Mediaboss Marketing

When former President Donald Trump clinched the Republican presidential nomination last month, his win was taken by many as both a hard-fought campaign victory and the conclusion of a long-standing inevitability. Although much of today's GOP exists as a de facto extension of the MAGA movement, Trump's dominating primary performance cannot be attributed to his personal sway over the conservative zeitgeist alone. For months the former president and his campaign team have worked behind the scenes to ensure the mechanics of this election cycle work in his favor. Some of these maneuvers have taken place publicly, such as Trump's installment of loyalists to run the Republican National Committee. Other instances have been less dramatic but equally impactful, as Trump alters both the spirit of the American electoral system and its operational structure as well.

In the past, Trump's political agenda had been "frequently stymied by infighting and incompetence" thanks, in part, to having "populated his campaigns with huge egos," Vanity Fair said. The 2024 contrast is stark, with a drama-free campaign best represented by senior advisor Chris LaCivita and his "Talmudic understanding of primary rules." LaCivita has spent much of the past year pushing for "state Republican parties to change their processes to favor Trump." Perhaps nowhere was that effort more impactful than in California, where the campaign orchestrated a change to the primary rules so that a "candidate who wins more than 50% of the statewide vote on March 5" receives the state's entire delegate count, rather than a proportional amount, Politico said. Ultimately, the maneuver was a potential "death knell for Trump's competition" like Ron DeSantis, who had been planning his California campaign to pick off delegates from the total batch under the old rules.

Recently Trump and his allies attempted a similar operation in Nebraska, which metes out electoral college votes based on district wins, rather than the winner-take-all system used by the vast majority of the country. In many past elections, "Republicans take two and Democrats take one of the state's votes, though the third is tightly contested," The Hill explained. After Republican Gov. Jim Pillen endorsed a bill to change his state's electoral college process, Trump publicly threw his support behind the measure, calling it "right for Nebraska" while urging supporters to lobby on its behalf.

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

"When you realize you can't win with the current rules, you go back to the drawing board to change the rules so you can win?" Democrat State Sen. Jen Day of Nebraska asked during last week's debate. The measure was ultimately defeated, but by lending his weight to the issue, Trump and his allies "underscore[d] just how narrow the race for 270 electoral votes could be in November," CNN said.

While the average American voter likely doesn't follow the picayune ins and outs of every state's primary voting rules, the Trump campaign has not been shy about manipulating the system in its favor. After several states "adoptedTrump-friendly rulesin 2020 to ward off competition for the then-president," in 2023 the former president's team began actively "advocating for modifications in half a dozen additional states," Reuters said, highlighting the "scale of the effort." For much of the 12 months prior to the 2024 primaries, Trump and his allies were "changing all these party rules, getting their people in place, changing the battlefield," one GOP strategist told Vanity Fair.

Trump is hardly alone in his effort to shape the existing political system to his liking. President Joe Biden's efforts with Democrats to change the primary schedule so South Carolina a state widely seen as being to his political advantage would vote first helped fend off a challenge from Minnesota Rep. Dean Philips. It also "helped set up an advantage for Trump" by cutting into then-chief rival Nikki Haley's base since "any registered voter can participate in either party's primary. But voters can only choose one primary," Politico said.

Working the electoral system to benefit incumbents may well be a bipartisan pursuit. For someone like Trump, who has built his political capital on claims of being the victim of a "rigged election," however, it might be the deciding factor in a path back to power.

To continue reading this article...

Create a free account

Continue reading this article and get limited website access each month.

Already have an account? Sign in

Subscribe to The Week

Get unlimited website access, exclusive newsletters plus much more.

Cancel or pause at any time.

Already a subscriber to The Week?

Unlimited website access is included with Digital and Print + Digital subscriptions. Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.

See more here:
Trump campaign changes election rules to try to win in 2024 - The Week

Barring any last minute delays, Donald Trump is set to appear at a Manhattan courthouse on Monday for the historic start of his first criminal trial.

The case involves his alleged falsification of business records to cover up a hush-money payment to adult-film star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election. The trial will mark the first time in history that an ex-President is criminally prosecuted in court, and could take Trump away from the campaign trail for more than a month as he runs for a return to the White House.

Trump faces 34 felony counts in the case brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who has accused Trump of doctoring financial records of his companies and orchestrating a scheme to influence the 2016 presidential election. Trump has denied all wrongdoing and accused Bragg of carrying out a politically motivated witch hunt against him.

