Will Trump Win All of California’s Delegates in the Primary? Here’s What Polling Suggests

September 9, 2023 By Kaitlynn Schallhorn 7 Comments

The former president, along with several other GOP contenders, will head to Southern California later this month

California Republicans’ support for former President Donald Trump appears to be growing, according to a new poll — and that’s a particularly positive sign for his campaign given how the state will assign its bevy of delegates this year.

Trump is the preferred candidate for 55% of likely Republican voters surveyed in late August by the Berkeley Institute of Government Studies — taken after he was indicted in Georgia for alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

That’s an 11% increase from Berkeley IGS’s May survey — and would trigger the California Republican Party’s new rule allotting all of its 169 delegates to whichever candidate can secure a majority (50% plus 1) of the statewide vote in the upcoming primary election.

In comparison, 16% of likely Republican voters picked Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, 7% former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley and 4% tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.

A February Berekely IGS poll found 37% of registered Republican voters preferred DeSantis while 29% preferred Trump.

“Even with all of his legal troubles, former President Donald Trump’s lead in the Republican primary looks more like what one expects to see from an incumbent running for reelection than for a candidate in an open seat,” said IGS co-director Eric Schickler. “While it remains early, it has to frustrate Trump’s opponents that his lead has grown even amid his series of indictments.”

Dan Schnur, who teaches political messaging at USC and UC Berkeley, says the poll shows good news for Trump — as long as he can maintain that support among California’s GOP voters during the March 5 primary.

“The state party clearly did this to help him, but now Iowa and New Hampshire are even more important,” said Schnur, noting the momentum from winning those early primary states coupled with California’s delegates would make Trump “unstoppable.”

CAGOP changed its rules in late July. If no contender can secure a majority, then the delegates — the most from any state — will be distributed proportionally.  Previously, candidates could win three delegates per congressional district, which could lead them to focus on certain pockets of the state.

The change, CAGOP Chair Jessica Millan Patterson said at the time, encourages Republican candidates “to spend real time campaigning in our state and making their case to voters.”

Still, the change was largely seen as a boon to Trump’s quest to return to the White House.

Meanwhile, the Berkeley IGS poll also found President Joe Biden holding a substantial lead over challengers Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Marianne Williamson among both likely Democratic and no party preference voters.

And while Biden holds a 51% to 31% lead over Trump, the survey found 24% of registered voters are “very open” to a potential third party candidate in a Biden-Trump matchup, 23% are “somewhat open” and 17% said it would depend on who the candidate is.

Trump, along with many other presidential contenders, plans to head to Southern California later this month.

The Republican National Committee is holding the second GOP presidential primary debate on Sept. 27 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute in Simi Valley — albeit, it’s not clear if Trump will participate. He skipped the first debate and criticized the presidential library as the venue because the longtime board chair, Frederick Ryan Jr., was the publisher of the Washington Post. (In June, Ryan said he was leaving the Washington Post to lead the new Center on Public Civility at the Reagan Foundation.)

On Sept. 29, Trump and other candidates are slated to speak at the CAGOP fall convention in Anaheim. DeSantis and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott are also scheduled to appear that Friday; Ramaswamy is expected the next day.

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , ,

Trump poised to sweep state’s delegates in GOP primary

September 7, 2023 By Seema Mehta 3 Comments

But California voters worry about his and Biden’s vulnerabilities,  a UC Berkeley/Times poll finds.

Former President Trump dominates his rivals so heavily that he’s on track to win all of California’s delegates for next year’s Republican convention — a haul that would give him a major chunk of the votes needed to secure his third presidential nomination.

The finding from a new UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll co-sponsored by The Times highlights a turnabout from earlier this year. In February, Trump faced a serious challenge from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis among California Republicans.

The potential for Trump to win all of the state’s delegates also reflects his campaign’s work to change the rules of the contest to his advantage.

In late July, the California Republican Party changed its rules so that if a candidate wins more than 50% of the statewide vote in the state’s March 5 primary, he or she will claim all 169 GOP delegates — the most of any state in the nation. Previously, the rules allocated delegates by congressional district. A candidate needs just over 1,200 convention delegates to win the nomination.

Trump’s campaign team pushed for the rule change, one of a series of such shifts it has backed in states across the nation. All of the changes supported by his campaign have the effect of helping a front-runner quickly nail down the Republican nomination.

The new poll shows about 55% of likely Republican voters plan to cast their primary ballots for Trump.

DeSantis’ support has plummeted to 16% — less than half of what he had earlier this year.

“Californians have turned away, by and large, from DeSantis,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the UC Berkeley institute’s poll. “The biggest beneficiary of DeSantis’ decline is the former president. There’s no question he’s well-liked by the Republican base.

“It’s a startling development given the fact that over the past year, there appeared to be sentiment among Republicans looking for an alternative to Trump,” DiCamillo added. “That has changed, and Trump is now the odds-on favorite.

“Capturing all of California’s delegates would give Trump a huge advantage over the rest of the field,” he said.

The state party’s rule changes were one factor in the recent decision by a super PAC backing DeSantis to stop major campaign operations in California and several other states, NBC News reported last week.

On the Democratic side, the poll indicated President Biden holds a big lead ahead of California’s primary, with 66% of party voters supporting him, compared with 9% for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and 3% for Marianne Williamson. About 1 in 6 likely Democratic voters said they were undecided.

Biden gets less support from young, Latino and Asian American voters than from white and Black voters. That difference in enthusiasm is unlikely to hurt his chances in California, given his wide lead, but it reflects a problem for the president that could be serious elsewhere in the nation.

Biden also holds a big lead over Trump in a prospective general election matchup in the state, not surprising given California’s cobalt-blue tilt.

Of the state’s 22 million registered voters, 46.9% identify as Democrats, 23.8% as Republicans, 22.5% as no party preference and 6.8% with other parties, according to the California secretary of state’s most recent statistics.

The poll also looked at some important vulnerabilities for each of the two leading candidates.

Among the state’s likely voters, 42% said they believe Biden’s age — he turns 82 shortly after election day — will hurt him a lot in his reelection bid, compared with 32% who think Trump’s legal woes will hurt him a lot in his effort to win back the White House.

Those legal difficulties may be on display just before the state’s primary. On March 4, the former president is scheduled to go on trial in Washington on federal charges that he illegally sought to overturn the results of the 2020 election, which he lost to Biden.

California shares its primary date with Texas, North Carolina and about a dozen other states, which together will allocate more than a third of Republican delegates.

