Quantcast
Connect with us

Here’s how GOP attacks on Justin Amash could doom Trump’s chances for re-election

Published

on

The Republican Party’s attacks on Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) — the first GOP lawmaker to describe President Donald Trump’s conduct impeachable — could backfire, according to New York Magazine‘s Jonathan Chait.

The Michigan Republican finished reading special counsel Robert Mueller’s report, which he faulted other lawmakers for neglecting to do, and concluded the president had engaged in impeachable conduct — and Attorney General William Barr had misled the public about the investigation’s findings.

ADVERTISEMENT

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and the president accused Amash of going public with his concerns just to gain attention, and Republicans falsely accused the libertarian conservative of voting most of the time with Democrats.

Chait pointed out that Republicans are trying to position Amash, who has already drawn a new primary challenger since going public, as an outsider — but he cautioned this approach could have unintended consequences for Trump and the GOP.

“The grain of truth in the accusations against Amash is that Amash is contemplating a presidential candidacy with the Libertarian Party,” Chait wrote.

ADVERTISEMENT

“A real right-wing third-party challenge, by a Republican (who hails from a swing state) would be a nightmare for Trump’s reelection,” he added, “and the more Republicans attack Amash, the more they close the door on any chance he can return to Congress, where he mostly votes with them, and push him instead to run against Trump. The short-term goal of discrediting Trump’s critics may bring with it a much larger long-term cost.”


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

‘Blow up the phones’: Demands that #BoltonMustTestify surge after new Trump’s Ukrainian aid freeze

Published

on

A day after Democratic lawmakers demanded that former National Security Adviser John Bolton testify in President Donald Trump's impeachment trial, grassroots political action groups urged the American public to call their representatives and add their voices to the call for a fair trial.

"Hearing from first-hand witnesses in the Senate trial is now a necessity," tweeted the progressive group Stand Up America. "Call your senators now and demand a fair trial."

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

World of slime: Here’s why Trump likes to hang out with bottom-feeders and crooked lawyers

Published

on

Donald Trump has been a real estate developer, a TV show host, a casino owner, a politician and more. But through it all, there has been one constant: Trump has surrounded himself with sleazy characters. Oddly enough, those are exactly the people who helped propel him to becoming the 45th president of the United States.That's the thesis of the new book by Pulitzer Prize-winning reporters Michael Rothfeld and Joe Palazzolo, titled aptly enough, "The Fixers: The Bottom-Feeders, Crooked Lawyers, Gossipmongers, and Porn Stars Who Created the 45th President." I spoke with Rothfeld during a recent edition of Salon Talks about the book, a veritable encyclopedia of the unsavory characters that have made Trump who he is, alongside some new reporting.
Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

How corporate lawyers made it harder to punish companies that destroy electronic evidence

Published

on

In the early 2000s, a series of civil lawsuits against giant corporations illustrated the disastrous consequences that could ensue if a defendant failed to provide electronic evidence such as company emails or records. In one suit against tobacco giant Philip Morris in 2004, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler concluded that the company deliberately deleted troves of emails that contained incriminating information. She fined the company $2.7 million for the breach, levied $250,000 fines against each of the company supervisors found culpable and barred them from testifying at the trial.

Big corporations rallied for changes and got them. In 2006, the rules that govern federal litigation were changed to create a “safe harbor” that would protect companies from consequences for failing to save electronic evidence as long as they followed a consistent policy and, when put on notice of imminent litigation, preserved all relevant materials.

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image