The simple but powerful act of telling the truth.

September 27, 2023

          Four major stories dominated the news on Tuesday. Let’s focus on the story that relates to the continuing leadership and remarkable presidency of Joe Biden. His presidency has been surprising on many levels—including its progressive agenda, breathtaking ambition, and support for personal liberty and workers’ rights. Here are the four stories:

·      Biden joining a picket line in the UAW strike.

·      The Supreme Court denying Alabama’s bad-faith effort to defend racial gerrymandering.

·      A New York judge ruling that Trump's business empire was a fraudulent enterprise.

·      A smidgen of progress on efforts to pass a federal budget.

President Biden joins a UAW picket line.

          Joe Biden has frequently said that he is the most “pro-union president in the nation’s history.” On Tuesday, he punctuated that point by joining a UAW picket line in Michigan—a critical swing state that the next president must win to gain a majority in the electoral college. See NYTimes, Biden Joins Autoworkers on Picket Line in Michigan. (This article is accessible to all.)

          The messaging by Biden was a prelude to a campaign battle between Biden and Trump over auto worker support. Biden said,

You’ve heard me say many times: Wall Street didn’t build this country. The middle class built this country. And unions built the middle class. That’s a fact. Let’s keep going. You deserve what you’ve earned, and you’ve earned a hell of a lot more than you get paid now.

          That message reaches beyond the UAW strike—as it should. Biden has faithfully represented the interests of American workers during his tenture. Trump, on the other hand, ignored workers during his tenure—a point that was underscored by Trump's ham-fisted attempt to upstage Biden by meeting with workers in Michigan on Wednesday.

Knowingly or not, Trump has chosen a “non-union” shop to promote workers’ rights in Michigan. The UAW views Trump's choice of a non-union shop as a slap in the face. One of the reasons the UAW is on strike is because the auto manufacturers are diverting union work to non-union shops—Trump's venue on Wednesday.

          The UAW strike raises complicated issues about the conversion to electric vehicles. The UAW sees that conversion as a threat because automakers are selecting “red states” to build new EV plants. Those states have anti-union laws that permit the auto manufacturers to pay lower wages. See Slate, Biden picket: The UAW strike is in part about electric cars. Here’s why.

          Biden anticipated the anti-union move by manufacturers, so he proposed a tax credit that applied to electric vehicles built at union plants. But Senator Manchin foiled that plan, as explained in Slate:

In late 2021, however, Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia announced his opposition to the bill’s proposed $4,500 federal tax credit for drivers who buy union-made EVs, effectively excising the measure from future climate legislation—even though it had the support of both the UAW and GM. 

          President Biden’s visit to a union picket line and his support for their wage demands is the first substantive confrontation between Biden and Trump in the 2024 campaign. Let’s see what tomorrow brings, but Trump's choice of venue shows that he just “doesn’t get it” when it comes to workers’ rights. If you know someone who works for a living (and who doesn’t!), make sure they know the facts!

Finally, the Supreme Court shuts down Alabama’s efforts at racial gerrymandering.

          In 2022, the Supreme Court issued a ruling that effectively ordered Alabama to create a second congressional district in which Black voters constitute a majority of the electorate. After that ruling, the Alabama legislature ignored the Supreme Court’s order and created a congressional map that packed most Black voters into a single district in violation of the Court’s ruling.

          A lawsuit challenged the second map by Alabama and a federal panel of three judges ruled that the second map was the product of racial gerrymandering and appointed a special master to draw new map that complied with the Supreme Court’s ruling. Alabama appealed that order to the Supreme Court, hoping that the Court would change its mind and allow Alabama’s racial gerrymandering to stand.

          On Tuesday, the Supreme Court refused to hear Alabama’s second appeal, effectively leaving in place the lower court’s order appointing a special master to draw a map with two “majority minority” districts in which Black voters constitute a majority of the electorate. See Vox (Ian Millhiser), The Supreme Court tells Alabama to shut up and obey its voting rights decision.

          The Supreme Court’s order denying review of Alabama’s appeal is significant for three reasons.

          First, as Ian Millhiser writes, “Tuesday’s orders suggest that the justices understand that they cannot allow a state to openly defy the Court’s decisions once those decisions are handed down.” While that conclusion should be obvious and uncontested, it was open to doubt before the Court’s ruling on Tuesday. The Court’s reactionary majority has created an atmosphere of lawlessness that encouraged the Alabama legislature to believe it could ignore an order of the Supreme Court. For the moment, the rule of law has held. That is a significant outcome that is not apparent in the one-sentence order issued by the Supreme Court.

          Second, Black voters in Alabama will finally obtain the representation that they have been denied by state legislators intent on perpetuating the Jim Crow era. That significant outcome is not apparent from the one-sentence order issued by the Supreme Court.

          Third, the likely outcome of the representation granted to Black voters in Alabama is that Democrats will gain another seat in the House in 2024.

          Any one of those reasons would be cause for celebration. Together, they represent a tremendous achievement for those who seek to ensure equal protection under the law and ensure the full promise of the Constitution to all Americans.

NY judge rules that Trump's business empire was a fraudulent enterprise.

          It has been accepted as common knowledge that the Trump Organizations ran roughshod over the law in New York for decades. New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a civil lawsuit under New York law against Trump, Don Jr., Eric Trump, and Allen Weisselberg for falsifying business records. (Ivanka Trump was a defendant in the complaint but was dismissed.) The Complaint is here: New York v. Trump et. al.

          On Tuesday, NY Justice Arthur Engoron granted partial summary judgment against Trump in favor of the State of New York, finding that the Trump Organization has been fraudulently manipulating asset values on the organization’s financial statements for a decade (or more). See Washington Post, N.Y. judge finds Trump committed fraud and sanctions his attorneys (Accessible to all.)