The poll was conducted in late August, shortly after Trump was indicted in Georgia over alleged efforts to overturn the state’s 2020 presidential election results.

It was the fourth indictment for the former president. In addition to the Georgia and federal cases alleging efforts to overturn the election, he also faces federal charges over his handling of confidential government documents after leaving the White House, and New York state charges over payments to a porn actor during the 2016 campaign in an attempt to conceal an alleged affair.

The polling began one day after the first GOP presidential primary debate, which Trump skipped.

The survey’s results affirm the dwindling popularity of DeSantis, who shares many of the same beliefs as Trump, but without the former president’s legal and temperamental baggage. The Florida governor has drawn praise from many on the right for his opposition to lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as for his vocal advocacy of the conservative side in the nation’s culture wars.

In February, when many Republicans were focused on Trump-endorsed candidates’ losses in last year’s midterm election, DeSantis had the support of 37% of likely California GOP voters, while Trump was backed by 29%, according to a Berkeley institute poll.

Three months later, a Berkeley survey indicated the former president had rebounded with the support of 44% of the state’s likely GOP voters and DeSantis trailing at 26%.

Former United Nations Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s performance in the first GOP debate appears to have bumped up her support in the latest poll, though she remains mired in the single digits among likely Republican voters in California.

Haley now has the backing of 7% of the state’s likely GOP voters surveyed, double her support in the February poll. Businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Vice President Mike Pence, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott and conservative talk radio host Larry Elder all trailed behind her. About 9% of the poll’s Republican participants said they supported someone else or were undecided.

Looking ahead at the general election, 51% of the state’s likely voters polled said they would support Biden, the incumbent president, while 31% said they would back Trump. About 13% said they planned to cast ballots for an unnamed third-party candidate, and 5% were undecided.

While California’s general election is unlikely to be competitive — it hasn’t been in the last three decades — voters’ attitudes about each candidate’s potential vulnerabilities provide insight into the overall state of the race.

Neither Trump nor Biden received stellar ratings from voters on their ethical behavior, though the current president outpaced the former; 71% faulted Trump’s personal ethics, compared with 43% who faulted Biden’s.

Nearly half, 47%, of likely California voters surveyed said they would be open to supporting a third-party candidate if the 2024 presidential campaign is a rematch of Biden and Trump’s contest three years ago, with 24% saying they would be “very open” to the idea.

While a candidate not affiliated with either of the nation’s two main political parties has practically zero chance of winning the White House, DiCamillo said those numbers reflect voter frustration, particularly among those who are less ideologically inclined.

“There’s dissatisfaction. We’ve seen that in other polls,” he said. “It appears to be the most moderate voters, not those on the extremes. Strong liberals and strong conservatives are less open to [a third-party candidate] than those in the middle.”

The Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies’ poll surveyed 6,030 registered California voters online in English and Spanish, Aug. 24-29, with weighted samples of 1,175 likely GOP primary voters and 2,833 likely Democratic primary voters.

Click here to read the full article in the LA Times

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , ,

John Eastman’s Disastrously Bad Idea

September 3, 2023 By Byron York 10 Comments

 Claremont Institute legal scholar John Eastman will be arraigned next week on nine felony counts related to his efforts to reverse the results of the 2020 election, charges that were brought by the Democratic district attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, Fani Willis. Eastman is one of the minds behind the scheme that, had it been enacted on Jan. 6, 2021, called for then-Vice President Mike Pence, presiding over the congressional certification of Electoral College results, to send the votes of key states including Arizona and Georgia back to the states for more debate and investigation, thus denying Joe Biden a victory in the Electoral College that was already settled and certified.

Pence refused to take part in the scheme. Then the proceedings were interrupted for several hours by the Capitol riot. And then Biden’s victory was finally certified. There was never any chance Eastman’s plan would have succeeded, but there is no doubt that, had Pence followed Eastman’s advice, the already chaotic day would have descended into a far more serious disorder.

That doesn’t mean Eastman’s idea was illegal. It does not mean it was a crime. In the political world, there are a lot of very damaging ideas that are not crimes. But prosecutor Willis has pushed ahead, even though a judge barred her from pursuing one possible defendant because of her, Willis’s, partisan political activities.

Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!

In any event, now Eastman, facing the possibility of years in prison, will begin his defense. This week, he began it in a very public way by sitting for an interview with Fox News’s Laura Ingraham, who in addition to her work on television is a lawyer and former Supreme Court clerk. In just a few minutes, Ingraham exposed a key flaw, perhaps the key flaw, of Eastman’s plan: He had no idea what to do if he succeeded.

Early in the interview, Eastman claimed that he had “lots of evidence of fraud” in the 2020 presidential election. Ingraham challenged him. “I haven’t seen that evidence,” she responded. “And I’m always wanting to see everything. So I haven’t seen that evidence.” The conversation then turned to the legal challenges of election results. But then Ingraham got to the simple question at the heart of the Jan. 6 story: “John, on Jan. 6, what did you want to happen? … Just so the viewers can understand what would have unfolded and how that would have ultimately been constitutional.”

Eastman began by saying that “some people,” meaning some around then-President Donald Trump, “had urged that Vice President Pence simply had power to reject electors whose certification was still pending.” In other words, Pence could, all on his own, reject Biden’s victory. Ingraham quickly noted, “I don’t believe that,” but Eastman maintained that it was an “open issue.” Nevertheless, Eastman said he told Pence “it would be foolish to exercise such power even if he had it.”

OK. So what did Eastman want Pence to do? “What I recommended, and I’ve said this repeatedly, is that he accede to requests from more than a hundred state legislators in those swing states to give them a week to try and sort out the impact of what everybody acknowledged was illegality in the conduct of the election.”

“Not everyone acknowledged it,” Ingraham noted. And then a more practical question: “You thought a week was going to be enough to hear all these challenges?” Underlying Ingraham’s question was a simple fact: There was no way in the world the challenges could have been resolved in a week. Eastman acknowledged that when he responded, “We’re still 2 1/2 years later looking at the evidence.”

Still, Eastman maintained that “what a week would have done is give them an opportunity to assess, OK, is the uncertainty so great because of the illegality in the election that we have a failed election? And at that point, the power to do the best they can revolved back to the [state] legislature. … A week would have given them a time to try and decide what, if anything, to do about it. And, you know, we were never going to get in a week to the bottom of how much fraud or what have you. But we could get to the bottom of illegality, and we could make some estimates and extrapolations to try and do the best job we could to assess what the likely outcome actually was.”

