(John Bazemore / Associated Press)

Dear Commons Community,

Fani Willis won the court battle to stay on in the Georgia election-meddling case against Donald Trump, but the judge’s opinion contained damning statements that could be “devastating” to Willis’ career, CNN legal analyst Elie Honig said yesterday.

Honig noted that the judge made several critical comments about Willis, the district attorney for Fulton County, Georgia, even as he ruled that she can remain on the prosecution if prosecutor Nathan Wade removes himself.

Willis and Wade were romantically involved, leading to a motion by Trump’s lawyers to dismiss the case on the grounds that Willis improperly benefited from their relationship.

Judge Scott McAfee dismissed the claim, but questioned Willis’ professionalism, character and truthfulness in a “bruising” opinion that would be a “career ender for a normal prosecutor,” Honig said.

“These are really serious findings by the judge about the D.A., and these are all verbatim from the opinion,” Honig said. “First of all, there is a quote, ‘significant appearance of impropriety that infects the prosecution team.’ Second, ‘a tremendous lack in judgment.’ Third, ‘the unprofessional manner of the D.A.’s testimony.’ Fourth, ‘the odor of mendacity remains.’”

Honig said the judge also suggested that Willis cast “racial aspersions on the defendants.” The CNN wonk saved for last what he thought was the most devastating comment of all: “There are reasonable questions about whether the D.A. testified untruthfully.”

“Any one of these statements by a judge would be a career ender for a normal prosecutor,” Honig said. “To have an on-the-record finding that there are reasonable questions about whether you lied under oath? That would be devastating.”

Willis has an election in November and a primary in May.  Her credibility will be on full display!

Tony

Gavin Newsom and Mike Johnson

Dear Commons Community,

Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) bashed each other’s efforts as leaders over topics such as immigration. The two leaders got into a direct spat on X on Wednesday. The exchange began when Newsom, quoting an article about machines used to detect fentanyl sitting unused, attacked Johnson over his record on border security.  As reported by The Washongton Examiner and The Gazette.

“As @GOP screams ‘BORDER CRISIS!’…Here’s what they are doing to help: NOTHING. Actually, worse than nothing,” Newsom wrote. “Machines that could stop the flow of fentanyl across our border are now literally sitting in warehouses. Unused. Not installed. All thanks to the fine leadership of @SpeakerJohnson, going above and beyond the call of Donald Trump.”

Johnson responded within hours, citing legislation opposed by Democrats that sought to secure the border while bringing attention to California’s response to immigration.

“Actually we’ve passed: HR 2, The Laken Riley Act, Bills to deter illegals from committing social security fraud, fleeing border patrol, or drunk driving,” the House speaker responded. “Much better than the Newsom approach of free health care, lodging & ‘sanctuary to all who seek it.'”

Newsom gave a concluding remark by accusing Johnson of blocking funding for border security, also calling the speaker a “fraud.”

“Oops. You left out that whole part about how you blocked $20 billion in funding for things like: – 1,500 new border agents. – 4,300 asylum officers. – New cutting edge tech to detect and stop the flow of fentanyl. You’re a fraud,” he said.

Johnson once again responded by questioning calls for further funding, accusing the Biden administration of being responsible for the border crisis that necessitates such funding.

“Why is the Administration asking for more money? Because their policies opened the border. And those failures are amplified by reckless mayors and Governors like yourself,” Johnson wrote. “Doubling down on these failed policies is why people are leaving California faster than any other state.”

Democrats and Republicans have blamed each other for the worsening situation at the border for months. Republicans allege that Democrats are aiming for an open border policy, while Democrats allege that Republicans are purposefully blocking border security legislation to harm Biden politically.

Good topic for these political leaders to debate!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

The University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee announced earlier this week that it will close its branch campus in Waukesha in the spring of 2025, making it the fifth two-year campus in the UW system to be marked for closure as the state grapples with the sustainability of its higher-education infrastructure.  As reported by The Chronicle of Higher Education.

