Amanpour & Company: ‘Democracy On Trial: The Case Against Donald Trump For His Role in The 2020 Election’

Amanpour & Company: “Democracy on Trial” The Case Against Trump for His Role in the 2020 Election _ Amanpour and CompanySource:Amanpour & Company talking to filmmaker Michael Kirk.

Source:The New Democrat

“Michael Kirk is the filmmaker behind a new Frontline documentary, “Democracy on Trial.” It charts special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment against former President Donald Trump, which alleges federal election interference in 2020. Kirk tells Hari Sreenivasan why he chose to release the film now.”

From Amanpour & Company

To be very frank here: unless you are some whacked-out, MAGA militant, who thinks that anyone who opposes you, your movement, and Donald Trump himself, is either some plant from the U.S. Department of Justice, The White House, or the mainstream media, the case against Donald Trump and his Jan. 6 militants is pretty obvious.

The entire case against Donald Trump in Washington is on video and all the witnesses against former President Trump, are members of his administration. Like Attorney General Bill Barr, his Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, his Vice President Mike Pence, and at least two other of his White House staffers, like Cassidy Hutchinson, who was one of Mark Meadows assistants, and Alyssa Farrah Griffin, who was part of his communications team.

As well as as all these Conservative Republicans in Georgia like the Secretary of State Brad Raffensburger, or Gabriel Sterling. Go to Arizona with the Republican Speaker of the House Rusty Bowers.

Assuming that Donald Trump loses his presidential immunity appeal at the Washington Federal appeals court, (which I believe is a safe bet) he’s going on trial perhaps at the latest in the late spring this year, in Washington, with all this video evidence, all the phone calls, the text messages, all the Donald Trump Republican testimony against him, etc. With the Trump team having very little if anything to do to either prevent all this evidence coming in against their client. Or be able to contradict any of the evidence that will be shown against their client.

Posted in Amanpour & Company, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ben Meiselas: ‘Donald Trump ATTACKS Financial Monitor After DEVASTATING Report’

Meidas Touch: Donald Trump ATTACKS Financial Monitor After DEVASTATING ReportSource:Meidas Touch– Barbara Jones vs Defendant Don.

Source:The New Democrat

“MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald Trump’s letter in the New York Attorney General civil fraud case calling out his own financial monitor, the very distinguished retired federal judge Barbara Jones.”

From the Meidas Touch

“Tucked into a footnote in a letter written by a former federal judge, Barbara Jones — the court-appointed special monitor overseeing Donald Trump’s New York business-fraud case — is a bombshell that appears to indicate the former president may have engaged in massive tax evasion, The Daily Beast reported.

The letter, first reported by The Messenger, was delivered Friday to update Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron on Jones’ findings while reviewing the former president’s business dealings through the Trump Organization.

In it, Jones wrote the financial information filed to her by Trump’s team contained “incomplete” or “inconsistent” disclosures containing multiple “errors.” However, she described Trump and his businesses as “cooperative” with her investigation.

But buried in the sixth footnote of the 12-page letter is what The Daily Beast, citing legal experts, said was a clue that Trump evaded taxes on $48 million in income, with Jones writing that the massive sum — which Trump has claimed for years that he owes as a debt to one of his companies — seems to have never existed.”

From Business Insider

“Donald Trump on Monday lashed out at the financial monitor overseeing the Trump Organization and urged a judge to fire her days after she reported a range of issues — and flagged a questionable $48 million loan — in the former president’s New York civil business fraud case.

The independent monitor, Barbara Jones, “desperately seeks to justify the continued receipt of millions of dollars in fees going forward,” an attorney for Trump wrote in a letter to Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron.

The attorney, Clifford Robert, said Jones has collected more than $2.6 million in 14 months on the job. New York Attorney General Letitia James has asked Engoron to order that Jones continue to monitor the Trump Organization for at least five years as part of his judgment in the case.

But Robert wrote that Jones’ findings “simply do not support or provide any evidentiary basis for continued oversight.”

Robert made that argument three days after Jones submitted a report to Engoron accusing the Trump Organization of providing incomplete, inconsistent or incorrect information about its financial disclosures.