There it is. Eastman said a week would be enough for the state legislatures to come up with “estimates and extrapolations” to see if the election was legitimate or not. That was his plan. But remember this:

1) The state results were already certified. They were literally signed, sealed, and delivered. The challenges from “more than a hundred state legislators” that Eastman mentioned were from several states and from people who did not represent a majority in any house of any state legislature. They were just groups of Republican lawmakers who questioned the election results. When Eastman referred to “electors whose certification was still pending” — there weren’t any. No legislature, as a body, and no governor had declared a state’s results illegitimate. Indeed, just the opposite was true. After recounts in the key states, the states had certified the results. There was no legal reason to send the election results back to any state.

2) The “illegalities” that Eastman cited had been considered in the courts. Some claims had been rejected before the election, some after the election. One important claim, in Pennsylvania, where the state Supreme Court, acting on its own, extended the time in which mail-in ballots could be received, made its way to the Supreme Court, which declined to hear it. That is not to say there was no valid criticism of the Pennsylvania court’s action, but the fact is, the objection had been taken all the way to the Supreme Court, and the case was over.

3) Most importantly, Eastman did not know what to do if he won. Let’s say Pence sent the electoral results back to some states. In a week, according to Eastman’s thinking, the state legislatures could “get to the bottom of illegality.” And what then? At that point, somebody would make “estimates and extrapolations” to determine if 2020 was a “failed election.” Then they would do “the best job we could” to “assess what the likely outcome actually was.”

Who knows how that would work. But here is the fundamental question. Under Eastman’s plan, who would be president of the United States at noon on Jan. 20, 2021? Would the president take office on the basis of Electoral College results or somebody’s “estimates and extrapolations” of what those results would be if the election were somehow conducted differently? What legitimacy would the president chosen on the basis of “estimates and extrapolations” have?

Click here to read the full article in the Washington Examiner

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , ,

‘Trump Would Be Better Off If He Had Never Met John Eastman’

August 29, 2023 By Teri Sforza 1 Comment

Column: As Eastman’s legal exposure increases, a conservative lawyer and former Trump delegate illuminates Eastman’s ‘three major rookie blunders’

True, former President Donald Trump’s mug shot is generating more cash than John Eastman’s mug shot — while Trump glowers, Eastman looks more like one of those stone heads on the graves in Disneyland’s Haunted Mansion — but the former Chapman Law dean isn’t doing too shabbily on the fundraising front:

Tens of thousands in small donations have poured in over the past week, helping Eastman surpass his half-million dollar “legal defense fund” target. He set a new goal of $750,000.

It appears he’ll need it.

Eastman faces a slew of criminal charges in Georgia, including violating the state’s RICO Act, filing false documents, soliciting a public officer to violate the oath of office and other criminal conspiracies.  Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis charged Eastman, Trump and 17 others with scheming to subvert the will of Georgia voters in an illegal bid to overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss there. They are scheduled to be arraigned Sept. 6.

More criminal charges could be forthcoming in federal court for Eastman, and he’s currently fighting charges of “dishonesty and moral turpitude” as the California Bar tries to yank his law license.

This bar trial is fascinating stuff, offering a sneak peek at the defenses Eastman will mount in criminal court(s) — and it has some legal observers thinking that Eastman is in big, big, big trouble.

Eastman and his lawyers argue that his legal advice to Trump — including memos theorizing that the vice president has power to delay election certification and send matters back to the states for a potential do-over and that states could send alternate electors (for the losing candidate) to the Capitol even after election results are certified by those states. etc. —  wasn’t unreasonable, and his opinion that there was massive fraud in the election is a matter of free speech.

Experts for the bar say it’s quite clearly otherwise.

“No reasonable lawyer exercising diligence appropriate to the circumstances would adopt Mr. Eastman’s legal positions,” wrote constitutional scholar Matthew A. Seligman in a report for the bar.

Months into his bar trial, Eastman asked the judge to halt trial until the Georgia criminal case concludes — to, you know, avoid incriminating himself. The judge declined. It’s apparently a bit too late for that.

Eastman “has testified for over 8 hours … not once invoking his Fifth Amendment privilege or making any such objection to his testimony thus far,” the judge wrote. “It is firmly established that a witness cannot choose to testify willingly about a topic … and then later claim the right to remain silent under self-incrimination privilege. …

“The act of testifying results in a forfeiture of the privilege for the subjects discussed.”

‘Three major rookie blunders’

And among Eastman’s “three major rookie legal blunders,” Laguna Niguel attorney James V. Lacy tells us, is this testifying in the disbarment proceeding bit.

Taking the stand for more than eight hours after zipping his lips and invoking the Fifth Amendment before the House Jan. 6 committee was probably, at best, unwise.

“Clearly Eastman was headed for a criminal trial, the House even referred him to the Justice Department!” said Lacy, whose conservative bona fides include serving in the Reagan and Bush administrations and as a Trump delegate in 2016.

Yet, somehow, for some reason, Eastman didn’t seek to postpone the disbarment trial, and then proceeded to talk, talk, talk. “Once that horse is out of the barn, any decent lawyer knows the Fifth Amendment defense as to what has already been said is out the window,” Lacy said.

Eastman’s other two major rookie legal blunders, in Lacy’s opinion, are as follows:

“Being a cheapskate and using the Chapman.edu server to send and accept attorney-client privilege messages about Trump’s post-election legal strategy. That all should have been done on his own secure confidential server. It is an inexcusable violation of client expectations of attorney confidentiality to send confidential messages over a server you do not control, let alone one that is owned by a public nonprofit educational institution,” he wrote to us.

Then, Eastman sued in federal court in an attempt to keep those Chapman emails confidential — which turned out to be way worse than shooting yourself in the foot. He got nowhere, almost all the emails were divulged anyway, and he put himself — and his client, Trump — in a far worse position by setting the stage for Judge David O. Carter to write that Eastman and Trump “more likely than not” committed a crime by trying to stop the vote certification on Jan. 6.

“If Eastman had used a secure system, or never filed the litigation to try to fix it, Carter would never have had a platform to write that,” Lacy said.

Lacy’s not saying that’s legal malpractice, but someone else might.

‘Awful legal advice’

Lacy has known Eastman for years. They met in D.C. in the 1980s, they vied for the same congressional seat in the 1990s, have had a “decent” relationship, with Lacy even taking on one of Eastman’s Chapman law students as an intern, who Lacy hired and who remains on the firm’s staff today.

