Today’s Edition: What's the plan?

June 14, 2021

          As I viewed the state of American politics over the weekend, I was struck by the notion that the Biden Administration is unfolding along two parallel paths. In the first, the election of Joe Biden seems to have returned America to a semblance of normalcy. That view was on full display in Biden’s participation in the G-7 summit and upcoming meeting with Vladimir Putin. Biden was acting appropriately “presidential” and adhering to norms of international relations that have prevailed for a century. In the second, Republicans continue their unchecked efforts to erode the foundations of democracy by claiming that election results cannot be trusted—except when Republicans win. The lack of alarm and urgency by the Biden administration and Democratic leadership in response to the second path is concerning. I am concerned that as Biden experiences the first path, he and his leadership team are focused on that portion of the political landscape that seems normal while dismissing the lawless efforts of Republicans to undermine the next election. To be blunt, I don’t get it.

          On Sunday, Biden wrapped up his visit to the G-7 summit, which was a qualified success—the standard result for meetings of global leaders. For a good summary of the issues and outcomes, see CNN, “G7 2021: Takeaways from President Biden's first summit.” Biden declared that “America is back at the table” and was greeted warmly by G-7 leaders. French President Emmanuel Macron spoke for most attendees when he said, “It is great to have a US president who's part of the club and very willing to cooperate.” While Macron’s comment will outrage the MAGA crowd, the truth is that America will be more secure and prosperous as a global partner with other industrialized democracies. The unity irked China and Russia, both of whom were the subjects of the resolutions issued after the summit. China betrayed its insecurity when it issued a defensive statement in response to the G-7 resolutions. China said, “The days when global decisions were dictated by a small group of countries are long gone.”

          China was reacting to a statement in the final resolutions that criticized Beijing's human rights and economic abuses. Biden had pushed for stronger language, but the other members of the G-7 demurred. And although the resolutions criticized Russia for malign cyber activity, some members of the G-7 share a continent with Russia and must find a way to co-exist in peace. Biden claimed that he had nonetheless moved the G-7 to a more aggressive stance against autocratic regimes like Russia and China. Biden said,

          “Everyone at the table understood, and understands, both the seriousness and the challenges that we are up against and the responsibility of our proud democracies to step up and deliver for the rest of the world.”

          And then, there were the gaffes. Biden said “Libya” when referring to “Syria” in reference to containing Russian influence. He also seemed to endorse a suggestion by Putin to “exchange cybercriminals.” See NYPost, “Biden 'open' to Putin's offer to exchange cybercriminals.” Administration officials tried to walk back the remark by claiming that the press misinterpreted the word “exchange” to mean “exchange.” It was not a credible defense. It was a careless remark by Biden that was similar to Trump’s statement that he would allow Russia to interrogate U.S. citizens in exchange for the ability of the U.S. to interrogate Russian citizens. See The Hill, (7/18/18), “White House says Trump to discuss allowing Russia to question US citizens.” Oh, well. It wouldn’t be an international summit without a gaffe. Expect the right-wing media to have a field day with both comments.

          As Biden was generally succeeding on the global stage, Republicans were running amok at home. The damage from the malignant “audit” by the Arizona Senate Republicans continues to expand. The “audit center” in Arizona has become a resort destination for aspiring Republican anarchists. See Huffington Post, “Republicans Push To Export Absurd Arizona-Style Election Audits To Other States.” A month ago, the Department of Justice sent a polite note to Arizona Republicans running the audit, saying that allowing private individuals to handle the ballots was a violation of federal law. In response, Arizona Republican Senator Wendy Rogers tweeted to Garland, “You will not touch Arizona ballots or machines unless you want to spend time in an Arizona prison.” In response, Merrick Garland has done . . . nothing.

          Well, almost nothing. Garland did give a speech on Friday in which he said that the DOJ would protect voting rights. See NYTimes, “Garland Pledges Renewed Efforts to Protect Voting Rights.” Garland seemed to refer to the Arizona audit when he said that the DOJ would “scrutinize post-election audits to ensure they abide by federal statutory requirements to protect election records and avoid the intimidation of voters.” Until the DOJ follows Garland’s brave words with action, Republicans will do whatever they want—including threatening to imprison Garland. At the moment, no one seems to be worried about the long arm of the law under Merrick Garland’s tenure. Nor should they be. Read on.