The latest closure plays out against the backdrop of a larger debate about the size and makeup of, and the competition among, the state’s public institutions of higher education. For decades, Wisconsin’s two-year branch campuses existed as a separate network. Amid declining enrollment and a sharp drop in state funding, the university system consolidated its 13 two-year colleges under several four-year institutions in 2018. Advocates for the two-year institutions argue the move pulled away funding, resources, and students, hurting the mostly rural campuses. They also point to a long history of state disinvestment that has made Wisconsin’s four-year public campuses among the lowest funded in the nation as having manufactured a crisis for the smaller campuses.

Enrollment at the Waukesha campus dropped by 65 percent over the past decade, which was similar to the 60-percent decline seen across the system’s other two-year branch campuses since enrollment peaked in 2010. As is also the case at many of the branch campuses, competition with nearby technical colleges played a role. UW-Milwaukee pointed to recently expanded associate-degree offerings at Waukesha County Technical College — located just miles away from its branch campus — as a driving factor behind the closure decision.

“You essentially have this duplication at a higher cost,” Mark Mone, UW-Milwaukee’s chancellor, told The Chronicle, adding that the cost-per-student is the same at the main R1 four-year campus as at its two-year campuses, but that the latter brings in half as much revenue. “There simply isn’t a positive path going forward.”

Mone’s reasoning echoed that provided for four other closures of UW system branch campuses in the past few months. In January, UW-Green Bay ended in-person classes at its campus in Marinette, Wis. A few months before that, in October 2023, Jay O. Rothman, the system’s president, closed a branch in Richland Center, Wis., and scheduled two others for closure, the campuses in Fond du Lac and Washington County.

Unfortunately, campus closures will continue in Wisconsin and elsewhere as projected student enrollment declines continue.

Tony

Getty Images.

Dear Commons Community,

The European Union made history yesterday, passing the world’s first comprehensive law regulating artificial intelligence. The AI Act is expected to officially become law by May or June, pending formal approval from EU member countries, with provisions starting to take effect six months after the rules enter the lawbooks.

Rules for general-purpose AI systems like ChatGPT will start applying a year after the law takes effect. The complete set of regulations is expected to be in force by mid-2026.  As reported by The Hollywood Reporter and CNBC.

The EU has taken a risk-based approach to its AI regulation, ranking the use of artificial intelligence according to the potential damage it could do. The law bans AI systems that carry “unacceptable risk,” including using biometric data to detect a person’s ethnicity or sexual orientation. High-risk applications, including the use of AI in hiring or law enforcement, will be more tightly regulated, with developers required to show that their models are safe and transparent and adhere to privacy regulations.

For lower-risk AI tools, there will be little to no regulation but developers will still be required to label AI-generated deepfake pictures, video, or audio of existing people, places, or events as artificially manipulated. The law applies to models operating in the EU and any firm that violates the rules risks a fine of up to 7 percent of its annual global profits.

When it comes to enforcement, each EU country will set up its own AI watchdog, and citizens will be able to file complaints if they think their rights have been violated. Brussels will create a stand-alone AI Office tasked with enforcing and supervising the law for general-purpose AI systems.

There will be extra scrutiny for the biggest and most powerful AI models that the EU judges to pose “systemic risks,” which include OpenAI’s GPT4 and Google’s Gemini. Companies providing these systems will have to assess and mitigate the risks, put cybersecurity measures in place, report any serious incidents as a result of their systems and disclose how much energy their models use.

All general-purpose AI systems will have to draw up a policy showing that the content used for training their models respects European copyright law.

As with other digital regulations — like last year’s Digital Services Act, which targeted abuse on social media or the Digital Markets Act, which went into effect March 7 and has the goal of combating market dominance by so-called digital “gatekeepers” — the EU’s AI act aims to be the global default legislation. Similar laws are on the way in countries from Brazil to Japan.

I don’t know how the EU will be able to enforce this law given the global nature of AI companies.

Tony

Credit…Dado Ruvic/Reuters

Dear Commons Community,

The House of Representatives yesterday passed a bill that would lead to a nationwide ban of the video app TikTok if its China-based owner doesn’t sell its stake, as lawmakers acted on concerns that the company’s current ownership structure is a national security threat.