“As a person who has supported Trump in the past, I am deeply saddened by this awful legal advice he gave to Trump,” Lacy said. “If Eastman was never in the picture, never gave any such legal advice … Trump would be in a far better political position today. Two of the four indictments would never have even happened.

“I’ve known John a long time,” Lacy continued. “He’s been very strong on extreme legal theories and trying to normalize them. Not just with this bit of the vice president having power to reject electors, but his philosophizing that state legislatures have unlimited power. … It’s just not true. Both of those are contrary to the underpinnings of our democracy.

“How could you say it’s democracy at all if it doesn’t provide for judicial review, for fairness? How can you say the vice president can set aside certified state electors? How can you say that, and say you’re a conservative and believe in state’s rights?”

Eastman didn’t just propose a theory on how to postpone or set aside certified election results from seven different states. He provided legal advice that he didn’t really believe in — in emails to the vice president’s lawyer, Eastman concedes that not one Supreme Court justice would agree with him — and took “overt acts,” Lacy said.

Eastman contacted state officials, helped organize alternate slates of Trump electors, testified to state legislators, was “a serpent in the ear of the President of the United States, the most powerful office in the entire world,” as the vice president’s attorney said.

“I can say flat out that Trump would have been so far better off politically if he didn’t have this 1/6 albatross around his neck, that was really created by Eastman,” Lacy said. “Even if Trump wanted to interfere in the outcome of the election, without those two (Eastman) memos, there’s no path to it.

“Trump would be better off if he had never met John Eastman.”

A judge set a March 4 trial date for Trump in the federal case charging the former president with trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

On Eastman’s defense that his opinions on massive fraud et al are a matter of free speech, Lacy says this:

“The zero-in point is coupling all his overt acts like helping prepare fake state elector certificates and calling legislators. The overt acts, like yelling ‘Fire!’ In a theater when you know there is no fire, makes the speech/advice no longer protected by the First Amendment.”

‘Contribute (or contribute again!)’

Eastman and his attorneys beg to differ there, of course.

“(W)e sought to have investigated what Vice President Mike Pence described as ‘serious allegations of voting irregularities and numerous instances of officials setting aside state election law.’  Doing that is speech and petitioning the government for redress of grievances fully protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution,” Eastman wrote on his fundraising blog.

“But the narrative being foisted on us by the left and by the anti-Trump right doesn’t care about constitutional rights, free and fair elections, presumption of innocence, or any of those other basic components of our system of government. That mentality needs to be confronted head on, and with your help, I’m doing all that I can….

“Keep us in your thoughts and prayers. And if you can, contribute (or contribute again!) to the legal defense fund and encourage your friends to do the same. Estimates from the various lawyers with whom I have spoken over the past week indicate this may cost $1 Million or more.”

After his booking in Georgia, Eastman vowed to vigorously contest every count of the indictment. “I am confident that, when the law is faithfully applied in this proceeding, all of my co-defendants and I will be fully vindicated,” his statement said.

Others aren’t so sure. Lacy thinks Eastman should have simply resigned his bar membership rather than agree to testify at the disbarment trial. Eastman is licensed to practice law in Washington, D.C.  He doesn’t really need a California law license.

The best thing Eastman can do now — not just for himself, but for Trump and everyone else — is to shut up, Lacy said.

We’ll see how that plays out at the State Bar. His trial resumes Sept. 5.

Click here to read the article in the OC Register

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , , ,

Trump Mugshot Released After Surrendering in Georgia

August 26, 2023 By KJ Hiramoto 8 Comments

Former President Donald Trump‘s mugshot has been released Thursday night.

The photo comes after Trump surrendered in Georgia after flying out of an airport in New Jersey. Jail records listed Trump as 6-foot-3 and at 215 pounds.

Trump, who served as the nation’s commander-in-chief from 2016 to 2020, has been booked on more than a dozen charges related to an alleged plan to overturn the results of the 2020 Presidential Election in Georgia.

The Georgia arrest marked the fourth criminal case against Trump since March 2023. Trump is the first former U.S. President to be indicted. In addition to the Georgia case, he also faces federal charges in Florida and Washington, D.C.

Trump is now in custody at Fulton County jail. A federal judge set up a Sept. 18 hearing for former Department of Justice official Jeffrey Clark’s motion to move the Georgia case to federal court, according to FOX 11’s sister station WAGA-TV.

Earlier in the week, Rudy Giuliani had his mugshot released to the public after the former New York City Mayor turned himself in over the alleged push to overturn the 2020 Presidential Election results. Giuliani and Trump join 17 others who were indicted earlier in the month.

Giuliani is accused of spearheading Trump’s efforts to compel state lawmakers in Georgia and other closely contested states to illegally appoint electoral college electors favorable to Trump.

Giuliani has since been released from jail after posting bond. Like the former NYC Mayor, Trump is also back on the streets after posting bond.

Click here to read the full article at FOX 11 LA

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , ,

Attorney John Eastman Surrenders to Authorities on Charges in Georgia 2020 Election Subversion Case

August 22, 2023 By Kate Brumback 3 Comments

ATLANTA (AP) — John Eastman, the conservative attorney who pushed a plan to keep Donald Trump in power, turned himself in to authorities Tuesday on charges in the Georgia case alleging an illegal plot to overturn the former president’s 2020 election loss.

Eastman was booked at the Fulton County jail and is expected to have an arraignment set in the coming weeks in the sprawling racketeering case.

He was indicted last week alongside Trump and 17 others, who are accused by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis of scheming to subvert the will of Georgia voters in a desperate bid to keep Joe Biden out of the White House. It was the fourth criminal case brought against the Republican former president.

Trump, whose bond was set Monday at $200,000, has said he will surrender to authorities in Fulton County on Thursday. His bond conditions prohibit him from intimidating co-defendants, witnesses or victims in the case, including on social media. He has a history of attacking the prosecutors leading the cases against him, including Willis, often using racist language and stereotypes.

Eastman said in a statement provided by his lawyers that he was surrendering Tuesday “to an indictment that should never have been brought.” He lambasted the indictment for targeting “attorneys for their zealous advocacy on behalf of their clients” and said each of the 19 defendants was entitled to rely on the advice of lawyers and past legal precedent to challenge the results of the election.

