Former President Trump didn’t impress the judges yesterday.

On the Defense

The Story

Former President Trump didn’t impress the judges yesterday.

Which judges?

The ones deciding his federal election interference case. Reminder: there’s the civil fraud case, the classified documents case, hush-money and defamation cases, and more. 45's court appearance was about the Justice Department’s election case, in which special counsel Jack Smith referred four criminal charges accusing Trump of trying to overturn the 2020 election results. Yesterday, Trump’s lawyers asked a panel of appeals court judges in DC to dismiss the case.

How’d that go over?

Not well. Trump’s team maintained that he is immune from prosecution over his actions on January 6th. Their argument: that Trump cannot be tried for his actions while serving as president since it’s up to Congress to decide whether to impeach and convict (reminder: Trump's been impeached twice, acquitted twice). One judge tried to press how far Trump’s lawyers thought that logic would go, asking whether a president could be charged for ordering Navy SEALs to assassinate a political rival. The Trump team's response: not without a congressional conviction. The judges — two appointed by President Biden, one by former President George HW Bush — did not seem convinced. One judge said “it’s paradoxical” to say that the constitutional duty to ensure laws are “faithfully executed” allows a president to violate criminal law.

So what now?

If the judges decide against Trump, he’s expected to appeal the case and potentially get it in front of the Supreme Court. The pressure is on: next week are the Iowa caucuses. If the trial goes on as planned in March, it will start the day before Super Tuesday. Meanwhile, Trump has been showing up in person to advocate for himself not just in court — but in the court of public opinion. Yesterday, he dismissed the election interference case as “persecution of a political opponent” and said: “When they talk about threat to democracy, that’s your real threat to democracy.”

theSkimm

The 2024 election is partially playing out in court as the Republican Party’s leading nominee fights prosecution. What happens next is in the hands of judges who could help set a precedent for future US leaders and elections — a precedent some see as dangerous, others as necessary.

Who’s clearing the air…

The Pentagon. Yesterday, it revealed that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s secretive hospitalization was related to prostate cancer treatment. Last week, Austin landed in the ICU after developing complications from a minimally invasive surgery on Dec 22 to treat the cancer. Austin didn’t tell the White House or Congress about his condition for days. President Biden first learned about Austin’s cancer diagnosis yesterday. Republican lawmakers say Austin acted recklessly, leaving US military leadership in doubt. Pentagon officials maintain Austin’s hospitalization didn’t put national security at risk, adding that his diagnosis is “deeply personal.” But after being left in the dark, the Biden admin is now requiring Cabinet members to keep the White House up-to-date on anything that may affect their duties.

What’s saying “it wasn’t me”…

The Securities and Exchange Commission. Yesterday, the price of bitcoin briefly spiked to nearly $48,000 after the SEC appeared to tweet that it approved bitcoin ETFs. Plot twist: It wasn’t the SEC. The agency said its account on X had been “compromised” and that it hasn’t signed off on the ETFs, or exchange-traded funds. It comes as crypto investors have been waiting for the SEC to give its stamp of approval. An ETF is a kind of investment fund that Americans have thrown at least $4 trillion into and could provide more regulated crypto trade. Now, the fake post is raising concerns about possible market manipulation, with some Republicans calling on the SEC to answer questions about what happened. Meanwhile, the SEC could reportedly approve bitcoin ETFs as soon as today.

Who’s got a bone to pick…

Bill Ackman. Yesterday, the hedge fund billionaire doubled down on his comments against Business Insider’s articles about his wife, former MIT professor Neri Oxman. Last week, BI published reports saying Oxman plagiarized parts of her 2010 dissertation, pulling content from Wikipedia and omitting quotation marks in several excerpts. Oxman said "I regret and apologize for these errors" and will update her work. Ackman, who helped lead the campaign against Harvard’s former president Claudine Gay in part because of plagiarism allegations, suggested anti-Zionism is at play in BI's reporting. He pressed BI’s owner, the German company Axel Springer, to investigate the journalists’ work. Now, Axel Springer said it's reviewing the articles and motivation behind them. The journalists said they’re “disappointed” with the decision and stand behind their work.

Who’s got a new office…

Gabriel Attal. Yesterday, French President Emmanuel Macron picked 34-year-old Attal to be France’s new prime minister. This makes Attal the youngest person in French modern history — and first gay man — to take on the role. Most recently, he served as education minister and made headlines for signing off on a controversial ban of the abaya (a robe-like dress worn by Muslim women) in public schools. Some view Attal’s appointment as Macron's attempt to re-energize his government, which has struggled following pension and immigration reforms.

While the Mandalorian and Grogu have a new adventure coming…

NASA is holding off on its lunar plans.

Who’s giving “Chicken Little” vibes…

A physics teacher.

Who “ain't into makin’ love”...

50 Cent. 

theSkimm helps you tackle your to-do lists, whether you're refinancing your loans or choosing a daycare for the first time. We talk to experts and real women to empower you to make decisions faster and with more confidence. Check out our guides to get started.

PS: Your feedback makes a big impact. Let us know what you like, what could be improved, and most importantly, if we helped you get sh*t done. Share your thoughts.