In a footnote in that report, Jones said she identified a loan between Trump himself and an entity related to Trump Chicago Tower that later turned out not to exist. She was told that the loan was believed to total $48 million, but that there are no agreements memorializing it.”

From CNBC

You can see why New York Attorney General Letitia James wants such a huge penalty against Donald Trump. (Other than the fact that she hates him politically) NYAG is asking for 200 million-dollar judgement against Donald Trump.

But, if this new reporting is true and Barbara Jones is right, she alone found 50 million-dollars of taxable income in the Trump Organization, they apparently tried to hide, to avoid paying taxes on. This coming after the Judge Arthur Engoron has already found Donald Trump guilty of business fraud in New York City.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Real Time With Bill Maher: ‘New Rule: The Year of Sanity’

Real Time With Bill Maher: New Rule: The Year of SanitySource:Real Time With Bill Maher arguing for sanity in America. On next week’s show. Bill Maher will argue for ice skating in the middle of the desert.

Source:The New Democrat

“The battle for the soul of America isn’t Right vs. Left. It’s Normal vs. Crazy.”

From Real Time With Bill Maher

I guess my serious response to Bill Maher here, is anytime you have a country as large and free, as well as diverse as America is, you are going to have a lot of crazy people in it. Let’s face it, we don’t even do a good job at the funding and managing the mental hospitals that we still have, let alone want to build more. And because of this, we have a lot of people who if they lived in a perfect world, (even in a perfect world that still has crazy people in it) these folks would probably be confined to mental hospitals.

Anytime you think that Hamas are freedom fighters and the people who were murdered in Israel back in October simply because they’re Jewish, not because they’re actually guilty of anything, but they’re the real terrorists, or the king of reality TV assholes, is a major party presidential frontrunner, you are obviously in a short supply of sanity.

But in a country 320 million people, that’s in between two of the largest oceans in the world, that’s bordered by two of the largest countries in the world, there’s only so much sanity to go around. But the need for it in America is still there. The question for it is how we as a country get enough of it, so at the very least America doesn’t look like the world’s largest outdoor insane asylum, where the patents are in control of the institution and the staff at the asylum is confined to the rubber rooms.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CBS News: ‘Breaking News: Jury Orders Donald Trump To Pay $83.3 million For Defaming E. Jean Carroll’

CBS News: Breaking News: Jury Orders Donald Trump To Pay $83.3 Million For Defaming E. Jean CarrollSource:CBS News breaking coverage of this story.

Source:The New Democrat

“Former President Donald Trump must pay writer E. Jean Caroll $83.3 million for defamatory statements he made denying he sexually assaulted her, a federal jury ruled Friday. Watch live coverage on CBS News.”

From CBS News

Just off the top of the bat: that 83 million sounds like a gigantic figure, especially based on the numbers that I’ve heard this week, which were more like 5-15 million that was being predicted as far as how much Donald Trump would be forced to pay to E. Jean Caroll. So now the only question here, is would this ruling even survive Judge Lewis Kaplan, or will Judge Kaplan knock that figure down. Or, would this jury ruling survive the appeal that of course Donald Trump’s lawyers will make for him.

Posted in CBS News, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Frank DiStefano: ‘The Liberal & Conservative Era Explained’

Frank DiStefano: The Liberal and Conservative Era Explained _ America's Fifth Party System in a NutshellSource:Frank DiStefano– with an inaccurate look and contribution to the false stereotypes of American liberalism & conservatism.

Source:The New Democrat

“In this episode, we explain the Fifth Party System battle between liberalism and conservatism.

Since the 1930s, American politics has been a battle between the two ideological forces we created to fight over the policies of Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression—New Deal liberalism and modern conservatism. Ever since, all of American politics has centered around this same ideological battle between these two ideological teams.

That’s not to say American politics hasn’t changed since the 1930s. Over time, we’ve added new issues to fight over. In the middle of the twentieth century, we shifted focus from economic issues like labor and taxes to moral and social ones like civil rights, gender equity, the environment, and moral values. The coalitions of our parties also changed, with the Northeast moving from a Republican stronghold to a Democratic one while the Solid South went from Democratic to Republican.

Yet these changes in who votes for each party, and which issues we focus on, aren’t changes in political ideology.