A former dean of Chapman University law school in Southern California, Eastman was a close adviser to Trump in the run-up to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by the president’s supporters intent on halting the certification of Biden’s electoral victory. He wrote a memo laying out steps Vice President Mike Pence could take to interfere in the counting of electoral votes while presiding over Congress’ joint session on Jan. 6 in order to keep Trump in office.

The indictment alleges that Eastman and others pushed to put in place a slate of “alternate” electors falsely certifying that Trump won and tried to pressure Pence into rejecting or delaying the counting of legitimate electoral votes for Biden, a Democrat.

Bail bondsman Scott Hall, who was accused of participating in a breach of election equipment in rural Coffee County, also turned himself in to the Fulton County Jail on Tuesday morning.

Two other defendants, former Justice Department lawyer Jeffrey Clark and former Georgia Republican Party chair David Shafer, have filed paperwork to transfer the case to federal court. Willis has filed paperwork in Fulton County Superior Court, where the indictment was filed, seeking a March 4 trial date. Legal maneuvering, such as the attempts to move the case to federal court, could make it difficult to start a trial that soon.

Lawyers for Clark argued in a court filing Monday that he was a high-ranking Justice Department official and the actions described in the indictment “relate directly to his work at the Justice Department as well as with the former President of the United States.” Shafer’s attorneys argued that his conduct “stems directly from his service as a Presidential Elector nominee,” actions they say were “at the direction of the President and other federal officers.”

Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows last week made similar arguments in a federal court filing, saying his actions were taken in service to his White House role.

Clark was a staunch supporter of Trump’s false claims of election fraud and in December 2020 presented colleagues with a draft letter pushing Georgia officials to convene a special legislative session on the election results, according to testimony before the U.S. House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Clark wanted the letter sent, but Justice Department superiors refused.

Click here to read the full article in AP News

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: ,

California GOP May Strip Opposition to Abortion and Same-Sex Marriage from Platform

August 20, 2023 By Seema Mehta 11 Comments

A rebellious campaign within the California Republican Party to break away from its historic opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage is dividing the party weeks before planned appearances by former President Trump and other GOP White House hopefuls.

A proposed platform overhaul, which could be voted on at the state GOP’s fall convention in Anaheim, is a remarkable break from conservative dogma in the state that nurtured Presidents Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon.

“It’s a seismic shift but it’s a shift born out of practical necessity. Look at what’s happening not just in California but in much more conservative states, realizing antiabortion, anti-same-sex marriage stances are no longer tenable,” said Jessica Levinson, an election law professor at Loyola Law School. “I think it shows their acknowledgment that the sand has shifted underneath their feet.”

Political platforms, while largely symbolic, are supposed to embody a party’s principles and core beliefs. Debate about modifying them often prompts controversy.

The California GOP proposal — adopted by a party committee in late July — supports “traditional family values” and a “strong and healthy family unit.” But it removes language that says “it is important to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.”

The draft also excises opposition to a federally protected right to abortion, while maintaining support for “adoption as an alternative to abortion.”

Longtime conservative leaders are appalled by the proposal — both over its content and its likelihood to foment division at a key moment before the state’s presidential primary.

“This will be extremely controversial and will take a convention that is supposed to be about unifying the party and instead it ends up becoming a big feud,” said Jon Fleischman, a former state GOP executive director. “It’s the last thing the party needs.”

He described it as “a big middle finger” to the presidential candidates who are scheduled to speak at the convention, “all of whom embrace the various party planks that are proposed for removal.”.

Supporters counter that the updates align the party’s principles with voters.

Charles Moran, a Los Angeles County delegate who is a member of the platform drafting committee, said it is critical to move away from rigid orthodoxy “to give our California Republican candidates a fighting chance.”

“We need a party platform that empowers our candidates, not one that serves as an albatross around their neck,” said Moran, the president of Log Cabin Republicans.

The draft proposal also eliminates language about taxpayer protection for homeowners and a plank about opposing racism. But at a time while the GOP nationally is focused on culture wars, the changes in approach to same-sex marriage and abortion are likely to draw the most consternation among state Republicans.

The proposal slims the platform from 11 pages to four. The vote approving the draft took place in Irvine on July 29, after a contentious state party executive committee meeting about revising how the state party’s presidential delegates will be awarded in the March primary. (Despite California’s overwhelming blue tilt, it is home to the largest state Republican party in the nation and will send the most delegates to their presidential nominating convention next year.)

The draft platform will be voted on at the state party’s fall convention, which former President Trump, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott and other presidential candidates are expected to attend. If the party’s delegates cannot reach consensus, the platform debate may be shifted to their spring gathering.

If the proposed modifications are adopted, it would place the party’s platform closer to the beliefs held by most Californians and Americans.

More than three-quarters of California adults did not want federal protection for access to abortion to be overturned, according to a 2021 poll by the Public Policy Institute of California. That included 59% of Republicans.

Nationally, 71% of Americans believe same-sex marriage should be legal, according to a recent Gallup poll.

But the state GOP is more conservative than the state’s voters, which makes the proposed revision of the platform a test of the party’s priorities.

Click here to read the ful article in the LA Times

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , ,

Republicans Win Presidency! Expand House Majority! Regain Senate! Spoiler Alert

August 8, 2023 By Arnold Steinberg 6 Comments

Republicans are going to win handily next year.

Among Fox News viewers.

But what about the rest of America?

Can Democrats replace Biden to keep the presidency, retain the Senate, and take back the House?  Ron DeSantis is showing the way. The latest example was in New Hampshire last week where he continued his inexplicable journey to morph into Donald Trump: “We’re going to have all of these deep state people, you know, we are going to start slitting throats on Day 1.”

An inelegant metaphor, or a loose cannon?

Mega-donor Robert Bigelow — who gave $20 million earlier this year to DeSantis’s Super PAC  “Never Back Down” — has suspended support.  Bigelow says “extremism won’t get you elected” and cited Florida’s six week abortion ban.  Voters will celebrate DeSantis if they see him as a reflective man of principle and integrity who will persuade others to his cause and collaborate for the common good. But  if “Never Back Down” instead describes a reflexive man of ideology and intransigence who won’t admit a mistake or compromise, they don’t need a Trump wannabe.

On Friday DeSantis belatedly criticized Trump’s insults and antics, and Trump’s behavior as not the way “the president of a great nation … should be conducting himself …  not a good standard for our children to follow.” DeSantis said voters don’t want Biden but in the end Trump would lose to Biden.