The unprecedented case is the first of Trumps four criminal cases to go to trialand may be the only one to wrap up before the November election. The trial is expected to last six weeks, starting with jury selection on Monday. Prospective jurors will be asked if they have ever attended one of Trumps rallies, if they belong to groups like the Proud Boys or Antifa, or if they volunteered with a political entity associated with the former President, according to a letter the judge provided attorneys.

Heres what to know about Trumps hush-money trial.

Prosecutors will attempt to prove that Trump is guilty of maintaining false business records with the intent to hide a $130,000 hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels, an adult-film actress who claimed she had a sexual encounter with him in 2006. The payments allegedly were made to keep Daniels from speaking publicly about the affair in the final weeks of Trumps 2016 presidential campaign.

If convicted, Trump could face up to four years in prison for each of the 34 charges against him. While paying hush money is not always illegal, prosecutors allege that Trump reimbursed his then-lawyer Michael Cohen in a series of installment payments processed by his business, which prosecutors say were fraudulently disguised as corporate legal expenses in violation of New York law.

Under New York law, falsifying business records is usually a misdemeanor but it can become a felony when there is an intent to defraud that includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal another crime. Bragg has said that the alleged payment scheme was intended to cover up violations of New York election law, which makes it a crime to conspire to illegally promote a candidate. He also said the $130,000 payment exceeded the federal campaign contribution cap and violated state tax laws.

The charges Trump faces are all considered class E felonies in New York, the lowest tier of felony charges in the state. Prosecutors will need to show that Trump not only falsified or caused business records to be entered falsely, but that he did so to conceal another crime.

The trial is not expected to be televised since New York state is one of three jurisdictions that does not permit audio-visual coverage of trial-court proceedings. Federal judges sometimes make an exception to this long-standing rule barring cameras from their courtrooms, but the judge presiding over the hush-money case has already rejected past media requests for greater access and appears unlikely to change course.

Pictures of Trump in the courtroom, however, may be allowed. When Trump was arraigned in Manhattan last April, Judge Juan Merchan permitted photographers to record still images before the arraignment but ruled that they would have to leave once the arraignment began. He also approved TV cameras in the hallways of the Manhattan courthouse, but said reporters would not be allowed to carry electronic recording devices into the courtroom or overflow rooms, claiming that cameras could disrupt the dignity and decorum of the court and put the safety of those involved at risk.

Under New York state law, Trump is required to attend his entire criminal trial in person, potentially limiting his ability to travel outside of the state as he campaigns for President. The trial is expected to last up to six weeks, depending on how long jury selection takes and whether the judge opts for half-day proceedings or days off to attend other cases.

But Trump may receive some leniency from the judge. The same day he is set to appear in court for the start of the trial, Trump is also scheduled to be deposed in one of the civil lawsuits stemming from the merger of his social media startup with a so-called blank check company. Judge Merchan could allow Trump to miss part of the hush-money trial to attend the deposition.

In the past, Trump has chosen to appear at some court proceedings he wasn't required to attend, often holding press conferences with reporters outside the courtrooms. Hes used those appearances to amplify both his campaign messages and his assertion that all of the charges he faces are politically motivated.

Daniels and Cohen are both expected to take the stand as witnesses for the prosecution, with Braggs office hoping that Cohen can directly tie Trump to the false business records.

Other witnesses could include Karen McDougala former Playboy model who received a $150,000 payment from the National Enquirer for rights to her story about an alleged affair with Trumpand members of Trumps inner circle, including his longtime assistant Rhona Graff, his former director of Oval Office operations Madeleine Westerhout, and former campaign and White House aide Hope Hicks.

Trumps lawyers are expected to attempt to undermine Cohens testimony by noting that he pleaded guilty to a variety of federal crimes in 2018including for his role in the hush-money paymentand that he and Trump had a falling out many years ago.

Its unclear if Trump will take the stand in his own defense, or if his lawyers will call any witnesses.

If Trump is convicted, he could face a sentence of up to four years in New York prison for each chargea maximum of 136 years. And since falsifying business records is a state crime, only the New York governorKathy Hochul, a Democratcould pardon him.

But given Trumps age, 77, lack of a prior conviction, the fact that hes the first former President to ever be criminally tried, and that he may become President again, legal experts say theres no guarantee that a conviction would result in jail time. The judge is not required to imprison Trump if hes convicted by a jury; most first-time offenders in non-violent cases are often sentenced to probation, and Trumps unique position could raise a host of extraordinary issues and considerations in sentencing.