Throughout the entire Fifth Party System era, Democrats stood for the same ideology they first formed under FDR of New Deal liberalism. It combined populism and progressivism into an ideology holding we could employ expertise and social science to benefit working people, the marginalized, and the least well off. Since the 1930, this ideology has justified everything the Democrats have done as well as their critiques of the Republicans. Republicans on the other hand have stood for modern conservatism, pushing back against New Deal liberalism as “big government” that threatens the two ideals of liberty and republican virtue. Since the 1930s, this modern conservative ideology has justified everything the Republicans have done as well as all their critiques of the Democrats.

Which means the core debate of American politics really hasn’t changed since the days of FDR. Which is strange because America has changed quite a bit since 1932. We now face an onslaught of new issues amid a completely different world than the industrial America we created these coalitions to debate and solve.

We know what that means from American political history. It means our parties are primed to come apart.”

From Frank DiStefano

Because it looks like it could be a very slow news day here, what I’m going to do with this post, is something that I simply haven’t had the time to do, for really since the summer with Donald Trump’s legal and political issues essentially taking over the American news cycle, is pushback on a lot of the mainstream stereotypes of what it means to be a Liberal and a Conservative and pushback a lot on what Frank DiStefano is saying here.

If you were landing on Planet Earth today from another planet, from some other galaxy, that no human being is even aware of yet and landed in America and for some reason you were interested in American political philosophy, but all the information that you gathered, was based on what the American mainstream media tells you, you would have a lot of false misconceptions of what it means to be a Liberal and Conservative, not just in America, but the rest of the world.

If you just went off the misconceptions of liberalism today, you would think a Liberal simply wants the national government to take as much money as it can get away with, from the individual, to spend on the people’s behalf for them. Because the supposed liberal government believes that individuals are essentially morons, who can’t think for and govern themselves and they need a big government to make those decisions for them. And you would also think that the supposed Liberal wants to regulate the hell out of individuals (except for gays and women’s health care) because the supposed Liberal sees individual freedom as essentially immoral and dangerous.

There are also lot of other garbage (to be kind) social stereotypes of what it’s supposed to mean to be a Liberal. Liberals are supposed to be left-wing hippies, who think America is the real evil empire and that communism is not just cool, but should be tried here.

And if you look at the situation in Israel right now between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, according to the so-called Liberal, Hamas are the real freedom fighters and the Jews are the terrorists and racists.

As well as Liberals are supposed to be weak and dovish, who wouldn’t even defend themselves, let alone their own country, even when under attack and that they believe that any form of humor or criticism against any minority in America, is bigoted, even if it’s accurate (unless it’s aimed at a right-wing minority) and that all men are pigs are women should rule the world.

If you just landed on Planet Earth in America from Planet Zoltron (or some place) and you were interested in learning about American conservatism and you just went of the mainstream stereotypes of what it means to be a Conservative, you would think that all Conservatives are just Southern or rural, or Southern-rural, fundamentalist, blue-collar, rednecks, who think America has been going to hell since the1960s thanks to the immigration and civil rights laws, as well as women’s liberation and that America is being taken over by women, gays, and minorities.

And, you would think that now it’s time for the supposed man (meaning the Southern, Anglo-Saxon-Protestant-blue collar man) to pushback and take back America. Which is what Donald Trump’s MAGA movement is about. But if they’re Conservatives, then the Libertarian Party in America is actually a Socialist party and the Green Party is the real Libertarian Party. Again, you would have be from another planet just arriving in America today (like an illegal alien) to even consider taking that seriously.

And the Frank DiStefano’s of the world contribute to the political ignorance when it comes to American politic, especially when it comes to liberalism and conservatism. He argued that since 1932 when Franklin Roosevelt ran for and won the presidency from Herbert Hoover, that the Democratic Party was now this supposed New Deal Liberal party. When the fact is FDR didn’t run on any New Deal. His New Deal agenda wasn’t put together until after he becomes President in 1933 and all of those programs were really put together in mid 1930s.