As I’ve pointed out, even many Trump voters are worried that ultimately Trump would lose in a general election, that more-than-subconscious apprehension that constitutes the path for DeSantis or someone else to win the Republican nomination. (READ MORE: There Is No Path for Donald Trump to Become the Republican Nominee)

Yet DeSantis’s sudden awakening to reality may not be plausible. It’s not just his past effusive praise of Trump, featured provocatively in a new Trump ad,  or his current Trump-like campaign. Most of all, it’s national  polls showing Trump competitive with Biden.  There may still be hope for DeSantis if he could finally credibly pivot from his absurd out-Trump Trump mode and instead appeal to independent voters to shift general election polling — to demonstrate he is more likely to defeat Biden. This is, paradoxically, the way to effect primary polling.  “Winner” Gov. DeSantis, who won a landslide reelection last year in Florida, must contrast with three-time loser Trump.

In 2018 President Donald J. Trump could have defied the odds and kept control of the House by a few seats.  Instead, he sabotaged his winning message of peace and prosperity, making the midterm election a referendum on him.  Losing the House meant his impeachment!  In 2020, it was again about him, not policy — and then his defeat.  Trump’s inept reelection campaign along with the clueless Republican National Committee did not encourage early mail voting or ballot harvesting.  If the election were stolen, it was not stuffed ballots or tampered vote counts, but the unconstitutional DOJ/FBI collusion with Big Tech, especially Facebook and Google, to suppress and tilt the news to favor Biden.

Last year Trump was at it again: he favored weak primary candidates who lost in November, assuring Democrats continued Senate control.  Also, Republicans had hyped a super majority in the House, triggering a high Democrat turnout.  Yet Republicans failed  on message — inflation. In lieu, they obsessed about investigations, the prurient interest of Fox News groupies. Republicans won only a narrow majority — nearly impossible for Speaker Kevin McCarthy to lead. (READ MORE: CHAOS! Republicans Control House, Barely, and Trump Is In-and-Out)

Since then, they “investigate” with blatant partisan stridency, no effort to project fairness and thus to win the end-game.  Without strategy or choreography, they announce the conclusion before each investigation starts  No media savvy, they raise expectations but don’t deliver. Their “impeachment inquiry” without credibility further telegraphs that this is all just politics and retribution.

For decades, the pre-senile Joe Biden exploited the tragic death of his first wife by falsely claiming a drunk driver killed her.  Joe Biden is not just a documented life-long serial plagiarist, but an unabashed liar to make himself look good, and even play victim.  Alibis are Biden DNA.  Hunter Biden’s tell-all book pre-empted Hunter’s drug-abusing, sex addict defense: I did bad things in the fog of Ecstasy. Voyeur-like Fox News fell for reality star Hunter. But Republicans could have conceded Hunter is a screw-up, pretended empathy and then focused on Joe.  Instead, they enabled many voters to buy the evolved narrative — a loving father helping a problem kid, as if a middle-aged con man is a teenager gone astray (those terrible delinquents at Burisma!).

In refusing to approve Hunter Biden’s sweetheart plea bargain, Federal Judge Maryellen Noreika acted competently and professionally. That’s why even the biased legacy media reported the deal smells, and now Hunter is on their watch list.  Voters react to favored treatment for Hunter but otherwise don’t care if Hunter is a crook. They do care if Joe is a crook, but so far they perceive politics-as-usual — a partisan vendetta —  far off from their macro-concerns.

The Big Picture

What about the Big Picture?  In the past, the increased cost of living was relentless but subtle:   After a decade or two or a generation, parents  would say to their children, “I remember when the cost of a (hot dog, ice cream cone, movie ticket, etc.) was …”  But Biden handed Republicans the keys to the kingdom when he shocked the economy into CHAOS.  Even former Harvard President and Democrat Larry Summers, an economist who served as President Bill Clinton’s Treasury secretary, predicted Biden would bring about doom and gloom inflation.

Republicans cannot process this political gift, an inflationary psychosis, such that even if inflation lessens, it’s baked in — the anxiety and angst are palpable and needed to have been — and to be — nurtured, with political closure in November 2024. Meanwhile Trump drama distracts from the uncertainty and despair of the inflation monster,  the nostalgia not for a quarter century ago, but for an APB … America-pre-Biden.

We are in uncharted waters.  Black and Latino support for Trump may increase, because they get it — bad cops and a rogue prosecutor. Republican support for Trump grows, but what about his unchecked baggage for November? A Trump candidacy even against Biden remains risky.  Chris Christie will say  a vote for Joe is a vote for Kamala. But Joe won’t run, and Trump surely loses to another Democrat.  Republicans bet all their chips on a Biden candidacy, rather than hedge with a generic attack on his Administration and its apologists, including likely Biden successors.

If non-candidate Biden serves out his term,  the unctuous Gavin Newsom will continue to gush over Kamala, as he has rhapsodized over Joe. Meantime, Newsom has drafted his announcement of candidacy. (Can we we get into Gavin’s laptop?)  If Biden won’t complete his term, Dems move Kamala into Feinstein’s Senate seat or elsewhere and replace the V.P. with an adult.

As for the proposed California Governor Newsom-Florida Governor DeSantis debate this year, Newsom is personable, slick and fast.  If DeSantis is abrasive, rigid, and detached, DeSantis will project anger and extremism, while Woke Newsom will come across as a happy moderate.

Meanwhile, Trump’s legal morass sucks the energy out of the spirited Republican primary. If Trump avoids the first debate, the viewer audience will be less.  But will his ego let him stay away? Besides, without Trump, will one candidate steal the stage?

The absurd indictment sponsored by that hack New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg was a nonstarter, and Trump should score an early win there. On federal matters, Trump deserves rebuke, but not criminal prosecution, yet we have Jack Smith’s multiple indictments for, get this, crimes against democracy. But what threatens democracy more? Trump soliciting alternative electors who then could be challenged? Or government/Big Tech collusion  to censor information, preventing  an informed electorate vital to democracy, manipulating an election, and actually violating the  First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech, assembly, and religion?   Prosecutor Smith claims to defend democracy as he seeks to undermine it!

After former Sen. John Edwards’ failed 2004 presidential run, Smith prosecuted Edwards. The jury failed to convict and the embarrassed Department of Justice dropped the case.  In yet other high profile case, Smith went after Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, who had to spend $28 million to defend himself. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously vacated McDonnell’s conviction, rebuking Smith, in its words: “the uncontrolled power of criminal prosecutors is a threat to our separation of powers.”  His false morality a cover, Jack Smith seeks not to stop Trump’s insurrection, but to start his own resurrection, a divided nation be damned.