Trump can still run for President if hes convictedor even inside a jail cellthough it would entail a range of unprecedented and untested legal questions if he wins the election after being convicted of a crime.

See the rest here:
Donald Trumps Hush-Money Trial: What to Know - TIME

The captivity of the pro-life movement to the character of Donald Trump is a crucial aspect of contemporary abortion politics. But maybe not quite in the way suggested by Trumps decision this week to publicly distance himself from his pro-life supporters by refusing to endorse national restrictions on late-term abortions.

That refusal was a sign of the anti-abortion movements political weakness but not necessarily a major blow to its cause. The contemplated legislation was unlikely to pass the Senate no matter what stance Trump took, and positioning the G.O.P. as a defender of state-based regulation usefully focuses abortion opponents on their most important challenge: defending the abortion restrictions that are already on the books in conservative states, and finding ways to win over the voters who have turned against the pro-life side in every post-Dobbs referendum with Arizona looming as the next battleground now that its Supreme Court has upheld an 1864 law that bans nearly all abortions.

The problem for pro-lifers is that these efforts at persuasion have become markedly less effective over a timeline that overlaps closely with Trumps takeover of the Republican Party. The captivity of abortion opponents, in this sense, isnt about the specific policy stances that Trump might choose and that they might then have to reluctantly accept. Its about the ways in which a Trumpist form of conservatism seems inherently to make Americans more pro-choice.

For most of my lifetime, public opinion on abortion was fairly stable, leaning pro-choice but with a strong pro-life minority and a lot of people in the middle expressing support for some restrictions but not others. But since the mid-2010s there has been a clear shift in favor of abortion rights: More Americans support abortion without restriction that at any point since Roe v. Wade was handed down.

You can tell various stories about these numbers that do not implicate Trump himself. For instance, America has become notably less Christian and less socially conservative, and maybe it stands to reason that as the country turned left on issues like same-sex marriage or marijuana legalization, it would swing left on abortion as well.

Or again, it was clear that Roe was threatened well before Dobbs was issued, so maybe it was the prospect of abortion being back in the political arena that focused the minds of abortion moderates and made them more solidly pro-choice.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

See original here:
Opinion | How the Pro-Life Movements Deal With Trump Made America More Pro-Choice - The New York Times

Politics / February 16, 2024

His promise to abandon NATO members who fall short of military spending targets puts international stability at risk.

As I look from the West Coast this week, the world seems increasingly dangerous by the minute. And, no, Im not talking about mudslides in Los Angeles or windstorms in the High Sierra, though it is true that the weather has played its fair share of dirty tricks on California in February. Nor am I talking about the horrific mass shooting in Kansas City this weekthough the relentless litany of massacres in modern day America is surely one of the most dispiriting developments of recent times.

Rather, Im thinking about the perilous state of American democracy. Special counsel Hurs poison pen letter in which he declined to prosecute President Biden for his mishandling of classified documents but went out of his way to cast doubt on Bidens mental acuity and memory drastically increases the risk that Donald Trump could be reelected come November. Biden doesnt have much time to turn around the dismal polling numbers hes been facing for the past half yearand Hurs report makes that task vastly more difficult. Las Vegas oddsmakers now have Trump as the most likely winner of the presidential election. Meanwhile, far from moderating his worst impulses as the election nears, the GOP front-runners behavior is, if possible, getting even cruder and more erratic, soiling everyone and every institution he interacts with.

Trumps head-spinning statement last week that he would encourage Putins Russia to do whatever the hell they want with NATO members who dont devote at least 2 percent of their GDP to the military would have doomed any other presidential candidate at any other moment in US history. After all, primary season is usually pretty unforgiving. Howard Dean, for Christs sake, was finished after he let out too primal a scream following some welcome primary results. Bidens own efforts to win the 1988 nomination were derailed after he purloined a few phrases from the speeches of an overseas politician.

Trump being Trump, however, and the GOP base being what the GOP base currently is, the party has hardly unified in outrage at this assault on the international order, and this explicit invitation to piracy. Supposedly rational politicians such as Lindsay Grahamwho prides himself on his national security credentialsrushed to Trumps defense. Grahams rationale? Give me a breakI mean, its Trump. In other words, dont judge Trump by the rational political and moral standards one would judge every other human being by. Judge him by his own standalone code of conduct. Let Trump say and do what no other mere mortal could say and do. If thats not the Fhrerprinzip, then I dont know what is.

