thenation--2020-08-07--Believing ‘Wall Street Journal’ Op-Eds Can Be Deadly

In 1981 , Ben Bagdikian , a veteran journalist and former dean of the University of California , Berkeley , journalism school , tried to explain why The Wall Street Journal published an opinion section dominated by an almost lunatic fringe .
“ Executives and stockholders really do want to know the unpleasant truth about corporate life when it affects their careers or incomes .
At the same time , however , most of them are true believers in the rhetoric of free enterprise , ” he noted .
Therefore , by “ singing the grand old hymns of unfettered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporting the truth in its news pages , “ the Journal has it both ways.
” This was only moderately problematic when US politics was played on a field with center-left and center-right goalposts , though media critics often amused themselves by suggesting that any number of inaccuracies published on the opinion pages could have been easily avoided if their authors took the trouble to read their own newspaper .
Unfortunately , the Journal ‘ s editorial page helped mess up the game when Republican politicians started taking its arguments seriously .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for supply-side economics under President Ronald Reagan and ballooned with literally thousands of pages of conspiracy theories printed during Bill Clinton ’ s presidency .
Incrementally , thanks to the massive investments of billionaires like Rupert Murdoch ( now the Journal ‘ s owner ) , Richard Mellon Scaife , the Koch brothers , and the Mercer family , this sort of nuttiness became holy writ within the conservative punditocracy .
Under the stewardship of Paul Gigot , who took over the Journal ‘ s op-ed section in 2001 , the page has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservative movement—to the point that even fabulists like Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss no longer felt comfortable and decamped to pollute the pages of The New York Times .
Unlike the Times , however , the Journal ‘ s page , with just one centrist exception , often publishes only right-wingers .
Opinions may split between those who cheerlead for and those who chide the president .
But there is a discernible consistency : a commitment to owning the libs .
Today the threat posed by the Trump administration spreading coronavirus misinformation and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made publishing the president ’ s most enthusiastic supporters especially dangerous .
As the Times ‘ Senator Tom Cotton brouhaha demonstrated , journalists have pushed the issue of printing fascistic arguments on one ’ s op-ed page front and center .
Despite the legacy of live and let live across the news and opinion partition , the Journal ‘ s actual journalists took action in July .
About 280 signed a long letter to the paper ’ s publisher , Almar Latour , complaining that the opinion section ’ s “ lack of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disregard for evidence , undermine our readers ’ trust and our ability to gain credibility with sources.
” The letter had many examples , but a centerpiece was a column titled “ There Isn ’ t a Coronavirus ‘ Second Wave ' ” by Vice President Mike Pence , whose arguments were inconsistent with the government ’ s own figures when published and were thoroughly debunked by the Journal ‘ s news pages days later .
Latour issued an anodyne statement in response , saying , “ [ We ] remain deeply committed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opinion writing .
We cherish the unique contributions of our Pulitzer Prize–winning Opinion section to the Journal and to societal debate in the U.S. and beyond.
” The editorial board , sounding a lot like Weiss upon her departure from the Times , complained that it would not kowtow to what it called the “ wave of progressive cancel culture ” and argued that unlike those fraidy-cats at The New York Times ( or so it implied ) , “ our opinion pages offer an alternative to the uniform progressive views that dominate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Herein lies the dilemma that faces all serious mainstream media organizations : Take the Trump administration at its word , and you are not only disgracing yourself professionally by misinforming people ; you are also putting your readers ’ lives at risk .
But if you don ’ t do so , you are vulnerable to the incessant and aggressive working of the refs by right-wing figures who label any attempts to impose standards of truth telling as “ progressive cancel culture.
” For a few years after Murdoch ’ s purchase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2007 , the Journal ‘ s jewel-like news-gathering operations appeared at risk .
The mogul ’ s handpicked editor in chief , the British-born Gerard Baker , complained in 2017 of “ a fit of Trump-induced pearl-clutching among the journalistic elite ” and sought to steer the paper ’ s reporting in a pro-Trump direction .
That fear was mitigated when Baker was replaced by the veteran journalist Matt Murray in 2018 and relegated first to the news pages and , after his May 15 column “ The Often Distorted Reality of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the opinion pages .
An earlier letter to Latour from staff members argued that the column not only posited “ the highly controversial argument that black people commit more hate crimes than white people ” but also used “ only his own single weighted statistical calculation , with no attribution or context ” to support it .
I do not exaggerate when I say that the result of believing the Journal ‘ s editorials can be death .
Pence ’ s op-ed , for instance , used false statistics to encourage complacency in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ At least three academic studies have pointed to an increased number of Covid-19 cases where viewership of Fox News , Murdoch ’ s other famous property , is unusually high .
A direct causal relationship is difficult to establish , as the same people who are likely to be lied to by right-wing pundits might have refused to take proper precautions anyway .
But it is enough to say that misinformation about the virus is a serious public health risk , and we should cheer on the journalists rising up within their institutions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ willing to be a party to it .

This article appears in the August 24/31, 2020 issue.
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
In 1981, Ben Bagdikian, a veteran journalist and former dean of the University of California, Berkeley, journalism school, tried to explain why The Wall Street Journal published an opinion section dominated by an almost lunatic fringe. “Executives and stockholders really do want to know the unpleasant truth about corporate life when it affects their careers or incomes. At the same time, however, most of them are true believers in the rhetoric of free enterprise,” he noted. Therefore, by “singing the grand old hymns of unfettered laissez-faire on the editorial pages” while reporting the truth in its news pages, “the Journal has it both ways.”
This was only moderately problematic when US politics was played on a field with center-left and center-right goalposts, though media critics often amused themselves by suggesting that any number of inaccuracies published on the opinion pages could have been easily avoided if their authors took the trouble to read their own newspaper. Unfortunately, the Journal‘s editorial page helped mess up the game when Republican politicians started taking its arguments seriously. It began with the paper’s campaign for supply-side economics under President Ronald Reagan and ballooned with literally thousands of pages of conspiracy theories printed during Bill Clinton’s presidency. Incrementally, thanks to the massive investments of billionaires like Rupert Murdoch (now the Journal‘s owner), Richard Mellon Scaife, the Koch brothers, and the Mercer family, this sort of nuttiness became holy writ within the conservative punditocracy.