It Won’t Be Trump vs. Biden

The Republican base is angry about the unprecedented persecution of Trump, the most recent indictment two-and-one-half years after the alleged crimes.  That anger manifests in growing support for Trump.  But in time, that fury may find expression, not in endlessly defending Trump, but in  supporting another Republican, better on offense against the Democrats.  In most so-called “winner take all” primary states, Trump needs a majority, not a plurality. Given Trump’s seemingly infinite capacity for self-destruction, Trump is more likely to top out early, even in Iowa and New Hampshire, than gain further. The Big Secret: other candidates are relatively more anxious for a collapse of DeSantis, not Trump.

Click here to read the full article in the Spectator

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , ,

Conservatives Who Tout RFK Jr. Just Relish Political Chaos

July 24, 2023 By Steven Greenhut Leave a Comment

SACRAMENTO – It looks like Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s 15 minutes of fame might have come and gone, as the latest polling in New Hampshire shows him with a measly 9 percent of the Democratic presidential primary vote. He is barely leading Marianne Williamson – the onetime “spiritual advisor” to Oprah Winfrey who credited the “power of the mind” for turning Hurricane Dorian away from the U.S. coast.

Most analysts chalk up RFK Jr.’s initial strong showing to his name identification. Obviously, the Kennedy name is golden in Democratic quarters. But Democrats increasingly understand he’s outside their party’s mainstream. His candidacy is bolstered by MAGA Republicans such as Steve Bannon and Roger Stone, who once referred to an imagined Trump-Kennedy ticket as a dream.

The transparent reason for the latter is mischief making. If a populist Democrat makes waves in the primary as a potential spoiler, then it creates headaches for President Joe Biden. Yet some thoughtful conservatives have sipped the Kool-Aid and seem to actually like the guy. What gives?

The obvious answer is after imbibing years of Trump-inspired conspiratorialism, the former president’s supporters have rewired their brains to relish chaos. They’re the political equivalent of those Allstate insurance ads where a menacing man named Mayhem destroys everything around him. They are so fed up that they’re willing to burn the system down without worrying about what rises in its place.

Conservative thinker Russell Kirk explained that “the conservative person is simply one who finds the permanent things more pleasing than Chaos and Old Night.” MAGA-style populism is radical not conservative, which is why the MAGA crowd has taken aim at the legitimacy of our institutions. Instead of making reasoned critiques, they prefer conspiracies about the Deep State, stolen elections and Big Pharma.

So, of course, RFK Jr. speaks their language, even though he is a leftist who once called for a law to punish politicians who express global-warming skepticism. He speaks his mind in a way that gets plaudits from those who are perpetually agitated, even if the things he says seem best left unsaid. Like Trump, he taps into grievances – some real, some perceived – and then goes off on flights of fancy.

The best right-of-center spin comes from Michael Brendan Dougherty in National Review: “Just as Donald Trump had retrieved political themes from the deep past of the Republican Party … so it must be that a Democrat should come along and try to revive left-leaning skepticism of government and corporate power, to denounce crony capitalism, censorship, and the CIA to boot.”

That sounds OK. As a libertarian, I’ve long expressed skepticism of government power and corporations that use their clout to gain privileges. I am against censorship, have never trusted the CIA (or any federal agency), and am leery of endless wars. But, like Trump, Kennedy offers no real principled resistance to such realities. Both men are against big government, except when they’re for it.

Plus Kennedy seems like a loon. He’s a devoted anti-vaxxer – and not just related to COVID-19 vaccines. There might be a reason that polio and other long-conquered illnesses are making a comeback precisely in those communities where people don’t bother with vaccines. He postulates weirdo theories that almost make Trump’s ivermectin notions sound rational.

“He paints a dark, conspiratorial picture of the world, bristling with debunked theories, misleading claims and outright falsehoods,” NPR noted. “Wi-Fi causes cancer and ‘leaky brain,’ Kennedy told podcaster Joe Rogan … . Antidepressants are to blame for school shootings, he mused during an appearance with Twitter CEO Elon Musk. Chemicals in the water supply could turn children transgender, he told … podcaster Jordan Peterson.”

That analysis is from 2021, but RFK Jr. has only doubled down. During a press dinner this month in New York, he unburdened himself of these thoughts: “COVID-19. There is an argument that it is ethnically targeted. COVID-19 attacks certain races disproportionately. COVID-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese.” Well, there is an argument that the moon is made of green cheese.

In an interview with Reason, he claimed, “I’ve always been aligned with libertarians on most issues.” That makes me chuckle. Having been on this libertarian editorial board on and off since the 1990s, I can assure you many politicians – even those who spent careers advocating for bigger government – suddenly get the libertarian religion during meetings. To the degree RFK Jr. espouses libertarian views, they are of the infantile variety.

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: , ,

Inside the Deepening Rivalry Between Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and California Gov. Gavin Newsom

June 21, 2023 By Steve Peoples 2 Comments

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom says there’s no chance “on God’s green earth” he’s running for president in 2024, but he wants to make clear that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is running, is “weak” and “undisciplined” and “will be crushed by Donald Trump.”

DeSantis, meanwhile, likes to mock Newsom’s apparent “fixation” on Florida while insisting that the Democratic governor’s “leftist government” is destroying California.

Welcome to one of the fiercest rivalries in U.S. politics, featuring dueling term-limited governors who represent opposite ends of the ideological spectrum and lead two of the nation’s largest and most influential states. Newsom and DeSantis almost certainly won’t face each other on any ballot in 2024, but in many ways, they are defining the debate from their corners of America as the presidential primary season gets underway.

Newsom addressed both his contempt for DeSantis and loyalty to President Joe Biden — even after Tuesday’s revelations that the president’s son, Hunter, reached a deal with federal prosecutors on federal tax offenses and a gun charge — in an interview just as the Florida governor launched a two-day fundraising trek spanning at least five stops across California. The Golden State has become one of DeSantis’ favorite punching bags as he tries to avoid a direct confrontation with his chief Republican presidential rival, Trump, and the former president’s escalating legal challenges.

“He’s taking his eye off the ball,” Newsom said of DeSantis’ escalating attacks against him. “And that’s not inconsistent with my own assessment of him, which is he is a weak candidate, and he is undisciplined and will be crushed by Donald Trump, and will soon be in third or fourth in national polls.”