The bill, passed by a vote of 352-65, now goes to the Senate, where its prospects are unclear.

TikTok, which has more than 170 million American users, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Chinese technology firm ByteDance Ltd.

The lawmakers contend that ByteDance is beholden to the Chinese government, which could demand access to the data of TikTok’s consumers in the U.S. whenever it wants. The worry stems from a set of Chinese national security laws that compel organizations to assist with intelligence gathering.  As reported by The Associated Press.

“We have given TikTok a clear choice,” said Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash. “Separate from your parent company ByteDance, which is beholden to the CCP (the Chinese Communist Party), and remain operational in the United States, or side with the CCP and face the consequences. The choice is TikTok’s.”

House passage of the bill is only the first step. The Senate would also need to pass the measure for it to become law, and lawmakers in that chamber indicated it would undergo a thorough review. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said he’ll have to consult with relevant committee chairs to determine the bill’s path.

President Joe Biden has said if Congress passes the measure, he will sign it.

The House vote is the latest example of increased tensions between China and the U.S. By targeting TikTok, lawmakers are tackling what they see as a grave threat to America’s national security — but also singling out a platform popular with millions of people, many of whom skew younger, just months before an election.

In a video posted on Wednesday evening, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew said that the company has invested to keep user data safe and the TikTok platform free from outside manipulation. If passed, he said the bill would give more power to a handful of other social companies.

“We will not stop fighting and advocating for you. We will continue to do all we can, including exercising our legal rights, to protect this amazing platform that we have built with you,” Chew said in his message to the app’s users.

In anticipation of the vote, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman, Wang Wenbin, accused Washington of resorting to political tools when U.S. businesses fail to compete. He said the effort would disrupt normal business operations and undermine investor confidence “and will eventually backfire on the U.S. itself.”

Overall, 197 Republican lawmakers voted for the measure and 15 against. On the Democratic side, 155 voted for the bill and 50 against.

Some Republican opponents of the bill said the U.S. should warn consumers if there are data privacy and propaganda concerns, but the final choice should be left with consumers.

“The answer to authoritarianism is not more authoritarianism,” said Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif. “The answer to CCP-style propaganda is not CCP-style oppression. Let us slow down before we blunder down this very steep and slippery slope.”

“We have a national security obligation to prevent America’s most strategic adversary from being so involved in our lives.”

Democrats also warned of the impact a ban would have on users in the U.S., including entrepreneurs and business owners. One of the no votes came from Rep. Jim Himes, the ranking Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee.

“One of the key differences between us and those adversaries is the fact that they shut down newspapers, broadcast stations, and social media platforms. We do not,” Himes said. “We trust our citizens to be worthy of their democracy. We do not trust our government to decide what information they may or may not see.”

The day before the House vote, top national security officials in the Biden administration held a closed-door briefing with lawmakers to discuss TikTok and the national security implications. Lawmakers are balancing those security concerns against a desire not to limit free speech online.

“What we’ve tried to do here is be very thoughtful and deliberate about the need to force a divestiture of TikTok without granting any authority to the executive branch to regulate content or go after any American company,” said Rep. Mike Gallagher, the bill’s author, as he emerged from the briefing.

“Not a single thing that we heard in today’s classified briefing was unique to TikTok. It was things that happen on every single social media platform.”

TikTok has long denied that it could be used as a tool of the Chinese government. The company has said it has never shared U.S. user data with Chinese authorities and won’t do so if it is asked. To date, the U.S. government also has not provided evidence that shows TikTok shared such information with Chinese authorities.

Republican leaders moved quickly to bring up the bill after its introduction last week by Gallagher and Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill. A House committee approved the legislation unanimously, on a 50-0 vote, even after their offices were inundated with calls from TikTok users demanding they drop the effort. Some offices even shut off their phones because of the onslaught. Supporters of the bill said the effort backfired.

“(It) provided members a preview of how the platform could be weaponized to inject disinformation into our system,” Gallagher said.