Under the stewardship of Paul Gigot, who took over the Journal‘s op-ed section in 2001, the page has lurched rightward with the rest of the conservative movement—to the point that even fabulists like Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss no longer felt comfortable and decamped to pollute the pages of The New York Times. Unlike the Times, however, the Journal‘s page, with just one centrist exception, often publishes only right-wingers. Opinions may split between those who cheerlead for and those who chide the president. But there is a discernible consistency: a commitment to owning the libs.
Today the threat posed by the Trump administration spreading coronavirus misinformation and violently repressing Black Lives Matter protests has made publishing the president’s most enthusiastic supporters especially dangerous. As the Times‘ Senator Tom Cotton brouhaha demonstrated, journalists have pushed the issue of printing fascistic arguments on one’s op-ed page front and center. Despite the legacy of live and let live across the news and opinion partition, the Journal‘s actual journalists took action in July. About 280 signed a long letter to the paper’s publisher, Almar Latour, complaining that the opinion section’s “lack of fact-checking and transparency, and its apparent disregard for evidence, undermine our readers’ trust and our ability to gain credibility with sources.” The letter had many examples, but a centerpiece was a column titled “There Isn’t a Coronavirus ‘Second Wave'” by Vice President Mike Pence, whose arguments were inconsistent with the government’s own figures when published and were thoroughly debunked by the Journal‘s news pages days later. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
Latour issued an anodyne statement in response, saying, “[We] remain deeply committed to fact-based and clearly labeled reporting and opinion writing. We cherish the unique contributions of our Pulitzer Prize–winning Opinion section to the Journal and to societal debate in the U.S. and beyond.” The editorial board, sounding a lot like Weiss upon her departure from the Times, complained that it would not kowtow to what it called the “wave of progressive cancel culture” and argued that unlike those fraidy-cats at The New York Times (or so it implied), “our opinion pages offer an alternative to the uniform progressive views that dominate nearly all of today’s media.”
Herein lies the dilemma that faces all serious mainstream media organizations: Take the Trump administration at its word, and you are not only disgracing yourself professionally by misinforming people; you are also putting your readers’ lives at risk. But if you don’t do so, you are vulnerable to the incessant and aggressive working of the refs by right-wing figures who label any attempts to impose standards of truth telling as “progressive cancel culture.”
For a few years after Murdoch’s purchase of the paper from the Bancroft family in 2007, the Journal‘s jewel-like news-gathering operations appeared at risk. The mogul’s handpicked editor in chief, the British-born Gerard Baker, complained in 2017 of “a fit of Trump-induced pearl-clutching among the journalistic elite” and sought to steer the paper’s reporting in a pro-Trump direction. That fear was mitigated when Baker was replaced by the veteran journalist Matt Murray in 2018 and relegated first to the news pages and, after his May 15 column “The Often Distorted Reality of Hate Crime in America,” to the opinion pages. An earlier letter to Latour from staff members argued that the column not only posited “the highly controversial argument that black people commit more hate crimes than white people” but also used “only his own single weighted statistical calculation, with no attribution or context” to support it.
I do not exaggerate when I say that the result of believing the Journal‘s editorials can be death. Pence’s op-ed, for instance, used false statistics to encourage complacency in places experiencing spikes in coronavirus infections. At least three academic studies have pointed to an increased number of Covid-19 cases where viewership of Fox News, Murdoch’s other famous property, is unusually high. A direct causal relationship is difficult to establish, as the same people who are likely to be lied to by right-wing pundits might have refused to take proper precautions anyway. But it is enough to say that misinformation about the virus is a serious public health risk, and we should cheer on the journalists rising up within their institutions to insist that they are no longer willing to be a party to it.


thenation--2020-08-07--Gun Lovers Should Be Thanking Tish James for Suing the NRA

New York Attorney General Letitia James announced a blockbuster lawsuit yesterday calling for the dissolution of the National Rifle Association .
The charges follow an investigation led by her office into the NRA ’ s alleged financial misdealings .
The lawsuit accuses NRA leaders of violating state and federal laws and diverting millions of dollars meant for the NRA ’ s operations into their personal coffers .
Longtime NRA chief executive Wayne LaPierre is a named defendant in the lawsuit , along with three other current or former high-ranking NRA officials.1 The NRA , a nonprofit organization incorporated in New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corruption for some time .
In 2018 , accused Russian spy Maria Butina pleaded guilty to engaging in a conspiracy against the United States .
Her vector for gaining influence in Republican circles allegedly came through the NRA .
In 2019 , Oliver North , then the NRA president , was pushed out of the organization after losing a power struggle with LaPierre .
North has alleged rampant corruption in the organization.2 James has accused LaPierre of “ looting ” the NRA , detailing extravagant expenses : a $ 17 million personal retirement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report to his board , private jets for his wife and niece , and trips to the Bahamas , paid for with NRA funds , to hang out on a private yacht named Illusions—which is what courts should have called LaPierre ’ s constitutional theories .
All told , James said the actions of LaPierre and others in leadership contributed to the loss of $ 64 million of NRA net assets in just three years.3 A potentially major breakthrough in the investigation occurred in February of this year when the NRA lost its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ackerman McQueen from releasing documents to New York ’ s AG.4 As the top prosecutor in the state where the NRA is incorporated , James is in the best legal position to address the organization ’ s alleged corruption .
She alone has the legal authority to sue for the dissolution of the NRA , thanks to New York state ’ s laws governing not-for-profit corporations .
Here ’ s the statute , NYCL Section 1101 ( a ) ( 2 ) :5 If I may put that into language the NRA can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take out Bambi ’ s mom.7 James , a Democrat , was elected to her post in 2018 , becoming the first Black woman to hold the top legal job in New York state .
There is a world in which a Democratic attorney general who filed a lawsuit to protect the largely Republican voters defrauded by an alleged charity would be met with broad bipartisan support .
There is a world in which conservatives would applaud a liberal attorney who has done the hard investigative work to back up Oliver North.8 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such a reasonable world ; we live on a warming ring of hell .
James ’ s announcement was met with so many baseless criticisms that I briefly thought she was another Black woman in the running to be Joe Biden ’ s VP pick.9 Complaints came from the left , right , and center .
Some nonlawyers were disappointed James didn ’ t show up to dog-walk Donald Trump ’ s adult children .
