Trump is in uncharted territory

Given that Donald Trump’s legal trouble has been the political equivalent of background noise for more than half a decade, it’s easy to see why many will shrug at the news of the former president’s indictment in the classified documents case.

“America is stuck in Trump legal groundhog day,” argued Freddy Gray on the site this morning. Also writing for The Spectator, Jacob Heilbrunn suggests that, contrary to the indictment marking a “uniquely contentious time in American history,” the country “may simply greet [Trump’s] indictment with a yawn.”

Those betting against Trump’s ability to shake off whatever…

Given that Donald Trump’s legal trouble has been the political equivalent of background noise for more than half a decade, it’s easy to see why many will shrug at the news of the former president’s indictment in the classified documents case.

“America is stuck in Trump legal groundhog day,” argued Freddy Gray on the site this morning. Also writing for The Spectator, Jacob Heilbrunn suggests that, contrary to the indictment marking a “uniquely contentious time in American history,” the country “may simply greet [Trump’s] indictment with a yawn.”

Those betting against Trump’s ability to shake off whatever charges he faces, to move on from the latest scandal miraculously unscathed, have lost a lot of money over the years. And there’s good reason to treat with suspicion claims that this time is different; that if only Republicans grew a backbone they could use the latest scandal to throw Trump overboard; that Trump has finally run out of luck.

And yet, regardless of the politics of the indictment, legally speaking, this time really is different. The indictment unsealed this afternoon contains thirty-eight federal charges, including thirty-one counts related to withholding national defense information, five counts related to concealing the possession of classified documents and two counts of making false statements.

According to the indictment, Trump stored in boxes at Mar-a-Lago “information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; political vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack. The unauthorized disclosure of these classified documents could put at risk the national security of the United States, foreign relations, the safety of the United States military, and human sources and the continued viability of sensitive intelligence collection methods.”

The case compiled by Special Counsel Jack Smith is, on the surface, damning. Trump is on tape admitting to showing classified documents to people without clearance. And (again, based on the indictment) the documents retained by Trump seem to be far more serious than personal letters and documents stamped “classified” by an overcautious bureaucrat. We are a million miles from the underwhelming case assembled by New York’s Alvin Bragg, a Democrat elected on a promise of prosecuting Trump. We are also a long way from Trump’s impeachments.

Said legal commentator Jonathan Turley on Fox News this afternoon: “It is an extremely damning indictment… this is not an indictment you can dismiss.” Of the battle ahead for Trump’s legal team: “They have to run the table. They have to take out every single count, or you’ve got a seventy-six-year-old man looking at a potentially terminal sentence. The visual and the audiotape evidence is really daunting. The audiotape that they transcribe makes it sound like the president was using these documents as trophies.”

Make no mistake, the legal gravity of this case means it will have a seismic political impact. Not because GOP primary voters will necessarily have a sudden change of heart. Don’t expect some dramatic change in the polls. But for all that the voters may shrug, this case will be front and center for this cycle. America faces a presidential cycle in which one of the candidates is on trial for federal offenses that carry serious jail time. It’s hard to predict the electoral consequences, but don’t doubt that Trump’s legal woes will be a political preoccupation for months to come.

On our radar

SUPREME SURPRISE The Supreme Court surprised many in Washington yesterday with a 5-4 verdict affirming a federal court decision that found a Republican-drawn congressional map in Alabama to be in violation of the Voting Rights Act. John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh voted with their liberal colleagues in a case that Democrats hope will have a far-reaching impact on electoral maps in the deep south.

Whatever the electoral impact of Merrill v. Milligan, the ruling is also a reminder that — contrary to the claims made in an increasingly hostile press — the Supreme Court remains a serious institution committed to dispensing justice, not simply voting according to their political or partisan preferences.

GALLAGHER NOT RUNNING Congressman Mike Gallagher has decided against a Senate run in Wisconsin. A rising Republican star (profiled recently by The Spectator’s Ben Domenech) and a prominent China hawk, Gallagher was the preferred pick of GOP Senate leadership.

*** Sign up to receive the DC Diary in your inbox here ***

Comic relief in the Trump indictment

Jack Smith’s thirty-seven-count indictment of Trump is doubtless serious stuff. Yet given the president in question, it’s perhaps unsurprising that in parts, the historic document is amusing enough to read more like a Coen Brothers script.

For example: it recounts a conversation between Trump and two of his lawyers, following his subpoena in May 2022. One attorney recalls four of Trump’s reactions to the grand jury’s attempts to reclaim documents from him:

“I don’t want anybody looking, I don’t want anybody looking through my boxes, I really don’t, I don’t want you looking through my boxes.”

“Well what if we, what happens if we just don’t respond at all or don’t play ball with them?”

“Wouldn’t it be better if we just told them we don’t have anything here?”

“Well look isn’t it better if there are no documents?”

Will we ever see a president of his like again?

Keep reading

–Matt McDonald

No flaming homosexuals on the White House lawn

At the last minute, the White House postponed a Thursday event on the South Lawn to commemorate Pride, citing air quality issues from the Canadian wildfires as the main reason. The decision to delay initially appeared to be fairly last minute: press passes for the event were approved Thursday morning, and notice of its cancellation was only sent out via a pool report, as opposed to updating the daily guidance.

But performers who were scheduled to attend the event were informed of its cancellation on Monday, per an email seen by Cockburn. The event was due to take place Thursday evening — long past Biden’s bedtime. So why were the performers told three days prior?

Cockburn wonders whether the smog offered convenient cover for the Biden White House to cry off, in what is proving to be the most contentious Pride month yet. Would a snap of 46 with drag queens or Dylan Mulvaney have done the president any favors with swing voters as he heads into the next election cycle?

–Cockburn

From the site

Freddy Gray: Prince Harry’s crusade against the British tabloids
Matthew Foldi: Republicans urge DoJ probe of TikTok CEO for ‘lying’ to Congress
Kevin Cook: Is the PGA-LIV merger the biggest betrayal in sport?

Poll watch

PRESIDENT BIDEN JOB APPROVAL

Approve 42.0% | Disapprove 55.2% | Net Approval -13.2
(RCP average)

POPULARITY OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSERVATISM

Americans who say they are conservative or very conservative on social issues: 38% (highest level of support in a decade)
Americans who say they are conservative or very conservative on economic issues: 44% (highest level of support in a decade)
(Gallup)