          In another sadly predictable move, the Department of Justice is continuing to defend a lawsuit brought by congressional Democrats to disclose records of Trump’s financial dealings with the General Services Administration in the lease of Trump International Hotel in D.C. See WaPo, “Trump administration blocked Democrats from documents about his D.C. hotel, and Biden’s administration has, too.”  A federal district court ordered the GSA to turn over the documents, but the Biden administration is appealing that ruling. The documents sought by congressional Democrats relate to a public contract between a private citizen and the GSA, an agency of the federal government. The Department of Justice lost its way under Barr and is in sore need of leadership to redeem itself. Merrick Garland needs to step up.

          The disclosures relating to the DOJ spying on journalists and members of Congress keep coming. Over the weekend, the media reported that Don McGahn, White House Counsel, was also the subject of a subpoena for his phone metadata and a gag order that prevented Apple from notifying McGahn of the demand. See WaPo, “Trump’s Justice Department secretly sought data from Apple on Donald McGahn.” Don McGahn was counsel to the President—and Trump was spying on him. Such conduct is the stuff of madmen and dictators. Every American should be outraged, even if McGahn was one of the chief enablers of Donald Trump. We cannot live in a democracy where the Department of Justice is weaponized to spy on the perceived political adversaries of the president. (Trump was unhappy with McGahn for cooperating with Robert Mueller’s investigation of Trump. So, even though he was White House Counsel, Trump viewed McGahn as an adversary.)

          Merrick Garland’s response to the spying scandal continues to be tepid. Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco asked the DOJ Inspector General to investigate the subpoenas for phone records of journalists and members of Congress. See Business Insider, “DOJ's watchdog opens investigation into the Trump-era seizure of Democrats' phone data.” An investigation by the Inspector General is a good and necessary step, in part because it will be an independent examination of conduct by existing senior leaders in DOJ. But an Inspector General investigation is no substitute for leadership by Merrick Garland. At the moment, the American people reasonably believe that existing senior members of the DOJ authorized spying on journalists and members of Congress. It is a dereliction of duty for Garland to ignore the controversy. Garland is the chief law enforcement officer of the land. If he cannot be bothered to address a political corruption scandal that is far more serious than Watergate and involves senior officials currently working for the DOJ, then Merrick Garland isn’t the right person to lead the DOJ.

          I expect to receive emails from readers urging patience, arguing that Garland has a lot on his plate and needs time to address the many scandals of the Barr era. That’s fair. But only if Merrick Garland acknowledges that he is concerned about the problem and is working on it. The longer he remains silent, the stronger the inference that he doesn’t care about the problem and won’t do anything to address it. Remaining silent while subordinates and the Inspector General work on the problem isn’t a substitute for the leadership obligation that comes with the job of being the nation’s chief law enforcement officer.

Concluding Thoughts.

If you are still trying to figure out the theme of today’s newsletter, so am I. What worries me at the moment is this: If someone asked me, “What’s the plan for 2022 and who’s in charge?”, I would have a difficult time answering. Republicans are controlling the narrative at the moment, and there does not seem to be a focused response coming from Democrats. For starters, it would be helpful to know which congressional seats are most likely to flip from blue to red and from red to blue.  What is the Democratic message for 2022? Will Democrats run only on Biden’s accomplishments? The economy? Against Trumpism? See, e.g., NBCNews, “New Democratic focus groups find many voters aren't sure what the party stands for.”

          I know that I am not the only Democrat who is unclear on these basic points—because readers ask me these questions weekly. In truth, some of the answers to these questions are available—if you know where to look for them. During a moment of frustration and anxiety, I visited the website for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. I was surprised to find a listing of priority congressional districts that the DCCC is attempting to protect in 2022. See “2022 Frontline Members” at the DCCC site. The list includes 32 current Democratic Representatives who expect to face tough challenges in 2022. Check out the list to see if one of your favorite candidates needs your help. (You can contribute directly to the candidate; the list includes a link to each candidate’s campaign site. Or you can contribute to all candidates.)

          The Frontline Members list is a good start. But what about the flip side? What seats are Democrats going to take away from Republicans? And what’s the message? There must be really smart Democrats who are thinking about these issues, but they need a messaging program like the highly effective Lincoln Project that is directed to Democrats (rather than merely being an anti-Trump platform).

          Whatever the plan is, it does not include inaction. There are plenty of opportunities to volunteer and contribute. Do not wait for someone to tell you what to do. At the very least, educate yourself about your state and local races, your congressional representative, and your U.S. Senators. That’s plenty to keep you busy until someone in the Democratic Party steps forward with a plan and unifying message.

          Talk to you tomorrow!