Some Twitter lawyers accused her of using the law to influence the election .
Liberal voices expressed fear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while right-wing pundits lost their ever-loving minds and accused James of trying to suppress not just the Second Amendment but also the First.10 Did I mention that the NRA allegedly paid Ackerman McQueen $ 70 million over two years for “ advertising ” that was really just a front for executive travel and entertainment , as well as personal hair and makeup services for LaPierre ’ s wife ?
James is not coming for people ’ s guns or speech in support of guns ; she ’ s coming for LaPierre ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but since so many people have been trained not to put “ NRA ” and “ accountability ” in the same sentence , it ’ s worth taking a few moments to answer the most persistent false narratives about this legal action.12 James teased us with a major announcement , but it didn ’ t have anything to do with Trump .
Boo .
Over on liberal Twitter , there was a lot of disappointment that James ’ s lawsuit wasn ’ t aimed at Trump .
The New York AG ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the night before the announcement , promising a “ major ” “ national ” story .
The press release came only a couple of hours after Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance announced that Deutsche Bank , Trump ’ s lender , had been cooperating with his office for months .
This , somehow , led many to believe that James had something major to unveil about ongoing investigations into Trump , Trump Inc. , or the Trump family.13 I am very sorry that more people don ’ t appreciate the distinct yet overlapping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state attorney general , a United States Attorney , and the US attorney general .
I ’ m not judging : Which office wields what prosecutorial power over whom in our legal system is legitimately confusing .
They teach this stuff in law school because you can ’ t pick up this knowledge just from reading John Grisham novels.14 But it ’ s not James ’ s fault that most people don ’ t know what she does .
The only active investigation into Trump Inc. that we know about is being run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He ’ s looking into state crimes , not civil violations .
I also have hope that there is a separate , ongoing criminal investigation into Trump-related federal crimes being led by the prosecutors in the Southern District of New York , but I don ’ t know that there is.15 What I do know is that James ’ s office is looking into civil violations that take place in New York .
Given what her office can do , calling for the dissolution of a powerful , 149-year-old organization—one , moreover , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definition of a constitutional amendment—qualifies as major national news .
This wasn ’ t a tease .
This is huge.16 There were a number of lawyers with solid objective bona fides lamenting that this lawsuit was a political attack by an ambitious prosecutor who ’ d like to run for higher office someday .
That ’ s a weird charge to make when you consider that every single lawsuit brought by a state attorney general can be called political in some fashion or other .
State AGs are , after all , elected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t sue a puppy mill without at least considering that voters like puppies .
Remarking that an AG ’ s lawsuit is political is , on its face , no more insightful than remarking that a book seems to contain a lot of words.17 To criticize the NRA lawsuit as politically motivated , good-faith critics need to argue that it ’ s somehow more political than what any AG normally does every day .
And there ’ s just no evidence for that with this lawsuit .
Some people are jumping on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ terrorist organization ” in 2018 .
But she didn ’ t sue it for terrorism .
She didn ’ t sue it for mass murder .
She sued it for corruption .
Again , rumors of massive corruption have been circling the NRA for a couple of years now.18 I ’ m sure there are plenty of organizations James disagrees with that manage to avoid defrauding the public while advocating for their trash views.19 James ’ s investigation was long and appears to have been thorough .
People can complain about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the general election .
But the presumption is that charges are announced when they ’ re ready , and we ’ re kind of always close to one election or another .
This investigation was stymied at various points by NRA delay tactics , which might have slowed the filing of charges .
Moreover , we ’ ll never know if James might have been able to announce this lawsuit earlier , perhaps after Ackerman McQueen turned over documents , if not for an unprecedented global pandemic that rocked New York soon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ploy failed.20 What did people want James to do ?
Hold the charges she was ready to file until after the election in November ?
Wouldn ’ t that involve messing with the timeline of lawsuits for political , as opposed to legal , motivations ?
21 The James announcement isn ’ t an October surprise .
I know that because it ’ s still August .
I ’ m old enough to remember when Republican FBI chief James Comey announced that he was renewing an investigation into Hillary Clinton ’ s e-mails @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 2016 , 11 days before the presidential election.22 If Vance perp-walks Jared Kushner on Halloween this year , we can revisit this discussion on whether Democratic prosecutors are unduly motivated by politics .
Until then , spare me your thoughts on what untoward political influence looks like.23 This lawsuit will hurt Democratic candidates running in purple states because white guys love the NRA .
Boo .
Apparently , there are some Democrats in swing states who are worried that this lawsuit to dissolve the NRA will push gun-loving Republicans and independents back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s possible , but if it happens , it will be because of a failure of Democratic messaging .
I can not say enough : This lawsuit seeks to defend NRA members from leadership that has stolen their money .
James is not holding the NRA liable for the deaths of children in school shootings .
The lawsuit does not seek to change the level of gun regulation in New York state or anywhere else .
She ’ s accusing the NRA of persistent fraud .
She ’ s accusing it of taking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so it could fight for more guns in more places and using it to fund LaPierre ’ s lavish lifestyle instead.25 The Deaths of 150,000 Americans Are on Trump ’ s Hands There Are Literally No Good Options for Educating Our Kids This Fall Many NRA members might not believe that James is doing what her lawsuit says she ’ s doing , but shouldn ’ t Democrats at least try to make that argument before running for the hills ?
Shouldn ’ t Democrats at least try to explain what they stand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Fox News characterization of their views ?
Convince the voters you are right ; don ’ t criticize the Black woman for being right.26 Even if the doomsayers are correct and this lawsuit irrevocably angers white gun owners who were thinking of voting for Biden , so what ?
I ’ ve explained before : Biden does not need aggrieved white guys to win this election .
Barack Obama told Pennsylvania voters , to their faces , that they “ cling to their guns and religion.
” He lost the primary there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people there in the general election to John McCain .
But he won Pennsylvania by 10 points .
I don ’ t know if Biden will win Pennsylvania this fall , but either way , it ’ s not going to have anything to do with Tish James.27 The criticisms leveled at James ’ s office don ’ t make a lot of sense .
She has the legal authority to bring down a nonprofit organization incorporated in her state for its suspected and much-discussed corruption .
She ’ s done a full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dealings—which appears to have revealed systemic fraudulence victimizing the group ’ s supporters .