Also, the Democratic Party in the 1930s, was a southern-Anglo-Saxon-Protestant based party, with Neo-Confederates, the Dixiecrats, being a major part of FDR coalition. Frank DiStefano seems to want his viewers to think that it’s 1932 when the Democratic Party became the liberal (his idea of liberal) party in America.

Frank DiStefano also want you to believe its 1932 when the Republican Party became the conservative (DiStefano’s idea of conservative) party in America. When the fact is President Roosevelt needed Progressive Republican votes for most of, if not his entire agenda, passed in Congress (House & Senate) and that it was the Dixiecrats in the Democratic Party that killed a lot of other things that FDR wanted to do, like his Economic Bill of Rights. Any decent book or documentary about FDR’s presidency, would make that very clear to you.

As a political and political history blogger, I believe words and labels not only matter, but they have to matter. You need to know what terms like liberal, conservative, progressive, libertarian, socialist, nationalist, actually mean, before you try to label someone’s politics. Otherwise, you will look like a political idiot or bullshitter. (To be Frank)

The definition of what I’m about to give you of what actual Liberals believe in America, is going to look pretty conservative, at least in the 1960s, 70s, or 80s sense, and perhaps libertarian today. But these are the true liberal values and if you are familiar with liberal democracy as well, you what the true liberal values are:

“Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, right to private property and equality before the law.[1][2] Liberals espouse various and often mutually warring views depending on their understanding of these principles but generally support private property, market economies, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion,[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] constitutional government and privacy rights.[10] Liberalism is frequently cited as the dominant ideology of modern history.[11][12]: 11

Liberalism became a distinct movement in the Age of Enlightenment, gaining popularity among Western philosophers and economists. Liberalism sought to replace the norms of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, the divine right of kings and traditional conservatism with representative democracy, rule of law, and equality under the law. Liberals also ended mercantilist policies, royal monopolies, and other trade barriers, instead promoting free trade and marketization.[13] Philosopher John Locke is often credited with founding liberalism as a distinct tradition based on the social contract, arguing that each man has a natural right to life, liberty and property, and governments must not violate these rights.[14] While the British liberal tradition has emphasized expanding democracy, French liberalism has emphasized rejecting authoritarianism and is linked to nation-building.”

From Wikipedia

Again, to my point about words and political labels having to matter: a conservative is someone whose: “averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values.”

Conservatives believe, in well, conserving. (Hopefully that doesn’t sound like Chinese or Greek to anyone) Conservatives believe in conserving and moving cautiously. They tend to be slow when it comes believing that there’s a need for new public policy and government actions to try to make the society better. Here’s a pretty good definition of conservatism:

“Conservatism is a cultural, social, and political philosophy that seeks to promote and to preserve traditional institutions, customs, and values.[1][2][3] The central tenets of conservatism may vary in relation to the culture and civilization in which it appears.[4] In Western culture, depending on the particular nation, conservatives seek to promote a range of institutions, such as the nuclear family, organized religion, the military, the nation-state, property rights, rule of law, aristocracy, and monarchy.[5] Conservatives tend to favour institutions and practices that guarantee social order and historical continuity.[6]

Edmund Burke, an 18th-century Anglo-Irish statesman who opposed the French Revolution but supported the American Revolution, is credited as one of the philosophers of conservatism in the beginning stage[7], with the other being Joseph de Maistre during a similar time period.[8] [9] The first established use of the term in a political context originated in 1818 with François-René de Chateaubriand during the period of Bourbon Restoration that sought to roll back the policies of the French Revolution and establish social order.”

From Wikipedia

When you listen to mainstream political pundits, or historians talk about American political philosophy, you would think that America really only has two major political philosophies: liberalism and conservatism. That liberalism represents everything on the left, including not just socialism, but militant socialism, as well as militant feminism. And that conservatism represents everything on the right, including Protestant Nationalism or Theocracy, as well as all the ethnic and racial philosophies that comes from Northern-European-Americans that the mainstream media likes to label as White Nationalism.

But the fact is, mainstream political journalists, tend to be overworked and in a lot a of cases are overworked by choice and get lazy. Yes, we have Liberals and Conservatives in America. But we also have Socialists, we have Libertarians, we have Communists even, we have Progressives in true sense as people who simply believe in progress through government action. Not government totalization of society.

