It wasn't supposed to be like this. We were told that, a while back, when Republicans took over control of the House of Representatives. Things were going to be different! Republicans were going to show us all how Congress is supposed to work. The 12 appropriations bills that make up the federal budget were going to go through "regular order" and be voted on one by one instead of all being swept into a giant "omnibus" bill or just largely ignored by the use of a "continuing resolution" (C.R.). That was all going to be a thing of the past, as Congress returned to regular order and appropriated funding the correct and proper way. Washington would bask in the sunshine of regular order and the citizenry would reward the staunch Republicans who had shown Congress the way out of the darkness. That was the way it was supposed to be!

Obviously, things aren't exactly working out according to this plan. Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who in all likelihood had to make specific promises to his members about following regular order (we don't know, since all these promises were given behind closed doors and remain secret) in order to get elected to the speaker's chair, is now running out of time and running out of options. And strictly following regular order simply isn't one of them, given the time remaining.

Continue Reading »

President Joe Biden needs to go to Michigan, and he needs to do it soon. Biden needs to go within days, in fact -- and certainly before next Wednesday. Because if he either waits that long or doesn't go at all, he will have failed an important pop quiz in Politics 101. Here is how such a quiz might be framed:

You have billed yourself as the most Union-friendly president in the history. The United Auto Workers goes on strike. You should:

• (a) Adopt a hands-off approach -- send White House mediators in and then state that you refuse to "play politics" with the negotiations.
• (b) Put out a few statements supporting the right of the workers to strike and largely agree that their demands have merit, send in your negotiators, and then sit back and stay out of it.
• (c) Travel to Michigan and set up a photo-op walking a picket line with the workers, in solidarity.
• (d) (Other: fill in the blank.)

So far, Biden has chosen (b). He has stated his support for the workers' position, but he hasn't really been leaning into the issue either. Choosing (c) would be a dramatic gesture -- the first president to actually walk a picket line in a very long time. But photo-ops can go badly for all sorts of reasons, and it would mean a security challenge for the Secret Service. So perhaps (d) is the way for Biden to go. He should travel to Michigan, perhaps drive his motorcade past the picket line (and give them a big thumbs-up or tell the driver to honk the horn loudly), and then give a speech to an audience of U.A.W. members somewhere nearby. Biden could also hold a meeting with a select few of them -- perhaps some Union leaders as well as a representative selection of line workers as well. He could listen to their stories and empathize with them and their situation (Biden can indeed empathize well with blue-collar workers, due to his own childhood experience).

Continue Reading »

Donald Trump hasn't changed. That was my big takeaway from watching his performance on this week's Meet The Press, where Kristen Welker started her new stint as host of the program by scoring a blockbuster interview with Trump. This is the first such interview he has given in a long time: on network television which is not part of the right-wing echo chamber. And it went about how you'd expect (assuming you haven't been in a coma for the past eight years). Trump flooded the zone with lies, distortions, conspiracy theories, and general blithering, and the poor benighted host simply couldn't keep up. So two big takeaways, really: Donald Trump hasn't changed, and (sadly) neither has the media.

Continue Reading »

No, wait... that can't be right...?

Sorry for opening with some snark, but we felt that was the appropriate tone for addressing this week's legal developments. Republicans have been swearing up and down for years now that President Joe Biden's son Hunter somehow bribed his father to use his position as vice president to do... well, something nefarious... and that all they really needed to do was dig into it all and the evidence would then appear.

Hunter has now been investigated for five years (and counting) by the Department of Justice. Republicans in the House of Representatives have been investigating him since the first day they retook control of the chamber at the start of this year. A special counsel was even named to look into all things Hunter. And what do they have to show for it all? Some pretty small potatoes indeed.

To date, there is zero evidence that Joe Biden did anything to benefit his son. None. All of his actions as vice president were exactly what President Obama wanted him to do and told him to do. There is no record of any bribes paid from Hunter to Joe at all, despite Hunter's bank records being repeatedly scoured.

Continue Reading »

Once again, it appears Congress is not going to do its constitutional job on time. October will dawn without a federal budget in place for the next fiscal year, unless (by some miracle) everything gets done in the next two weeks. This miracle is not likely to happen -- it's on the order of wishing for both Donald Trump and Joe Biden to announce tomorrow that they're not running for president next year. It's just not going to happen, in other words.

The Senate hasn't passed a single appropriations bill yet, but they've at least gotten all of them out of committee, with impressive bipartisan support. However, due to the Byzantine rules for getting floor votes to happen, there's no guarantee all of them will pass before the end-of-the-month due date. Some of them will likely pass, but at this point it looks like it would take a somewhat-lesser miracle for all of them to clear the chamber on time.

Since Republicans are in control on the other side of the Capitol, the House of Representatives is in complete disarray. Kevin McCarthy, the weakest politician to hold the speaker's chair in quite some time, is struggling to get all the members of his caucus on the same page. Since this includes factions who do not have any grasp on reality to speak of, this is going to be quite the task for him. The craziest of these crazies are already threatening to try to depose McCarthy as speaker if they don't get all of their demands in the budget fight. They will not get all of their demands, however, because other (much saner) Republicans do not agree with the goals of the crazies. So the House isn't going to get all of their appropriations bills complete by the deadline either.

Continue Reading »

Mitt Romney is hanging up his spurs, it seems. Well, that is perhaps not the best metaphor to use since even though he represents a Mountain West state with plenty of horses to ride, it's hard to picture him atop one of them while wearing spurs. OK, sure, riding one, maybe... but perhaps politely riding dressage, since the only famous link between equestrian sports and Romney was the "dancing horse" his wife entered in the 2012 Olympics. But we're galloping a bit too far down the wrong trail, here, pardner.

All kidding aside, the fact that Mitt Romney will not be running for re-election to his Senate seat next year is notable for a number of reasons. His announcement made somewhat of a splash because of the main reason Romney gave for his decision:

At the end of another term, I'd be in my mid-80s. Frankly, it's time for a new generation of leaders. They're the ones that need to make the decisions that will shape the world they will be living in.

Continue Reading »

When I was born, there had only been one U.S. president impeached in all of American history. When I was a child, impeachment proceedings were launched against a second, but he resigned before the House of Representatives could impeach him. But since that time, a president has been impeached three times: Bill Clinton for lying about having sex with a White House intern; and Donald Trump both for trying to strongarm the leader of another country in order to create some dirt on his political opponent, and then for instigating an insurrection attempt rather than facing the reality that he lost his re-election effort. Now we stand at the brink of a possible fourth presidential impeachment in my lifetime.

We are where we are for one reason and one reason only: Speaker Kevin McCarthy's political weakness. McCarthy announced today that an impeachment inquiry would be launched solely because he had to assuage the extremists on his right flank, right at the start of a very contentious budget fight. He is using the impeachment process as a political prize for the crazies in his caucus, in the hopes that they won't depose him as speaker when he has to inevitably cut some sort of budget deal with the Democrats in his chamber, the Democrats and the Republicans in the Senate, and the White House. He is going to have to cut this deal -- that much is not in question -- but he is terrified (for good reason) that right after he does, the extremist wing of his own party will try to oust him as speaker. So he is tossing them this impeachment inquiry as a bone in the hopes that they won't, plain and simple.

Continue Reading »

Due to an unforeseen automotive emergency, there will be no column today. That's a fancy way of saying I spent all day replacing my alternator and doing a few other jobs. But the car's back together, it started right up first try, so columns will resume tomorrow as normal. My apologies for the interruption in service.

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

We hate to do this (as we suspect we'll be doing it recurringly for the next year or so), but once again the biggest political news of the week came from the legal system. Almost all the news was from the Republican side of the aisle, because of course it was. (And we promise that our subhead this week will be explained in due time, too... but not until the very end of the column.)

While most of the legal proceedings in the political world are going to be drawn-out affairs, this week we saw a truly speedy trial take place. Peter Navarro's trial began at the start of the week (after the holiday, even), took only two days from start to finish (with only three hours of witness testimony), and the jury then took a mere four hours to return with a guilty verdict. Navarro was found guilty of contempt of Congress, which was (quite obviously) an open-and-shut case. Navarro was prevented by the judge (before the trial began) of making his specious argument to the jury that he somehow had some sort of magic "executive privilege" that meant he was free to just blow off a congressional subpoena. In the first place, Donald Trump never backed up Navarro's claim of executive privilege -- which is not something that just anybody can claim (it requires the actual executive to claim it). Secondly, even if Navarro did have a legitimate claim to executive privilege (which he did not), he still would have been required to show up as a witness and claim executive privilege in person (which he did not do). So he really didn't have any defense at all and is pinning all his hopes that the Supreme Court will eventually just let him skate free. He now faces up to two years in jail, although even if he is sentenced to some prison time he will likely remain free until his appeals are all exhausted. Even so, it was good to see some actual legal consequences for a member of Donald Trump's White House.

Continue Reading »

Two Republicans went on trial this week. One of these trials just concluded while the other will stretch on for a while. The two aren't connected in any way, it was just a coincidence of the legal calendar that they both got underway this week. But both are important milestones, in different ways, so it bears taking a look at what is going on.

The first trial -- the short one -- had Peter Navarro facing a federal jury on charges that he defied a subpoena from Congress. And it didn't take long at all for the jury to decide that he was indeed guilty. The trial itself was only two days long. It featured fewer than three hours of witness testimony. The jury only needed four hours of deliberation to return a unanimous verdict.
Continue Reading »