Lawmakers in both parties are anxious to confront China on a range of issues. The House formed a special committee to focus on China-related issues. And Schumer directed committee chairs to begin working with Republicans on a bipartisan China competition bill.

Schumer is likely to feel some pressure from within his own party to move on the TikTok legislation. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner announced after the House vote that he would work to “get this bill passed through the Senate and signed into law.”

In a joint statement with Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, the top Republican on the intelligence panel, Warner said that “we are united in our concern about the national security threat posed by TikTok — a platform with enormous power to influence and divide Americans whose parent company ByteDance remains legally required to do the bidding of the Chinese Communist Party.”

Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell, who chairs another panel with jurisdiction on the issue, said she would “try to find a path forward that is constitutional and protects civil liberties.”

Roughly 30 TikTok influencers and others who traveled with them spoke out against the bill on Capitol Hill on Wednesday. They chanted phrases like “Keep TikTok” ahead of the vote. They also held signs that read “TikTok changed my life for the better” and “TikTok helped me grow my business.”

Dan Salinger, a Sacramento, California-based TikTok creator in attendance, said he started creating content on the app during the COVID-19 pandemic purely out of boredom. But since then his account, which features videos about his life and his father, who suffers from dementia, has grown in popularity. Today, he has 2 million followers on the app.

“I’m actually appalled for many reasons,” Salinger said. “The speed with which they’re pushing this bill through does not give enough time for Americans to voice their concerns and opinions.”

Former President Donald Trump has spoken out against the House effort, but his vice president, Mike Pence, is urging Schumer to bring the House bill to a vote.

“There can be no doubt that this app is Chinese spyware and that a sale to a non-foreign adversary company is in the best interests of the American people,” Pence said in a letter to Schumer.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the Senate!

Tony

Robert Hur.    NBC News

Dear Commons Community,

Yesterday, the U.S. Congress held a hearing on Robert Hur’s report on President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents.  I started watching it but after an hour, I could not take it anymore as members of the Congress tried to get Hur in an “aha” moment. Here is a brief recap courtesy of The Huffington Post.

Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-Wis.) asked former Justice Department special counsel Robert Hur point-blank: Is Joe Biden “senile”?

In a February report declaring that no charges were warranted against Biden for mishandling classified documents, Hur had described the president as an “elderly man with a poor memory” — but at a Tuesday hearing on Capitol Hill, he wouldn’t go any further.

“That conclusion does not appear in my report, congressman,” Hur said, later explaining that his description of Biden’s “memory gaps” only mattered for how the president would seem to a jury.

Hur deflected dozens of questions from lawmakers in similar fashion, declining to play along with their hypotheticals or make damaging statements about either Biden or former President Donald Trump — who, unlike his successor, does face charges for mishandling classified material, as well as obstructing federal investigators.

Republicans complained over and over that Biden should have been charged with a crime, while Democrats emphasized Biden’s cooperation with Hur’s investigation and occasionally criticized Hur for calling Biden old. They also played a clip reel of Trump, who’s seeking to retake the White House from Biden, stumbling over his words and saying that he couldn’t remember things.

Hur insisted that politics played no part in his decisions, noting that the law required him to prepare a confidential report for the attorney general about his prosecutorial decisions.

“You say it wasn’t political and you must have understood the impact of your words,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said. “You must have understood the impact of your decision to go beyond the specifics of a particular document to go to the very general, to your own personal, prejudicial, subjective opinion of the president, one you knew would be amplified by his political opponent, one you knew that would influence a political campaign.”

Hur shot back: “What you are suggesting is that I shape, sanitize, omit portions of my reasoning and explanation to the attorney general for political reasons. That is nowhere in the rules.”

One anecdote that was used by Hur’s report to show Biden’s forgetfulness involved the president not remembering what year his son Beau Biden died of brain cancer — a pivotal event in 2015 that contributed to Joe Biden’s decision not to run for president in the following year’s election.

A transcript of the interview between Hur and Biden, released by the Justice Department on Tuesday morning, showed that when he was asked about a time period after his vice presidency in 2017 and 2018 — when he was writing a memoir and living in Virginia — Biden had described his son as either “deployed or is dying.”