And the fact is Liberals and Conservatives actually have a lot in common with each other, at least when you look at them in a classical sense (which is the real sense) and they shouldn’t be mixed up with every other political philosophy in America because of how different all these political philosophies are.

Posted in Frank DiStefano, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Ben Meiselas & Karen F. Agnifilo: ‘WOW! Judge YELLS AT DONALD TRUMP As He Takes The Stand’

Meidas Touch: WOW! Judge YELLS AT DONALD TRUMP as He Takes the StandSource:Meidas Touch– left to right: U.S. Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan & Defendant Don.

Source:The New Democrat

“Legal AF hosts Ben Meiselas and Karen Friedman Agnifolo report on what took place during Donald Trump’s testimony in the E Jean Carroll defamation trial.”

From the Meidas Touch

You have to understand that Donald Trump now lives on another planet. And I’m not talking about Planet Mars vs Earth, but he now lives in a new universe in the sense as far as how he’s able to conduct himself and what responsibilities and rights that he has an American citizen, which are the same rights and responsibilities that every other American citizen has in America.

But mentally, Donald Trump doesn’t even live on Planet Earth, let alone the United States, or even North America. He’s lives on Planet Trump mentally, which is his own mental reality show, in a place where Donald Trump is king and isn’t responsible for the action of everyone, especially himself and where he isn’t accountable to anyone else, except for perhaps himself. But that’s not the world that he lives on. He lives and operates in the same country as everyone else. And Judge Lewis Kaplan is making that perfectly clear.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jonathan Karl In Conversation With Liz Cheney: ‘Oath & Honor: A Memoir & a Warning’

The 92nd Street Y: Liz Cheney in Conversation with Jonathan Karl — Oath and Honor_ A Memoir and a WarningSource:The 92nd Street Y– Jonathan Karl & Liz Cheney.

Source:The New Democrat

“Liz Cheney in Conversation with Jonathan Karl — Oath and Honor: A Memoir and a Warning. Your support helps us continue creating online content for our community. Donate now…

From The 92nd Street Y

“INSTANT #1 BESTSELLER: A gripping first-hand account of the January 6th, 2021, insurrection from inside the halls of Congress, from origins to aftermath, as Donald Trump and his enablers betrayed the American people and the Constitution—by the House Republican leader who dared to stand up to it.

In the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump and many around him, including certain other elected Republican officials, intentionally breached their oath to the Constitution: they ignored the rulings of dozens of courts, plotted to overturn a lawful election, and provoked a violent attack on our Capitol. Liz Cheney, one of the few Republican officials to take a stand against these efforts, witnessed the attack first-hand, and then helped lead the Congressional Select Committee investigation into how it happened. In Oath and Honor, she tells the story of this perilous moment in our history, those who helped Trump spread the stolen election lie, those whose actions preserved our constitutional framework, and the risks we still face.”

From Amazon

“During her time in Congress, Cheney served on the House Rules Committee, Natural Resources Committee, and Armed Services Committee. In 2018 she was elected chair of the House Republican Conference, effective 2019, making her the third-ranking Republican in the House. Cheney largely voted in step with the agenda of the Republican president, Donald Trump (2017–21), and, when the House held a vote to impeach him in 2019, she voted against the two articles of impeachment.

Cheney’s support of Trump changed drastically after the November 2020 election, which the president falsely claimed was rigged and that he had actually won, and after the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, that occurred after President Trump gave a speech in which he encouraged a large crowd of his supporters to march to the Capitol and violently resist Congress’s certification of Joe Biden’s victory over him in the November 2020 presidential election. Cheney was vocal in her criticism of Trump’s actions that day and of his false claims about the election. In the ensuing impeachment proceedings later that month, she voted in favour of the article of impeachment. Her vote to impeach and her continued outspoken criticism of Trump—she famously said that “there has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution”—put her at odds with the majority of her Republican colleagues. She successfully fended off calls for her to be removed from her position of Republican Conference chair in February, but in May she was stripped of the post.

