The real news on Wednesday.

August 24, 2023

          I will resist the temptation to lead with the “made-for-tv” circus on Fox. Instead, I will start with three stories that are important to Americans over the longer term. I will comment on the debate briefly in today’s newsletter and come back to it on Friday with the benefit of analysis and commentary.

Bidenomics is working to direct foreign investment to US manufacturing.

          Several major bills passed by Biden and the Democrats in Congress encouraged foreign direct investment in US manufacturing. Those bills include the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the CHIPS and Science Act, and Inflation Reduction Act. An analysis released by the White House on Wednesday shows that those bills are encouraging foreign direct investment into US manufacturing capacity, including semiconductors, computers, and electronics. See NYTimes, Biden Incentives for Foreign Investment Are Benefiting Factories. (This article is accessible to all.)

          Per the Times,

The analysis shows that two-thirds of foreign direct investment, excluding corporate acquisitions, was in manufacturing in 2022. That was more than double the average share from 2014 to 2021.

          The original report is here: Early Signs That Bidenomics is Attracting New Foreign Investment in U.S. Manufacturing | CEA | The White House. Per the report, foreign direct investment “in the computer and electronics sector is striking, rising from $17 million in 2021 to $54 billion in 2022.”

          It is worth reading the preceding sentence again: Foreign investment in US manufacturing in computers and electronics rose from $17 million to $54 billion between 2021 and 2022. That increase is staggering.

          As noted in the report, investment in US manufacturing capacity is far outpacing such investment in Japan, UK, Germany, and Australia. The inflow of investments into the US is coming from European investors (57 percent); Canadian investors (21 percent); and Japan, Singapore, and South Korea (collectively, around 9 percent).

          The increase in foreign investment in US manufacturing is not a high-profile, headline-generating story. But it has a significant effect on the lives of US workers and their families. And it is exactly the type of success that typifies the Biden administration: long-term, solid, and strategic. Our challenge is to communicate that success in a way that is short, memorable, and true. Tell a friend!

South Carolina Supreme Court upholds six-week ban on abortions.

          The South Carolina Supreme Court issued an opinion upholding a six-week ban on abortions, reversing a decision issued only eight months ago that ruled such a ban violated the South Carolina constitution. See NYTimes, South Carolina Supreme Court Upholds Abortion Law, Reversing Earlier Decision. (This article is accessible to all.)  

          Although the South Carolina Supreme Court was addressing an “updated” statute passed in response to its decision striking down the earlier statute, the new statute was effectively indistinguishable from the prior statute. What changed? Answer: The composition of the South Carolina Supreme Court, which lost its only female justice after the prior ruling was issued.

          The newly “all-male” Supreme Court accepted arguments from proponents of the ban that women should “adjust their behavior accordingly” by using contraceptive pills. (Apparently, it never occurred to the proponents of the ban that “men should adjust their behavior accordingly.”)

          The Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court dissented in an opinion that called out the majority’s hypocrisy:

I agree with the majority that, "[a]s judges, our solemn duty is to uphold the rule of law." Today, however, the majority has abandoned the precedent established just months earlier by this Court and, despite its insistence otherwise, has turned a blind eye to the obvious fact that the 2021 Act and the 2023 Act are the same.

The result will essentially force an untold number of affected women to give birth without their consent. I am hard-pressed to think of a greater governmental intrusion by a political body.

This outcome is not an affirmation of the separation of powers, as the majority declares, but an abdication of this Court's duty to ascertain the constitutionality of the challenged legislation.

          Protecting reproductive liberty calls on us to adopt a multi-pronged strategy. In some states—Ohio, Kansas—we can rely on citizen-led initiatives to amend the state constitution. In others, gaining control of the state legislature is the path forward. But for many Americans, dissolving the reactionary majority on the US Supreme Court is the only real hope of regaining a right embedded in the liberty clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

A positive development in the Georgia criminal proceeding.

          The procedural developments in Georgia are picking up steam and becoming increasingly difficult to follow. But on Wednesday, a federal judge in the Northern District of Georgia issued two rulings that should give all Americans comfort that justice will ultimately prevail. Let me explain.

          It is possible that some of the defendants who were federal officers during the insurrection will successfully “remove” the case against them to federal court. If that happens, D.A. Fani Willis will continue to serve as the prosecutor in federal court.

          But if the case is removed to federal court, who will be the judge? Answer: Judge Steven Jones of the Northern District of Georgia. Judge Jones served as a state court judge in Georgia before being nominated to the federal bench by President Barack Obama.

          When Mark Meadows filed a petition to “remove” the case against him to federal court, the petition was randomly assigned to Judge Jones. Under rules relating to the assignment of cases, Judge Jones will be assigned all other removal petitions, including any petition filed by Donald Trump. If Judge Jones grants their petitions to remove the cases to federal court, Judge Jones will remain as the judge through trial.

          By Wednesday of this week, Judge Jones had been assigned removal petitions by Mark Meadows and Jeff Clark. Both Meadows and Clark filed “emergency” motions on Wednesday, asking Judge Jones to “stay” the proceedings in Georgia state court against them while Judge Jones considered their removal petitions.

          The requests for an emergency stay flatly contradict the removal statute, which provides,

[T] he filing of a notice of removal of a criminal prosecution shall not prevent the State court in which such prosecution is pending from proceeding further . . . .

          In other words, the request for an emergency stay was not a close question and should have been denied in summary fashion. Which is exactly what Judge Jones did. His opinion is clear, straightforward, and correct. Read the opinion here: Georgia v. Meadows (Court Listener).

          Here’s the point: For those of you stressing over whether Trump or Meadows will remove their cases to federal court, don’t! Judge Jones has already demonstrated that he is going to follow the law. No drama. No delay. Just justice. D.A. Fani Willis will have a fair forum to try Trump if he succeeds in removing the case. She (and we) cannot ask for anything more.

Trump, Putin, and Prigozhin.

          Donald Trump idolizes Vladimir Putin—a ruthless dictator with a long history of assassinating his political opponents. In Helsinki in 2017, Trump sided with Putin over US intelligence agencies regarding Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. (“My people . . . said they think it's Russia. I have President Putin, he just said it's not Russia. I will say this, I don't see any reason why it would be.”)

During a pre-Superbowl interview in 2017, Bill O’Reilly invited Trump to condemn Putin’s violence against his opponents:

“But [Putin’s] a killer,” O’Reilly said to Trump.

“There are a lot of killers. You think our country’s so innocent?” Trump replied.

          On Tuesday, Yevgeny Prigozhin—the head of Putin’s private mercenary army—died in a plane crash that has all the hallmarks of an assassination. Prigozhin’s plane plummeted from the sky without warning or a distress call. Video shows the plane emitting white smoke as it plummets from the sky.

          Like Putin, Prigozhin was a ruthless killer who had recently attempted an unsuccessful rebellion against Putin. Even so, in a nation of laws, insurrectionists are entitled to due process and a fair trial rather than assassination.

          As recently as April of this year, Trump was praising Putin as “very smart” and excusing his invasion of Ukraine. See Business Insider, Trump Vies for GOP Voters With Bizarre Takes on Ukraine War.

          Putin is a dangerous man. Fraternizing with Putin does not strengthen America’s national security; instead, it makes us less secure and weakens the bonds with our allies. The assassination of Yevgeny Prigozhin is a timely reminder of that fact. Another reason we must re-elect Joe Biden in 2024.

Concluding Thoughts.

          The most important development in the Republican “debate” on Wednesday evening was that six of the eight candidates pledged to support Trump for president if he is the nominee even if he is convicted in his pending criminal trials. (DeSantis, Haley, Scott, Ramaswamy, Pence, and Burgam said they would support Trump.) In essence, they pledged to be part of Trump's ongoing, slow-rolling attempted coup, the final stages of which include pardoning the coup plotters. That singular moment marks the Republican Party’s nadir, its everlasting moment of shame and humiliation.

          During the debate, the candidates espoused other outrageous positions: climate change is a hoax, support for a national abortion ban, blaming teacher unions and single mothers for the problems in education, proposing invading Mexico with US special forces, and cutting aid to Ukraine. None of the candidates provided an actual proposal for America’s future, other than Ramaswamy’s line, “Drill, frack, burn coal, embrace nuclear.”

          On the one hand, it is distressing that the leading GOP candidates support such reactionary and dangerous positions. On the other hand, most Americans reject the positions articulated on the Fox debate stage Wednesday evening. On many major issues—like reproductive liberty and climate change—Americans reject the GOP positions by twenty to thirty percentage points. Republicans are on the wrong side of history and of this precarious moment for democracy. Trump's extremism has warped the GOP field so drastically that the candidates are taking positions that render them unelectable in a general election.

          The dysfunction on display on Wednesday evening provides an opportunity for Democrats. In addition to endless free videos for attack ads directed at the eventual nominee, Democrats should convert every negative, destructive, mean-spirited notion espoused on the debate stage into a positive, productive, forward-looking message about Democratic accomplishments over the last three years. We can do that; indeed, the positive messages write themselves after the hate-fest on display on Wednesday evening.

          As members of the grass-roots movement to elect Joe Biden, let’s not wait for the DNC or DCCC to write those messages. We can write, post, text, and call using our own words to describe why Democrats are the antithesis of what happened on the Fox debate stage. Speak the truth in words of one syllable using short, declarative sentences. Say the most important thing first. Be genuine. Be kind. Be proud!

          In an evenly divided electorate, we need only change the minds of voters at the margin. We can do that. After what we witnessed on Wednesday evening, we should be more confident than ever that our messages will resonate with most Americans in 2024.

          Talk to you tomorrow!