At some point , these allegations will be heard in a New York court.28 I ’ m sending my thoughts and prayers to the NRA during these difficult times.29

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
New York Attorney General Letitia James announced a blockbuster lawsuit yesterday calling for the dissolution of the National Rifle Association. The charges follow an investigation led by her office into the NRA’s alleged financial misdealings. The lawsuit accuses NRA leaders of violating state and federal laws and diverting millions of dollars meant for the NRA’s operations into their personal coffers. Longtime NRA chief executive Wayne LaPierre is a named defendant in the lawsuit, along with three other current or former high-ranking NRA officials.1
The NRA, a nonprofit organization incorporated in New York state, has been suspected of corruption for some time. In 2018, accused Russian spy Maria Butina pleaded guilty to engaging in a conspiracy against the United States. Her vector for gaining influence in Republican circles allegedly came through the NRA. In 2019, Oliver North, then the NRA president, was pushed out of the organization after losing a power struggle with LaPierre. North has alleged rampant corruption in the organization.2
James has accused LaPierre of “looting” the NRA, detailing extravagant expenses: a $17 million personal retirement fund for LaPierre that he did not report to his board, private jets for his wife and niece, and trips to the Bahamas, paid for with NRA funds, to hang out on a private yacht named Illusions—which is what courts should have called LaPierre’s constitutional theories. All told, James said the actions of LaPierre and others in leadership contributed to the loss of $64 million of NRA net assets in just three years.3
A potentially major breakthrough in the investigation occurred in February of this year when the NRA lost its case to prevent its former advertising agency Ackerman McQueen from releasing documents to New York’s AG.4
As the top prosecutor in the state where the NRA is incorporated, James is in the best legal position to address the organization’s alleged corruption. She alone has the legal authority to sue for the dissolution of the NRA, thanks to New York state’s laws governing not-for-profit corporations. Here’s the statute, NYCL Section 1101(a)(2):5
If I may put that into language the NRA can understand: That statute has enough firepower to take out Bambi’s mom.7 Current Issue View our current issue
James, a Democrat, was elected to her post in 2018, becoming the first Black woman to hold the top legal job in New York state. There is a world in which a Democratic attorney general who filed a lawsuit to protect the largely Republican voters defrauded by an alleged charity would be met with broad bipartisan support. There is a world in which conservatives would applaud a liberal attorney who has done the hard investigative work to back up Oliver North.8
Unfortunately, we do not live in such a reasonable world; we live on a warming ring of hell. James’s announcement was met with so many baseless criticisms that I briefly thought she was another Black woman in the running to be Joe Biden’s VP pick.9
Complaints came from the left, right, and center. Some nonlawyers were disappointed James didn’t show up to dog-walk Donald Trump’s adult children. Some Twitter lawyers accused her of using the law to influence the election. Liberal voices expressed fear that this would galvanize the gun-loving right, while right-wing pundits lost their ever-loving minds and accused James of trying to suppress not just the Second Amendment but also the First.10
Did I mention that the NRA allegedly paid Ackerman McQueen $70 million over two years for “advertising” that was really just a front for executive travel and entertainment, as well as personal hair and makeup services for LaPierre’s wife? James is not coming for people’s guns or speech in support of guns; she’s coming for LaPierre’s slush fund.11
These criticisms are bunk, but since so many people have been trained not to put “NRA” and “accountability” in the same sentence, it’s worth taking a few moments to answer the most persistent false narratives about this legal action.12
James teased us with a major announcement, but it didn’t have anything to do with Trump. Boo.
Over on liberal Twitter, there was a lot of disappointment that James’s lawsuit wasn’t aimed at Trump. The New York AG’s office sent out a press release the night before the announcement, promising a “major” “national” story. The press release came only a couple of hours after Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance announced that Deutsche Bank, Trump’s lender, had been cooperating with his office for months. This, somehow, led many to believe that James had something major to unveil about ongoing investigations into Trump, Trump Inc., or the Trump family.13
I am very sorry that more people don’t appreciate the distinct yet overlapping powers of a district attorney, a state attorney general, a United States Attorney, and the US attorney general. I’m not judging: Which office wields what prosecutorial power over whom in our legal system is legitimately confusing. They teach this stuff in law school because you can’t pick up this knowledge just from reading John Grisham novels.14
But it’s not James’s fault that most people don’t know what she does. The only active investigation into Trump Inc. that we know about is being run out of Vance’s office. He’s looking into state crimes, not civil violations. I also have hope that there is a separate, ongoing criminal investigation into Trump-related federal crimes being led by the prosecutors in the Southern District of New York, but I don’t know that there is.15
What I do know is that James’s office is looking into civil violations that take place in New York. Given what her office can do, calling for the dissolution of a powerful, 149-year-old organization—one, moreover, that has managed to change the very definition of a constitutional amendment—qualifies as major national news. This wasn’t a tease. This is huge.16
It’s a political lawsuit designed to influence the upcoming election. Boo.
There were a number of lawyers with solid objective bona fides lamenting that this lawsuit was a political attack by an ambitious prosecutor who’d like to run for higher office someday. That’s a weird charge to make when you consider that every single lawsuit brought by a state attorney general can be called political in some fashion or other. Most state AGs are, after all, elected politicians. A state AG doesn’t sue a puppy mill without at least considering that voters like puppies. Remarking that an AG’s lawsuit is political is, on its face, no more insightful than remarking that a book seems to contain a lot of words.17 The Second Amendment It’s Time to Repeal—and Replace—the Second Amendment Elie Mystal
To criticize the NRA lawsuit as politically motivated, good-faith critics need to argue that it’s somehow more political than what any AG normally does every day. And there’s just no evidence for that with this lawsuit. Some people are jumping on the fact that James called the NRA a “terrorist organization” in 2018. But she didn’t sue it for terrorism. She didn’t sue it for mass murder. She sued it for corruption. Again, rumors of massive corruption have been circling the NRA for a couple of years now.18
I’m sure there are plenty of organizations James disagrees with that manage to avoid defrauding the public while advocating for their trash views.19
James’s investigation was long and appears to have been thorough. People can complain about the timing of the announcement, relatively close to the general election. But the presumption is that charges are announced when they’re ready, and we’re kind of always close to one election or another. This investigation was stymied at various points by NRA delay tactics, which might have slowed the filing of charges. Moreover, we’ll never know if James might have been able to announce this lawsuit earlier, perhaps after Ackerman McQueen turned over documents, if not for an unprecedented global pandemic that rocked New York soon after the NRA’s last stalling ploy failed.20
What did people want James to do? Hold the charges she was ready to file until after the election in November? Wouldn’t that involve messing with the timeline of lawsuits for political, as opposed to legal, motivations?21
The James announcement isn’t an October surprise. I know that because it’s still August. I’m old enough to remember when Republican FBI chief James Comey announced that he was renewing an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s e-mails on [checks notes] October 28, 2016, 11 days before the presidential election.22
If Vance perp-walks Jared Kushner on Halloween this year, we can revisit this discussion on whether Democratic prosecutors are unduly motivated by politics. Until then, spare me your thoughts on what untoward political influence looks like.23
This lawsuit will hurt Democratic candidates running in purple states because white guys love the NRA. Boo.
Apparently, there are some Democrats in swing states who are worried that this lawsuit to dissolve the NRA will push gun-loving Republicans and independents back into the arms of Trump.24
That’s possible, but if it happens, it will be because of a failure of Democratic messaging. I cannot say enough: This lawsuit seeks to defend NRA members from leadership that has stolen their money. James is not holding the NRA liable for the deaths of children in school shootings. The lawsuit does not seek to change the level of gun regulation in New York state or anywhere else. She’s accusing the NRA of persistent fraud. She’s accusing it of taking money people gave to the group presumably so it could fight for more guns in more places and using it to fund LaPierre’s lavish lifestyle instead.25 More from Mystal The Deaths of 150,000 Americans Are on Trump’s Hands Elie Mystal There Are Literally No Good Options for Educating Our Kids This Fall Elie Mystal America Doesn’t Deserve to Have Baseball Back Elie Mystal
Many NRA members might not believe that James is doing what her lawsuit says she’s doing, but shouldn’t Democrats at least try to make that argument before running for the hills? Shouldn’t Democrats at least try to explain what they stand for, instead of immediately capitulating to the Fox News characterization of their views? Convince the voters you are right; don’t criticize the Black woman for being right.26
Even if the doomsayers are correct and this lawsuit irrevocably angers white gun owners who were thinking of voting for Biden, so what? I’ve explained before: Biden does not need aggrieved white guys to win this election. Barack Obama told Pennsylvania voters, to their faces, that they “cling to their guns and religion.” He lost the primary there to Hillary Clinton. He lost white people there in the general election to John McCain. But he won Pennsylvania by 10 points. I don’t know if Biden will win Pennsylvania this fall, but either way, it’s not going to have anything to do with Tish James.27
The criticisms leveled at James’s office don’t make a lot of sense. She has the legal authority to bring down a nonprofit organization incorporated in her state for its suspected and much-discussed corruption. She’s done a full investigation into that nonprofit’s financial dealings—which appears to have revealed systemic fraudulence victimizing the group’s supporters. At some point, these allegations will be heard in a New York court.28
I’m sending my thoughts and prayers to the NRA during these difficult times.
Clarification: An earlier version of this article stated that attorneys general are elected politicians. While that is true in most cases, seven states do not choose their AGs via popular vote but by appointment, often by the governor, or election by the state legislature. The article has been updated to reflect this fact.29


thenation--2020-08-07--Progressives Are Rallying Behind Karen Bass for VP

More than 300 progressive Democratic National Convention delegates from more than three dozen states are signaling to presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden that they want him to choose Congressional Black Caucus ( CBC ) chair Karen Bass as his running mate .
“ We , delegates to the DNC for Joe Biden , Bernie Sanders , and others , believe Congresswoman Karen Bass is the best choice among Vice Presidential candidates under consideration to help unify our party and move our nation forward , ” reads the statement that was circulated Friday .
“ We urge Vice President Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Bass , a veteran activist and former speaker of the California State Assembly who has represented that state in the House of Representatives since 2011 , has emerged in the late stages of the vetting process as a serious contender for a place on Biden ’ s ticket .
Since then , the Californian has been the target of whisper campaigns , opposition research dumps , and media hits that seek to portray her as too radical or controversial for a place on the ticket .
But the delegates say Bass is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that needs to expand its base of support .
“ Karen Bass is a builder—of multiethnic and multigenerational coalitions which stand the test of time , ” says Dolores Huerta , the cofounder of the National Farmworkers Association , which later became the United Farm Workers .
“ In these chaotic times , Joe Biden needs a tested and proven partner who can help him unite the country and bridge the divides others have sought to deepen.
” Huerta backed California Senator Kamala Harris , another VP prospect , for the party ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civil rights and economic justice activist has been talking up Bass in recent weeks , noting that the CBC chair has a long record of working on the domestic health care , jobs , and justice issues where Biden will need a strong partner .
“ Karen has never been a self-promoter , so probably a lot of people don ’ t know who she is , ” she explained in a recent interview with Payday Report , “ but people in my world , the activist world , we know who Karen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Year for # SquadPolitics .
Just Ask Cori Bush and Rashida Tlaib .
The President ’ s Damned Lies Are Killing Us As the convention approaches and Biden closes in on a choice , there have been reports that Harris , a former prosecutor , and former Obama administration national security adviser Susan Rice , another candidate favored by centrists and foreign policy insiders , have emerged as front-runners .
But Bass , who recently led the successful House push for the “ George Floyd Justice in Policing Act , ” remains in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sense that adding her to the ticket would excite supporters of Sanders and economic , social , and racial justice activists .
Former Ohio state senator Nina Turner , a cochair of the Sanders campaign whose name has been raised by the Vermont senator ’ s backers as a vice-presidential prospect , signed the pro-Bass statement .
“ Congresswoman Bass would make an excellent vice president , ” says Turner .
“ Her commitment to the grassroots is evident in her work from activist to the California legislature to the Congress .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ especially during turbulent times , and this skill set is absolutely needed in this critical moment in our nation ’ s history .
Moreover , she brings a strong progressive voice to the table that speaks to the future of America.
” While enthusiasm for Bass has grown among progressives , the congresswoman has taken explicit hits from Republicans and subtler jabs from centrist Democrats .
Media reports have tried to make a big deal about a speech she gave , as a state elected official , at the opening of Church of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bass to point out that she continues to “ proudly worship at First New Christian Fellowship Baptist Church in South LA.