Representatives for DeSantis did not make the governor available for an interview. Beneath the war of words, however, strategists in both parties suggest there may be a mutually beneficial dynamic at play. As they jab at each other’s policies and personalities through comments in the press and on social media, the governors are scoring points with their respective political bases, raising money and expanding their national brands.

Both men issued fundraising appeals Monday going after the other by name.

But it’s not all helpful.

Newsom, in particular, is facing nagging questions about his presidential ambitions less than a week after DeSantis dared him to “stop pussyfooting around” and launch a primary challenge against Biden.

The California governor, whose second and final term concludes at the end of 2026, has seen his national profile grow since he easily beat back a recall attempt in 2021 and cruised to reelection last fall. He finished the midterm campaign with roughly $16 million in the bank. And in March, he channeled $10 million to a new political action committee he’s calling the Campaign for Democracy.

All the while, Newsom’s team has been moving deliberately to avoid the perception that he’s running a shadow presidential campaign just as Biden ramps up his political activities.

For example, Newsom’s new PAC is initially focusing on challenging Republican leaders in deep-red states that are largely irrelevant in the 2024 presidential race. He campaigned in Alabama, Arkansas and Mississippi in April on his first trip associated with the PAC.

Newsom is expected to avoid battleground states or key presidential primary states for the foreseeable future, his allies say.

At the same time, the California governor and his team have been in regular contact with Biden and his top aides, including Jen O’Malley Dillon, who managed the president’s 2020 campaign and serves as deputy White House chief of staff. A Biden campaign official said the president’s team coordinates closely with Newsom.

“Newsom is not going to run against Joe Biden and never would. But life is long, and Newsom is one of the prominent national Democrats. It’s part of that role to have these big national battles,” longtime Newsom adviser and friend Nathan Ballard said of the feud with DeSantis.

“There is the 2024 election, and then there is a 2028 election,” Ballard added.

Indeed, veteran Democratic consultant Roy Behr, whose clients included former California Sen. Barbara Boxer, said the two governors are engaged in what could become an early preview of the 2028 presidential contest.

“It’s not inconceivable that four years from now, these two guys could be their respective parties’ nominees,” he said. In tangling with DeSantis, who is 44, the 55-year-old Newsom is building his national brand and visibility and is “certainly trying to create opportunities for himself.”

Sacramento-based Democratic consultant Andrew Acosta said he expected the ongoing rivalry to continue given that it’s beneficial for both politicians with their core supporters. He described Newsom and DeSantis as “frenemies.”

“They both get points off it,” Acosta said. “There is a hard core of voters on both sides who think this is great.”

While polling shows that many Democrats don’t want the 80-year-old Biden to seek a second term, Newsom said there are no circumstances in which he would challenge the sitting president of his own party.

“Not on God’s green earth, as the phrase goes,” Newsom said in the weekend interview, adding that he would be with Biden on Monday and hosting a fundraiser for him Tuesday. “I have been pretty consistently — including recently on Fox News — making the case for his candidacy.”

On Tuesday, Newsom reaffirmed his support for Biden shortly after news surfaced that the president’s son, Hunter, reached a plea deal with federal prosecutors on charges he failed to pay federal income tax and illegally possessed a weapon.

“Hunter changes nothing,” Newsom told the AP, noting that he was spending the day with Biden.

DeSantis did not plan to make any public appearances during his California fundraising tour, which included stops in Sacramento and the Bay Area on Monday and continues Tuesday with events planned for San Diego, Orange County and Los Angeles.

Over the weekend in Nevada, DeSantis noted that he’s seen a surge of “disgruntled Californians” moving to Florida.

“Why would you leave like a San Diego to come to say, Jacksonville, Florida? I see people doing that,” DeSantis told thousands of conservative activists at a weekend gathering close to the California border. “It’s because leftist government is destroying that state. Leftist government is destroying cities all over our country. It’s destroying other states.”

Former Nevada attorney general Adam Laxalt, who hosted the weekend event and leads the pro-DeSantis super PAC, said the policy contrast between the leaders of Florida and California is “a debate that our whole country needs to have.”

“California has been the model for many leftist policies. I would take the contrast between Florida’s policies and its results led by Gov. DeSantis and the California policies, any day of the week,” Laxalt said in an interview. “We can already see what leftist policies do.”

Both DeSantis and Newsom took office in 2019 and won reelection for their second and final terms in 2022. While in office, both have been buoyed by multiple billion-dollar budget surpluses and the help of statehouses controlled by their own party that supercharged their agendas.

In California, Newsom expanded the state’s Medicaid program to cover all eligible adults, regardless of their immigration status. He signed a raft of legislation to make it easier to get an abortion, including authorizing $20 million in state spending to help people from other states travel to California. When the U.S. Supreme Court declined to strike down an abortion law in Texas that was enforced by private lawsuits, Newsom signed a similar law in California — only he made it about guns.

And earlier this month, he proposed amending the U.S. Constitution to institute what he called a “reasonable” waiting period for all gun purchases, a ban on so-called assault rifles, universal background checks and raising the minimum age to buy a firearm to 21.

“I think Gavin Newsom is a very useful foil for Ron DeSantis, quite frankly,” said Lanhee Chen, a California Republican who attended one of DeSantis’ five California fundraisers this week. “The more kinds of crazy things that Newsom does — at least, crazy in the eyes of Republican voters — the more I think Ron DeSantis frankly benefits as somebody who’s seen as a counterweight to that.”

In Florida, DeSantis has leaned into cultural conservative issues in what he calls his “war on woke.”

Earlier this month, his administration flew groups of migrants from Texas to Sacramento to draw attention to the influx of Latin American immigrants trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border. He did the same last fall, sending dozens of immigrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard, which he often highlights during his stump speeches.

DeSantis also signed and then expanded the Parental Rights in Education bill — known by critics as the “Don’t Say Gay” law, which bans instruction or classroom discussion of LGBTQ+ issues in Florida public schools for all grades. He seized control of Disney World’s governing body after the company publicly opposed the law.

The Florida governor this year also signed a law banning abortions at six weeks, which is before most women realize they’re pregnant. And he took control of a liberal arts college that he believed was indoctrinating students with leftist ideology.

While DeSantis does not have the legal entanglements that Trump faces, Newsom said Democrats may be wrong to assume the former president would be an easier candidate to defeat in the 2024 general election.

Click here to read the full article in AP News

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , ,