View this post on the web at [link removed]

When word came down yesterday that Donald Trump’s request for a “special master” was approved by a judge, I wasn't particularly surprised. But a legal expert I am not, so I wanted to find out whether this really was the “big win” for Trump it was made out to be. According to former federal prosecutor Jennifer Rodgers [ [link removed] ], now an adjunct professor of clinical law at New York University School of Law and a lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School, it most certainly is, because U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon went well above and beyond Team Trump’s request. Rodgers says Cannon, with little or no justification provided, “determined that Trump would be irreparably injured in part because he has a need for the documents seized, in part because information about these items may be leaked to the press and harm him, and in part because these documents may subject him to criminal prosecution.” Cannon ordered the Justice Department to refrain not just from reviewing but also from "using" the seized documents in any way. Rodgers responds, “Under what authority does a judge order not only that the Justice Department and FBI put questioned documents aside but also orders them to forget all about investigative steps they've taken in the two weeks before Trump's attorneys got their act together to file a motion?” The DOJ can, of course, appeal the decision. In any case, this battle is far from over. —Melissa Amour, Managing Editor
Second suspect in Saskatchewan mass stabbing is still at large after his brother was found dead — [ [link removed] ]CNN [ [link removed] ]
Liz Truss becomes Britain's new prime minister — [ [link removed] ]Associated Press [ [link removed] ]
Nuclear monitors demand security zone around Ukraine plant — [ [link removed] ]Bloomberg [ [link removed] ]
Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema sanctioned by Russia — [ [link removed] ]NBC News [ [link removed] ]
Democrats weigh gay marriage vote in pre-election sprint — [ [link removed] ]Politico [ [link removed] ]
Legends of the fall 
Labor Day is over. The kids are back in school. NFL football starts this week. That can only mean one thing: the midterm elections are approaching quickly. This time around, they’re as likely to be shaped by two speeches, delivered days apart by current and former presidents, as by inflation, pandemic, or any of the many other concerns on Americans’ minds. The first, President Biden’s address last Thursday, in which he warned of the dangers posed by “MAGA Republicans,” laid the groundwork for the second—Donald Trump’s tirade at a rally in Pennsylvania on Saturday. Trump unironically slammed Biden’s speech as the "most vicious, hateful, and divisive speech ever delivered by an American president,” and called Biden “an enemy of the state.” —France24 [ [link removed] ]
But will it backfire? Little has curbed Republican enthusiasm for Trump heretofore, but with polls decidedly less red than they were earlier in the summer, will the GOP stick with Trump’s personal grievances as its primary GOTV message? As The Atlantic’s David Frum points out, “At his Pennsylvania rally, the former president gave exactly the narcissistic display his Democratic nemesis tried to provoke.” Whether enough rank-and-file Republicans see it that way remains to be seen. —The Atlantic [ [link removed] ]
“A major gift.” Former Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Charlie Dent agrees with Frum. “Most Republican candidates don’t want anything to do with Donald Trump in this general election,” Dent said. “They want this to be about Joe Biden and the Democrats, but to the extent Trump inserts himself into this conversation, he’s giving the Democrats a major gift right now.” —The Hill [ [link removed] ]
No, we’re not all MAGA. The contrasting speeches have also given a lift to Republicans who’ve fought the Trump-aligned wing of the party. Even within the GOP, there are many people who agree with Biden's sentiments, says Olivia Troye, former homeland security and counterterrorism adviser to former Vice President Mike Pence. “There are many of us Republican voters who are not the right-wing crazy that is taking over the party [and] that is damaging, I would say, to the party,” Troye said. “We don't identify with that at all. And I think as long as they continue to do this, they will lose.” —Newsweek [ [link removed] ]
MORE: Biden was right to ring the alarm for democracy — [ [link removed] ]Financial Times [ [link removed] ]
FiveThirtyEight: More than 1 In 2 Americans will have an election denier on the ballot this fall
“[A]n election denier winning election and taking office is more than a symbolic concern. An election-denying secretary of state could refuse to certify an election that he or she believes was rigged. An election-denying governor could attempt to submit electoral votes that defy the will of the people. And election-denying senators and representatives could vote to count those electoral votes. The 2022 election will determine how many of these candidates get that chance.” —FiveThirtyEight [ [link removed] ]
MORE: Independents are leaning toward Dems in midterm elections: WSJ Poll — [ [link removed] ]Insider [ [link removed] ]
Is our democracy being filibusted?
While Americans and Members of Congress have increasingly expressed support for democracy reforms in recent years, most bills related to these issues have not become law. The fourth biennial Democracy Scorecard, released today by government watchdog group Common Cause, notes that of 18 such House and Senate bills, only one, the Courthouse Ethics and Transparency Act, was signed into law during the 117th Congress. Among those that failed are the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which would strengthen legal protections against discriminatory voting policies, and the Protecting Our Democracy Act, which would help prevent abuses of executive power. The report lays the blame squarely at the feet of the Senate filibuster, which requires 60 votes—not a simple majority of 51—to advance a bill toward a final vote. In a polarized chamber split 50-50, that makes moving legislation close to impossible, even if it is widely popular. —Insider [ [link removed] ]
MORE: Why election experts worry for American democracy and what they say can be done — [ [link removed] ]ABC News [ [link removed] ]
Focus on the Georgia voting system breach
According to just-released surveillance video, several Trump-linked operatives were allowed to access a Georgia elections office with help from a local Republican official who was trying to get Trump reelected. The video was taken the same day Coffee County’s voting system was breached—a potential crime currently being investigated by local authorities as well as the Georgia Bureau of Investigation.
Sent by the Kraken. Computer experts from the forensics firm SullivanStrickler were sent by pro-Trump attorney Sidney Powell on Jan. 7, 2021, to the election office in Coffee County, where they copied a wide range of data from the county’s voting systems for a reported $26,000 fee.
Received by the fake elector. Cathy Latham, the county’s former GOP chair and one of the Republicans who signed on to a false slate of electors in Georgia, let the operatives into the office that day, according to the video, which was obtained as part of a civil lawsuit over Georgia’s election security. Latham previously denied being at the office on the day of SullivanStriker’s visit.
Data data everywhere. The files taken from Coffee County were put on a server and downloaded by “at least” four people outside of SullivanStrickler, including Doug Logan of Cyber Ninjas, which conducted an “audit” of election results in Maricopa County, Arizona; cybersecurity consultant Jim Penrose; former pro surfer Conan Hayes; and a man known only as “Scott T.”—the latter two of whom were also involved in an alleged voting systems breach in Antrim County, Michigan. Stay tuned. —Forbes [ [link removed] ]
MORE: Questions surround handling of election breach investigation in South Georgia county — [ [link removed] ]The Atlanta Journal-Constitution [ [link removed] ]
Ricks: Amid the struggle, signs of hope 
“[T]he House select committee examining how Jan. 6 came to pass has established a factual record that cannot be denied. While unfortunately not truly bipartisan, it also shows part of the legislative branch of the federal government finally awakening and responding to the attack that branch suffered. The Justice Department’s slow but steady pursuit of Jan. 6 perpetrators ‘at any level’ targets those who thought they could speak or act without repercussions. And the American people are paying attention. A recent NBC News poll found that ‘threats to democracy’ topped the list of pressing issues facing the nation.” —Thomas Ricks in The Washington Post [ [link removed] ]
Thomas Ricks is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and author specializing in military and national security issues. His latest book is “Waging a Good War: A Military History of the Civil Rights Movement, 1954-1968.”
MORE: Former Defense leaders decry ‘extremely adverse’ political climate — [ [link removed] ]Politico [ [link removed] ]
Abernathy: Time to finalize the GOP divorce?
“The country might heal more quickly if the left, the right, and the media accepted the modern Republican Party for what it is. For those former lovers who can’t agree to be friends, the best way to move on is to meet someone else. Maybe they could be introduced to someone in the new Forward Party. They seem nice.” —Gary Abernathy in Miami Herald [ [link removed] ]
Gary Abernathy is a contributing columnist for The Washington Post.
MORE: Top House Democrat says ‘mainstream’ Republicans are fighting against MAGA to defend democracy — [ [link removed] ]The Hill [ [link removed] ]
Kudos to Peter Groome for his defense of third parties. The time has come. We must do something bold to break the two-party chokehold on our politics. And kudos to Bill T. of Arizona, who reminds us once again that unscrupulous people in public office must be held accountable. A democracy cannot exist without the rule of law, and it is presently under attack like never before. Vote, volunteer, and engage. Push back against those who would undermine our democracy. —Tim P., New Mexico
Federal judges and Supreme Court justices are often too easily characterized in the popular press as being associated with a particular viewpoint based on the party affiliation of the president who nominated them. This is too casual an approach, for it fails to take into account the often complex legal arguments and approaches taken in legal opinions rendered, or decisions taken on the bench. Chief Justice Roberts had a valid point when he asserted that there are no Republican justices, no Democratic judges in the judicial system—or at least he expressed what should be true.
However, Judge Aileen Cannon of the Southern District of Florida betrayed partiality in her announcement that she was inclined to grant Donald Trump's request for a special master to examine materials seized by the FBI at Mar-a-Lago in that she announced her preliminary intention before the Department of Justice could present its counterargument to the defense's proposal. Her preliminary intention before hearing the DOJ argument indicates she is not an impartial judge in Trump v U.S. and should be removed from the case. —Steve J., Pennsylvania
The views expressed in "What's Your Take?" are submitted by readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff or the Renew America Foundation.

Unsubscribe [link removed]?