Legislature theory.

Concluding Thoughts.

          A new regular grand jury in Fulton County, Georgia, will be empaneled on March 7, 2023. It is possible that this new grand jury will issue an indictment against Trump. If that happens, everything will change. Trump will not drop out of the race, but the development will embolden his competitors to call for Trump to withdraw. That act of disloyalty will cause Trump to savage his competitors. All the while, Joe Biden will be tending to the nation’s needs in a serious, sober, and successful way.

          While we should not seek an indictment of Trump to gain political advantage, it will grant political advantage, nonetheless. We should exploit that advantage for all it is worth, without delay. Democratic leaders must be more aggressive in pressing our advantages and pushing back against Republican lies. We will have a rare opportunity to eliminate one—and possibly two—of the most dangerous GOP candidates before the primary season begins. That would be an accomplishment of enormous strategic importance. Let’s prepare ourselves to take action the moment an indictment issues, whether that happens in two months or two weeks.

          Talk to you on Monday!

(As I have for the last few months, I will send a short note on Saturday to open the Comments section.)