As Hur put it, “He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died.”

Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) said that Hur needed to “correct the record” about the anecdote, since the transcript showed that Biden did remember the month and day of his son’s death, if not the year. (Dean initially claimed, incorrectly, that Hur had asked Biden what month his son died; it was Biden who brought it up.)

“What month did Beau die? Oh God, May 30th,” Biden had said, before several aides chimed in to say it was 2015.

In response to a question from House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Hur suggested that Biden’s attorneys repeatedly helping him answer certain questions reflected poorly on the president.

“It was a wealth of details about being there in the moment with the president, including his inability to recall certain things, and I’ll also say, as reflected in the transcript, the fact that he was prompted on numerous occasions by members of the White House counsel’s office,” Hur said.

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) complained that Hur’s report omitted a statement that Hur made to Biden in their interview during a somewhat offhand conversation about Biden’s lake house in Wilmington, Delaware.

“You said, to President Biden, ‘You appear to have a photographic understanding and recall of the house,’” Swalwell said, with a poster bearing Hur’s remark behind him.

“That word does appear on page 47 of the transcript,” Hur said.

“Never appeared in your report, though, is that correct?” Swalwell asked.

“It does not appear in my report,” Hur said.

Swalwell then played another video of Trump slurring his words.

Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) said Hur’s report made him concerned that Biden needed a court-appointed legal guardian to handle his personal finances. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), meanwhile, suggested that Biden may be less senile and “a little craftier, a little more devious, and perhaps a little more intentional than we might otherwise think.”

Toward the end of the hearing, Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.) tried to get Hur to say if he thought Biden needed a legal guardian or if he thought Biden was unfit for office.

“My report did not include any opinions on those issues,” Hur said.

Dull, dull, dull!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

An anti-Trump Republican group is planning to spend $50 million in a campaign to stop the former president from winning a second term in the White House.

Republican Voters Against Trump plans to share testimonial videos of Trump’s past backers who will share why they won’t be supporting the former president come November.

The campaign is orchestrated by Sarah Longwell, a Republican strategist who has long been critical of Trump. The plan is to target “moderate Republican” and Republican-leaning voters in swing states with videos. The group had a similar strategy in 2020, when they shared more than 1,000 testimonials during an election that President Biden won.

The ads featuring the former Trump voter testimonials will be deployed on TV, streaming platforms, billboards, radio and digital media. They will run in the battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Longwell believes the anti-Trump coalition built up in 2020 was one of the determining factors in that contest, and that expanding the demographic in 2024 could be a determining factor in whether Trump returns to the White House.  As reported by The Hill.

“Former Republicans and Republican-leaning voters hold the key to 2024, and reaching them with credible, relatable messengers is essential to re-creating the anti-Trump coalition that made the difference in 2020,” Longwell, the president of the group’s Republican Accountability PAC, said in a statement yesterday.

“It establishes a permission structure that says that — whatever their complaints about Joe Biden — Donald Trump is too dangerous and too unhinged to ever be president again. Who better to make this case than the voters who used to support him?”

The voters who are sharing their testimonies are generally not applauding Biden or arguing why he should be reelected in 2024, but mostly sharing which incidents made them oppose the former president.

“I voted for Donald Trump in 2020. January 6 was the end of Donald Trump for me,” Ethan, a Wisconsin resident, says in the video. He will be voting for Biden. “The peaceful transfer of power is one of the defining pieces of our democracy, and I could not believe that someone I had formerly supported would get behind an effort that would throw that under the bus … There is no choice.”

Here’s hoping this movement is successful!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Virginia will become the second state to ban legacy admissions at public colleges and universities after Governor Glenn Youngkin signed a bill on Friday that unanimously cleared the state legislature.

The bill says public universities cannot give preferential admissions to college applicants based on their familial relationship to the school. Virginia joins Colorado as the only states to ban the practice.   As reported by Scripps News.

Applicants at the University of Virginia were “invited” to share their family’s relationship to the university. The new law says the university can no longer use that information to accept an applicant.