” But the biggest hits have involved old-school Red baiting—with frequent references to the fact that Bass worked with the Venceremos Brigades that traveled to Cuba in the 1970s to help construct homes and medical facilities .
She ’ s also been criticized for adding a brief reflection on Oneil Marion Cannon , a longtime LA activist who was active in the Communist Party , to the Congressional Record after Cannon ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on an opportunity to paint Bass as a Castro supporter , and a communist , in particular to Cuban Americans in swing states like Florida , ” notes The Guardian , which adds , “ Bass argues her position on Cuba ‘ is really no different than the position of the Obama administration.
’ She accompanied Obama in 2016 on his historic visit to the country .
Bass has also stressed that she is not a communist , but said she appreciated Cannon ’ s work for his community in Los Angeles and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brown candidates.
” The Castro hit is a sly jab at Bass , as Democratic strategists always fret about how to appeal to Cuban-American voters in the closely contested state of Florida .
But the list of delegates calling on Biden to choose Bass includes Floridians , including Jessica Lauren Hernandez , a Cuban-American Sanders delegate , who says , “ I think that for Cuban-American families like mine , the fact that she actually cares about the people of Cuba and wants a better relationship with the country can help Biden win @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Cuba , I want an American government that will actually care to improve the relations between the countries.
” “ Young people and progressives in Florida like me would be fired up to have Karen Bass on the ticket .
Karen Bass is someone that is receptive and would deeply care about my community , ” says Hernandez .
That ’ s a point Kai Newkirk , a Sanders delegate from Arizona who helped organize the pro-Bass statement , says Biden and others in the party need to recognize .
“ No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ breadth of support , ” says Newkirk .
“ Joe Biden and all who want to unify the party should take that to heart.
” The cochair of the California delegation , which is the largest that will participate in this month ’ s convention , is Representative Ro Khanna , a Sanders backer who early in the vetting process spoke up for another former presidential candidate , Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren .
Khanna says Biden should recognize that Republicans are attacking Bass because they recognize she could strengthen the ticket .
Even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Warren , Khanna told me that “ Karen Bass would be extraordinary in healing our nation at this time .
Her commitment to Medicare for All , racial justice , and moving beyond colonialism in Africa come from deep moral commitments .
She is one of the nicest people in Congress and works well with Republicans and Democrats .
She is principled but also understands the art of compromise .
I believe many independents and suburban voters would be drawn to her because of her story , character , and temperament .
”

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
More than 300 progressive Democratic National Convention delegates from more than three dozen states are signaling to presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden that they want him to choose Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) chair Karen Bass as his running mate. “We, delegates to the DNC for Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and others, believe Congresswoman Karen Bass is the best choice among Vice Presidential candidates under consideration to help unify our party and move our nation forward,” reads the statement that was circulated Friday. “We urge Vice President Biden to choose her to join the ticket.”
Bass, a veteran activist and former speaker of the California State Assembly who has represented that state in the House of Representatives since 2011, has emerged in the late stages of the vetting process as a serious contender for a place on Biden’s ticket. Since then, the Californian has been the target of whisper campaigns, opposition research dumps, and media hits that seek to portray her as too radical or controversial for a place on the ticket. But the delegates say Bass is precisely the right candidate for a party that needs to expand its base of support.
“Karen Bass is a builder—of multiethnic and multigenerational coalitions which stand the test of time,” says Dolores Huerta, the cofounder of the National Farmworkers Association, which later became the United Farm Workers. “In these chaotic times, Joe Biden needs a tested and proven partner who can help him unite the country and bridge the divides others have sought to deepen.”
Huerta backed California Senator Kamala Harris, another VP prospect, for the party’s presidential nomination. But the veteran civil rights and economic justice activist has been talking up Bass in recent weeks, noting that the CBC chair has a long record of working on the domestic health care, jobs, and justice issues where Biden will need a strong partner. “Karen has never been a self-promoter, so probably a lot of people don’t know who she is,” she explained in a recent interview with Payday Report, “but people in my world, the activist world, we know who Karen Bass is.” More From John Nichols A GOP Debate Without Trump Is the Definition of Pointlessness August 11, 2023 A Win for Abortion Rights, a Win for Democracy: Ohio Voters Reject Issue 1 August 9, 2023 The Biggest Threat to Donald Trump Could Be the Constitution Itself August 4, 2023
As the convention approaches and Biden closes in on a choice, there have been reports that Harris, a former prosecutor, and former Obama administration national security adviser Susan Rice, another candidate favored by centrists and foreign policy insiders, have emerged as front-runners. But Bass, who recently led the successful House push for the “George Floyd Justice in Policing Act,” remains in contention—at least in part because of a sense that adding her to the ticket would excite supporters of Sanders and economic, social, and racial justice activists. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
Former Ohio state senator Nina Turner, a cochair of the Sanders campaign whose name has been raised by the Vermont senator’s backers as a vice-presidential prospect, signed the pro-Bass statement. “Congresswoman Bass would make an excellent vice president,” says Turner. “Her commitment to the grassroots is evident in her work from activist to the California legislature to the Congress. She has a record of building coalitions, especially during turbulent times, and this skill set is absolutely needed in this critical moment in our nation’s history. Moreover, she brings a strong progressive voice to the table that speaks to the future of America.”
While enthusiasm for Bass has grown among progressives, the congresswoman has taken explicit hits from Republicans and subtler jabs from centrist Democrats. Media reports have tried to make a big deal about a speech she gave, as a state elected official, at the opening of Church of Scientology’s headquarters in Los Angeles—leading Bass to point out that she continues to “proudly worship at First New Christian Fellowship Baptist Church in South LA.” But the biggest hits have involved old-school Red baiting—with frequent references to the fact that Bass worked with the Venceremos Brigades that traveled to Cuba in the 1970s to help construct homes and medical facilities. She’s also been criticized for adding a brief reflection on Oneil Marion Cannon, a longtime LA activist who was active in the Communist Party, to the Congressional Record after Cannon’s death. Current Issue View our current issue
“Republicans have seized on an opportunity to paint Bass as a Castro supporter, and a communist, in particular to Cuban Americans in swing states like Florida,” notes The Guardian, which adds, “Bass argues her position on Cuba ‘is really no different than the position of the Obama administration.’ She accompanied Obama in 2016 on his historic visit to the country. Bass has also stressed that she is not a communist, but said she appreciated Cannon’s work for his community in Los Angeles and his commitment to campaigning for Black and brown candidates.”
The Castro hit is a sly jab at Bass, as Democratic strategists always fret about how to appeal to Cuban-American voters in the closely contested state of Florida. But the list of delegates calling on Biden to choose Bass includes Floridians, including Jessica Lauren Hernandez, a Cuban-American Sanders delegate, who says, “I think that for Cuban-American families like mine, the fact that she actually cares about the people of Cuba and wants a better relationship with the country can help Biden win here. As someone that has family in Cuba, I want an American government that will actually care to improve the relations between the countries.” The Short List Progressives Have a VP Short list: Barbara Lee, Nina Turner, Karen Bass John Nichols
“Young people and progressives in Florida like me would be fired up to have Karen Bass on the ticket. Karen Bass is someone that is receptive and would deeply care about my community,” says Hernandez. That’s a point Kai Newkirk, a Sanders delegate from Arizona who helped organize the pro-Bass statement, says Biden and others in the party need to recognize. “No other VP candidate has Bass’s breadth of support,” says Newkirk. “Joe Biden and all who want to unify the party should take that to heart.”
The cochair of the California delegation, which is the largest that will participate in this month’s convention, is Representative Ro Khanna, a Sanders backer who early in the vetting process spoke up for another former presidential candidate, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren. Khanna says Biden should recognize that Republicans are attacking Bass because they recognize she could strengthen the ticket.
Even as he continues to speak highly of Warren, Khanna told me that “Karen Bass would be extraordinary in healing our nation at this time. Her commitment to Medicare for All, racial justice, and moving beyond colonialism in Africa come from deep moral commitments. She is one of the nicest people in Congress and works well with Republicans and Democrats. She is principled but also understands the art of compromise. I believe many independents and suburban voters would be drawn to her because of her story, character, and temperament.”


thenation--2020-08-07--A Biden Administration Will Have to Confront Trump’s Corruption

On July 21 , The New York Times described a small but typical example of corruption in the Trump era .
“ The American ambassador to Britain , Robert Wood Johnson IV , told multiple colleagues in February 2018 that President Trump had asked him to see if the British government could help steer the world-famous and lucrative British Open golf tournament to the Trump Turnberry resort in Scotland , ” the newspaper reported.1 What ’ s striking about this report is how little of a ripple it caused .
In any other administration , the use of an ambassador @ @ @ @ @ @ @ business would be a major scandal and trigger congressional investigations and perhaps the appointment of a special counsel .
At the very least , everyone implicated would have to resign .
But Johnson remains the ambassador , and there is no sign that he or anyone else , especially Trump , will pay any penalty for using public offices for personal enrichment.2 The singular fact about Trump ’ s corruption is that he has shown how much a president can get away with as long as Congress is complicit or cowed .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Trump presidency given him carte blanche for self-dealing .
The implicit bargain has been that as long as Trump hews to the Republican agenda on substantive issues , like tax cuts and court appointments , the party will serve as his legal bodyguard.3 Congressional Democrats have made a greater show of oversight but have proved ineffectual .
They decided on a narrow impeachment , which left most of Trump ’ s crimes unpunished even by a symbolic rebuke .
Trump has successfully stonewalled congressional investigations .
In theory , the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the purse to fight Trump on this , but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has shown no appetite for this sort of fight.4 The sad truth is that that to date , Trump has gotten away with being a massively corrupt president .
His success in evading any checks has only emboldened him , especially now that he has a compliant attorney general in William Barr .
Acts that Trump might have blanched at early in his presidency—for example , commuting the sentence of his crony Roger Stone apparently in exchange for his silence—are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that any redress to Trump now is unnecessary because he ’ ll face punishment by voters .
But would Trump ’ s electoral defeat bring justice ?
6 There Will Be No Return to Normality Can Trump Win in November by Reviving Willie Horton ?
While running for the Democratic presidential nomination last year , California Senator Kamala Harris suggested that if she became president , she would have “ no choice ” but to bring criminal charges against Trump.7 Joe Biden , the presumed winner of the nomination that Harris lost , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday , while speaking in a virtual interview with the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists , he said that prosecuting a former president would be a “ very unusual thing and probably not very…good for democracy.
” 8 Biden qualified his remarks by saying that the matter would be out of his hands and would be dealt with by the Department of Justice .
“ Look , the Justice Department is not the president ’ s private law firm , ” he noted .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s private lawyer .
I will not interfere with the Justice Department ’ s judgment of whether or not they think they should pursue the prosecution of anyone that they think has violated the law.
” 9 The political reality is that if Biden wins the election , he and his administration will be under enormous pressure to allow Trump ’ s wrongdoing to fade into history .
Biden will be presiding over enormous problems , notably the Covid-19 pandemic and economic meltdown , that will require national unity .
As Greg Sargent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Having campaigned on a vow of post-Trump reconciliation—and facing the daunting task of unifying a battered country around national solutions to the coronavirus pandemic and a potential economic depression—Biden might feel disinclined from sinking too much political capital into an effort along these lines , which might feel akin to diving right back into Trump ’ s black hole.
” 10 Going after Trump would be portrayed , especially by the right-wing media , as a divisive and partisan move .
It would allow Trump to play the role of martyr , fueling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alive as a political force.11 Despite these good reasons for moving on , doing so would be a massive dereliction of duty , one that would damage American democracy .
As Sam Berger , the vice president of Democracy and Government Reform at American Progress , observed , “ Ignoring the Trump administration ’ s attacks on the rule of law will only invite further attacks—and likely even more brazen and threatening ones.
” 12 In the extensive report , Berger suggested that a Biden presidency could follow a nonpartisan approach that would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a political vendetta .
Berger recommended that the attorney general “ conduct a top-to-bottom review of the DOJ to identify where politicization has influenced investigations , charging decisions , sentencing recommendations , and the like .
There should be a particular focus on instances in which Trump administration allies received special treatment or opponents of his administration were targeted.
” 13 Berger added that “ nonpartisan career prosecutors must be allowed to pursue evidence of wrongdoing without political interference .
If officials in the Trump administration—career or political—have broken the law , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and held to account.