          If the order survives on appeal, it is the death knell for the Trump Organization and related entities in New York. The finding of fraud is bad enough. But Judge Engoron canceled the certificates that allow the Trump Organizations to conduct business in New York. (The Order is here: Decision and Order.)

          The order highlights the bad-faith litigation tactics of Trump's lawyers (who are sanctioned) in the following passage:

Exacerbating defendants' obstreperous conduct is their continued reliance on bogus arguments, in papers and oral argument. In defendants' world:

· rent-regulated apartments are worth the same as unregulated apartments;

· restricted land is worth the same as unrestricted land;

· restrictions can evaporate into thin air;

· a disclaimer by one party casting responsibility on another party exonerates the other party's lies;

· the Attorney General of the State of New York does not have capacity to sue or standing to sue (never mind all those cases where the Attorney General has sued successfully) under a statute expressly designed to provide that right; and

· square footage [is] subjective.

          The Trump entities are now under the supervision of a receiver, who will dissolve the Trump organizations and use the proceeds to satisfy the civil judgment to be awarded in a trial of the remaining issues not resolved by the order granting partial summary judgment.

          Trump has filed a separate proceeding to remove Justice Engoron from the case. Assuming he is not removed, Justice Engoron will serve as the factfinder on the amount of damages to be awarded (i.e., there is no jury in this case).

          If this decision stands, it is difficult to overstate the devastating effect it will have on Trump's business operations. To the extent those operating entities are covered by the lawsuit, they are now controlled by a third-party receiver whose job it will be to liquidate those entities to pay the civil judgment awarded by Justice Engoron. Even if Tump is able to delay the day of reckoning, his entire business empire is at risk. That leaves only his political fundraising as a source of funds for Trump. And while the source of those funds may be anonymous, their expenditures are subject to federal regulations.

          Combined with Trump's criminal jeopardy, the order granting partial summary judgment is a giant step forward in holding Trump accountable for his life of flouting the law.

Minor progress toward passing a budget.

          The GOP caucus in the House was able to commence debate on four spending bills (out of twelve) that it must pass to avoid a government shutdown. That and $3.50 will buy you a non-fat latte at Starbucks. It is not enough to avoid a shutdown. See The Hill, McCarthy gets small spending win, Senate advances shutdown solution.

          As noted in The Hill article above, the Senate is preparing to pass a “continuing resolution” to fund the government on the assumption that the House fails to pass twelve spending bills in the next five days. (A safe assumption.) The Senate’s spending bill is a rational approach that continues the status quo until Congress can pass a budget. It is doubtful that the House will agree to such a continuing resolution.

          In short, there are hints of progress, but a resolution is a long way off.

31st Street/Swing Left raising money for key Virginia races.

          I received this note from Jim S. of 31st Street/Swing Left, a longtime reader and friend of the newsletter:

The pitched battle for Virginia commenced with early voting last Friday. Countering Gov. Youngkin’s vast war chest, 31st St. Swing Left, along with partner Swing Blue Alliance are supporting eight key races that will determine the outcome in Virginia’s legislature. These races were selected based on voting history, financial data, polling, direct conversations with the campaigns and strategic need for funds. A substantial amount is directed for radio advertisements for Black candidates to reach out to key voters. Please help with direct contributions for this effort: 31st Street Support for Key 2023 VA State Legislature Races — Donate via ActBlue.

Concluding Thoughts.

          Former White House staffer Cassidy Hutchinson has been making the rounds promoting her book about her experiences as the “chief of staff” for Trump's Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. She appeared on Lawrence O’Donnell’s show on Tuesday evening for a truly remarkable interview by O’Donnell.

          There is much to be said about the courage of the 27-year old Hutchinson. Her decision to testify truthfully before the January 6 Committee may be the “but for” cause of the DOJ’s decision to expand its investigation into Donald Trump and, ultimately, to appoint special counsel Jack Smith.

          Hutchinson’s decision to tell the truth was exceptional, courageous, and remarkable. She deserves the gratitude and praise that are rightfully being heaped on her in each interview.

          And yet, she did something that should not be exceptional, courageous, and remarkable. She responded to a congressional committee in a way that most of us live our lives every day. She told the truth. True, she did so in spite of pressure from lawyers and powerful politicians (all men) who believe that the truth is expendable in the political quest for power.

          Truth was one of the earliest casualties of the Trump administration. Kellyanne Conway touted “alternative facts” in her defense of Trump's lies about the size of his inauguration audience. “Alternative facts” is simply another term for “lies.”

“Alternative facts” became accepted and commonplace in the Trump administration. They infected the entire Republican Party to the point that there is no objective meaning to anything. As Justice Engoron noted in his order granting partial summary judgment, in Trump's fantasy world, “square footage is subjective.”

          I do not mean to diminish what Cassidy Hutchinson did. But it is helpful to recognize that restoring order, decency, and honor is a short step back from Trump's world of fantasy and corruption. Hutchinson invited other witnesses to look at themselves in the mirror and ask whether they are happy with the person they must live with for the rest of their lives. If not, they can tell the truth, say what they remember, and abandon the notion of alternative facts. The path forward begins by agreeing in good faith on the facts and then telling the truth—a simple but powerful act. If we can do that, we can make tremendous progress in short order.

Talk to you tomorrow!

Postscript: My wife and I have returned to civilization from our remote cabin in the Sierras. She posted a dozen pictures on her blog with music. Take a break and enjoy the beauty of the Sierras! See Sunset in Mineral King 2023 (everydaywithjill.com).