Legacy admissions came under greater scrutiny after the Supreme Court ruled last year in Students for Fair Admissions vs. Harvard that affirmative action programs violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. This largely meant that universities could no longer consider an applicant’s race in admissions.

Affirmative action policies were put in place by a number of universities to boost admissions among historically underserved and discriminated groups. Several states had since banned the practice, but it remained widely used at some of the nation’s top academic institutions.

National Center for Education Statistics data indicates that 32% of all selective four-year colleges and universities said they consider “legacy status” in admissions. These schools are ones that don’t have open enrollment policies.

By comparison, over 40% of universities considered an applicant’s work experience if provided. Nearly 2 out of 3 schools considered personal essays if provided.

In the wake of last year’s ruling on affirmative action, several universities said they would end legacy-based admission considerations. Among them was Wesleyan University in Connecticut, which said the practice had a “negligible role” in decisions.

“We still value the ongoing relationships that come from multi-generational Wesleyan attendance, but there will be no ‘bump’ in the selection process. As has been almost always the case for a long time, family members of alumni will be admitted on their own merits,” university President Michael Roth said.

Two down and forty-eight to go!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Just days after installing his new leadership team at the Republican National Committee, Donald Trump’s lieutenants cut dozens of staff across key departments in an aggressive move that further cements the former president’s takeover of the GOP’s political and fundraising machinery.

More than 60 people were fired in all, including senior staff in the political, data and communications departments inside the committee’s Washington headquarters. The cuts also included staff that ran the committee’s celebrated community centers, which were focused on building relationships with minority groups in some Democratic-leaning states.  As reported by The Associated Press.

The sweeping overhaul was confirmed by multiple people with direct knowledge of the cuts who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the moves publicly.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., celebrated news of the staffing cuts, suggesting they send a clear message about the direction of the GOP.

“MAGA is now in control of the Republican Party!!” Greene wrote on X, referencing Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement. “We will continue to need everyone’s help all the way across the finish line! Do not grow weary.”

Trump’s lieutenants telegraphed major changes late last week as Republican National Committee members gathered in Houston to approve his hand-picked leadership team, which includes his daughter-in-law Lara Trump as the committee co-chair. Michael Whatley, a former North Carolina GOP chairman, replaced Ronna McDaniel as the chair.

The cuts are designed to eliminate duplication as the Trump campaign and the RNC work to become essentially one organization, said Chris LaCivita, a Trump campaign senior adviser who who took over as the RNC chief of staff after Friday’s vote.

“This is Republicans streamlining,” LaCivita said Monday night.

Staffers were notified of the cuts in an email yesterday afternoon from the committee’s new chief operating officer, Sean Cairncross, who offered people an opportunity to reapply for their jobs.

The email, obtained by The Associated Press, indicated that those who choose not to reapply for their jobs would need to leave by the end of March. Some staffers were told to leave their positions immediately on Monday afternoon, however.

“Chairman Whatley is in the process of evaluating the organization and staff to ensure the building is aligned with his vision of how to win in November,” Cairncross wrote in the email.

News of the shakeup was first reported by Politico.

The Trump campaign and the RNC have worked closely in past elections, but the new overhaul marks an unprecedented level of integration between the former president’s campaign and the GOP’s formal political and fundraising apparatus, which is tasked with helping Republicans win elections up and down the ballot. The size and scope of the new changes within the GOP’s formal political and fundraising apparatus may take several weeks to become clear.

Aware of internal concerns about the level of the committee’s commitment to Trump, LaCivita said last week that “not a penny of the RNC’s money” would go to pay Trump’s mounting legal fees.

In her farewell address Friday, McDaniel insisted that the Republican Party must come together in order to defeat President Joe Biden this fall. She said she worries most about “internal cohesion” heading into the election.

“We have to stop the attacking other Republicans,” she said. “If we spend our time attacking each other, we guarantee the Democrats are going to win.”

Republicans have to do more than just stop attacking other Republicans.  They need a capable, honest leader.

Tony