If Donald J. Trump were a peacenik, I might give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he got carried away by his own semiliterate bombast, that all he was really trying to do was to raise uncomfortable questions about the purpose and value of NATO 35 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. After all, its perfectly healthy in a democracy to debate the value of old military alliances and the wisdom of a foreign policy based on the idea that your nation must for all time maintain a global military posture of a scope and scale virtually unprecedented in human historycertainly, many of the great left-wing parties of Western Europe have debated these very issues for three-quarters of a century, and much of the British Labour Party leadership under Michael Foot in the early 1980s opposed continued membership in NATO. If Trumps minions in Congress who are holding up billions of dollars of military assistance to Ukraine and Israel were doing so out of a genuine loathing of the military-industrial complex and of a defense lobby run amokif theyd all been up nights reading C. Wright Mills on the new power elite, and polishing up on Gandhian nonviolence philosophyif they had a genuine policy beef with, say, the brutalist youve got to destroy a village to save a village philosophy undergirding Israels morally calamitous actions in Gaza, Id again say that was a perfectly valid debate to bring out into the open.

But by no stretch of the imagination can Trump be thought of as a warrior for peacethis is the same man who asked his advisers why we have nuclear weapons if we arent going to use them, who wanted to shoot immigrants on sight at the southern border, and who plotted to send in the US military against domestic racial justice protesters. This is the same man who fantasized about military parades, complete with displays of the latest hardware, running through the heart of Washington, D.C. And this is the same man who declared that he wanted to have generals as loyal to him as Hitlers top brass were to the Fhrerand who has recently advocated executing the erstwhile chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for not being in lockstep with him in the weeks after the November 2020 election.

Similarly, with a few exceptionsthe libertarian-leaning Rand Paul arguably being a case in pointmost of the Republicans opposing military aid to Ukraine and Israel arent doing so out of any particular distaste either for militarism or for the specific alliances with Israel and Ukraine, but because Trump has essentially ordered them to stalemate government in order to embarrass Biden and the Democrats. More generally, to imagine the GOP as an anti-war, anti-violence, partydespite its fanatical embrace of a vision of the Second Amendment that arms the country to the teeth with high-velocity rifles, and despite high-profile Republicans such as Arizonas Kari Lake essentially threatening civil conflict if Trump is found guilty on his felony charges and sentenced to prisonis an absurdity.

Trump has repeatedly said that all he wants is peace. But advocates of peace dont publicly announce that they would welcome another countrys invasion of a neighbor. What Trump was doing in making such a statement had nothing to do with promoting global peace and everything to do with destabilizing international relations and openly converting NATO into a protection racket. One can imagine bad dialogue from a Mafia-themed B-movie. Pay up or my buddy over to your east will come in with some tanks and artillery and planes and, who knows, maybe even nuclear weapons, and fuck you up in a way that you and everyone else in your neighborhood wont soon forget.

The idea that a man like Trump, an amoral huckster seemingly gleeful at the prospect of small, vulnerable countries being chewed up and spat out like the husks of sunflower seeds by large, bullying powers, could once again be perched on the edge of the awesome power of the presidency, is beyond nightmarish. By the skin of our teeth, we survived Trump 1.0 with our democratic institutions still roughly intact. If Trump finds his way back to the White Housewith an assist from special counsel Hur and a flurry of own-goals from an aged, fragile, Bidenhes giving every indication that version 2.0 will be far, far worse. God only knows, the current international order is deeply flawed. But what Trumps advocating is a whole different ball game. In such a world, alliances become nothing but shakedowns, and Great Powers pick off smaller countries with impunity, cheered along by a gloating, preening, narcissistic US president too uncaring to realize the enormity of the damage he is unleashing with every inflammatory, thoughtless, and cruel statement that comes out of his mouth.

Sasha Abramsky, who writes regularly for The Nation, is the author of several books, including Inside Obamas Brain, The American Way of Poverty,The House of 20,000 Books, Jumping at Shadows, and, most recently, Little Wonder: The Fabulous Story of Lottie Dod, the Worlds First Female Sports Superstar. Subscribe to The Abramsky Report, a weekly, subscription-based political column, here.

Read the original post:
Donald Trump Threatens to Start a Global Protection Racket - The Nation

1. Trump's New York hush-money case will start March 25. It's the first of his criminal trials  The Associated Press
2. How Melania Trump Will Play Key Role In Donald Trump's Defense In The Stormy Daniels Trial  Yahoo Entertainment
3. Trial Will Test Trump's Limits of Reaping Political Gain From Legal Woes  The New York Times

Visit link:
Trump's New York hush-money case will start March 25. It's the first of his criminal trials - The Associated Press