” 14 There ’ s much to recommend in Berger ’ s nonpartisan approach , but there might be more to be gained by congressional Democrats ’ making corruption a political issue .
As Berger noted , Congress can continue to investigate the Trump administration even after he leaves office .
This will be all the easier to do with a Biden White House presumably ending stonewalling in those areas.15 These investigations could be used in the service of public education , to make Americans fully aware of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to shame all those implicated in it .
Documenting Trump ’ s corruption could be a springboard to new laws to prevent corruption .
One such measure is Senator Elizabeth Warren ’ s proposal that all future presidential candidates be required to release their tax returns.16 Moves like this might be dismissed as partisan , but they would ensure that corruption has political as well as legal consequences .
To shrink from such fights would only perpetuate the normalization of Trump even after he has left the White House .
As Warren told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s corruption , plain and simple , and we ’ ve got to call it out.
” 17

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
On July 21, The New York Times described a small but typical example of corruption in the Trump era. “The American ambassador to Britain, Robert Wood Johnson IV, told multiple colleagues in February 2018 that President Trump had asked him to see if the British government could help steer the world-famous and lucrative British Open golf tournament to the Trump Turnberry resort in Scotland,” the newspaper reported.1
What’s striking about this report is how little of a ripple it caused. In any other administration, the use of an ambassador to further a president’s private business would be a major scandal and trigger congressional investigations and perhaps the appointment of a special counsel. At the very least, everyone implicated would have to resign. But Johnson remains the ambassador, and there is no sign that he or anyone else, especially Trump, will pay any penalty for using public offices for personal enrichment.2
The singular fact about Trump’s corruption is that he has shown how much a president can get away with as long as Congress is complicit or cowed. The Republicans in Congress have from the start of the Trump presidency given him carte blanche for self-dealing. The implicit bargain has been that as long as Trump hews to the Republican agenda on substantive issues, like tax cuts and court appointments, the party will serve as his legal bodyguard.3
Congressional Democrats have made a greater show of oversight but have proved ineffectual. They decided on a narrow impeachment, which left most of Trump’s crimes unpunished even by a symbolic rebuke. Trump has successfully stonewalled congressional investigations. In theory, the House of Representatives could use the power of the purse to fight Trump on this, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has shown no appetite for this sort of fight.4
The sad truth is that that to date, Trump has gotten away with being a massively corrupt president. His success in evading any checks has only emboldened him, especially now that he has a compliant attorney general in William Barr. Acts that Trump might have blanched at early in his presidency—for example, commuting the sentence of his crony Roger Stone apparently in exchange for his silence—are now commonplace.5
Pelosi’s argument is that any redress to Trump now is unnecessary because he’ll face punishment by voters. But would Trump’s electoral defeat bring justice?6 More From Jeet Heer The Indigenous Roots of Robbie Robertson’s Rock and Roll Revolution August 14, 2023 Why Does This Racist Keep Getting Silicon Valley Money? August 11, 2023 When Phallocrats Go Limp August 4, 2023
While running for the Democratic presidential nomination last year, California Senator Kamala Harris suggested that if she became president, she would have “no choice” but to bring criminal charges against Trump.7 Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
Joe Biden, the presumed winner of the nomination that Harris lost, has been much more circumspect. On Tuesday, while speaking in a virtual interview with the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, he said that prosecuting a former president would be a “very unusual thing and probably not very…good for democracy.”8 Current Issue View our current issue
Biden qualified his remarks by saying that the matter would be out of his hands and would be dealt with by the Department of Justice. “Look, the Justice Department is not the president’s private law firm,” he noted. “The attorney general is not the president’s private lawyer. I will not interfere with the Justice Department’s judgment of whether or not they think they should pursue the prosecution of anyone that they think has violated the law.”9
The political reality is that if Biden wins the election, he and his administration will be under enormous pressure to allow Trump’s wrongdoing to fade into history. Biden will be presiding over enormous problems, notably the Covid-19 pandemic and economic meltdown, that will require national unity. As Greg Sargent of The Washington Post wrote, “Having campaigned on a vow of post-Trump reconciliation—and facing the daunting task of unifying a battered country around national solutions to the coronavirus pandemic and a potential economic depression—Biden might feel disinclined from sinking too much political capital into an effort along these lines, which might feel akin to diving right back into Trump’s black hole.”10
Going after Trump would be portrayed, especially by the right-wing media, as a divisive and partisan move. It would allow Trump to play the role of martyr, fueling a lost-cause mythology that would keep Trumpism alive as a political force.11
Despite these good reasons for moving on, doing so would be a massive dereliction of duty, one that would damage American democracy. As Sam Berger, the vice president of Democracy and Government Reform at American Progress, observed, “Ignoring the Trump administration’s attacks on the rule of law will only invite further attacks—and likely even more brazen and threatening ones.”12
In the extensive report, Berger suggested that a Biden presidency could follow a nonpartisan approach that would effectively redress corruption while minimizing the appearance of a political vendetta. Berger recommended that the attorney general “conduct a top-to-bottom review of the DOJ to identify where politicization has influenced investigations, charging decisions, sentencing recommendations, and the like. There should be a particular focus on instances in which Trump administration allies received special treatment or opponents of his administration were targeted.”13
Berger added that “nonpartisan career prosecutors must be allowed to pursue evidence of wrongdoing without political interference. If officials in the Trump administration—career or political—have broken the law, they must be treated like everyone else and held to account.”14
There’s much to recommend in Berger’s nonpartisan approach, but there might be more to be gained by congressional Democrats’ making corruption a political issue. As Berger noted, Congress can continue to investigate the Trump administration even after he leaves office. This will be all the easier to do with a Biden White House presumably ending stonewalling in those areas.15
These investigations could be used in the service of public education, to make Americans fully aware of the extent of Trump’s corruption and to shame all those implicated in it. Documenting Trump’s corruption could be a springboard to new laws to prevent corruption. One such measure is Senator Elizabeth Warren’s proposal that all future presidential candidates be required to release their tax returns.16
Moves like this might be dismissed as partisan, but they would ensure that corruption has political as well as legal consequences. To shrink from such fights would only perpetuate the normalization of Trump even after he has left the White House. As Warren told us during her candidacy, “It’s corruption, plain and simple, and we’ve got to call it out.”17