In July 2021 Cheney was selected by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to serve on the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol; she was one of only two Republicans to serve on the committee. She was named vice chair of the committee in September. Her embrace of the committee’s work to investigate the January 6 attack, as well as her continued criticism of Trump’s false claims that he won the 2020 election, led the Wyoming Republican Party to declare in November 2021 that it would no longer recognize her as a member of the party; it had previously censured her in February after she voted to impeach Trump. Undaunted, in May 2022 Cheney announced that she was running for reelection. The next month, the Select Committee’s televised hearings began, with Cheney taking a prominent role in the proceedings.

Cheney’s unrelenting repudiation of Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, her vote to impeach Trump, and her significant role in the January 6 attack investigation and hearings made her very unpopular with most of her Wyoming constituents, who overwhelmingly supported Trump. As such, she was expected to lose in the Republican primary election, held on August 16, 2022. She was soundly defeated by Harriet Hageman, a candidate who fully embraced Trump’s false election claims and had the support of the former president as well as the Republican Party leadership. As Cheney conceded the election that night, she condemned the election denialism movement in the Republican Party and reaffirmed her resolve to put country over party and to fight for the survival of America’s democracy. Her term in Congress ended in January 2023.”

From Britannica

“Neoconservatism is a political movement that began in the United States and the United Kingdom during the 1960s during the Vietnam War among foreign policy hawks who became disenchanted with the increasingly pacifist Democratic Party and with the growing New Left and counterculture of the 1960s. Neoconservatives typically advocate the unilateral promotion of democracy and interventionism in international affairs, grounded in a militaristic and realist philosophy of “peace through strength.” They are known for espousing opposition to communism and political radicalism.[1][2]

Many adherents of neoconservatism became politically influential during the Republican presidential administrations of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, peaking in influence during the administration of George W. Bush, when they played a major role in promoting and planning the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Prominent neoconservatives in the George W. Bush administration included Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle and Paul Bremer.

Although U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had not self-identified as neoconservatives, they worked closely alongside neoconservative officials in designing key aspects of George W. Bush’s foreign policy; especially in their support of Israel, promotion of American influence in the Arab World and launching the “War on Terror”.[3] Bush administration’s domestic and foreign policies were heavily influenced by major ideologues affiliated with neo-conservatism, such as Bernard Lewis, Lulu Schwartz, Daniel Pipes, David Horowitz, Robert Kagan, etc.[4]

Critics of neoconservatism have used the term to describe foreign policy and war hawks who support aggressive militarism or neo-imperialism. Historically speaking, the term neoconservative refers to those who made the ideological journey from the anti-Stalinist left to the camp of American conservatism during the 1960s and 1970s.[5] The movement had its intellectual roots in the magazine Commentary, edited by Norman Podhoretz.[6] They spoke out against the New Left, and in that way helped define the movement.”

From Wikipedia

“Cheney is a neoconservative who rejects America First foreign policy.[151] She opposed proposals to withdraw from Afghanistan.[152] Cheney has criticized what she has called the “Putin wing” of the Republican Party.”

From Wikipedia

I give you all of this background about Liz Cheney because Donald supporters like to call any Republican who doesn’t support their cult hero (my words) Donald Trump 100% of the time, a RINO.

The Tea Party now MAGA (but it’s the same political coalition) definition of RINO, is someone whose a Republican in Name Only. And that includes any Republican who doesn’t agree with them 100% of the time, including pro-constitution, pro-business, pro-national security hawk, pro-rule of law, Republicans, like Liz Cheney.

The Tea Party, now MAGA, has been trying to eliminate the traditional, center-right, elitist, Republican Party, that was the Republican Party really all the way up to 2009 when George W. Bush left The White House and replace it with a populist, blue-collar, new-constitutional, (if not anti-constitutional) political, anti-rule of law, nationalistic, party. And the way for them to do that as they see it, is to primary all the traditional, center-right, elitist Republicans, and replace them with populist Tea Party/MAGA members.

But, going back to Abraham Lincoln, at least, the Republican Party has always been a pro-wealth, pro-property rights, pro-business, pro-constitution, pro-rule of law, pro-hawk, pro-individual rights, political party. They’ve always had a fringe movement, a populist movement. that looks very different from traditional Republicans. And so does the Democratic Party with it’s Far-Left.

But the Liz Cheney’s of the world (who The New Democrat calls the American Iron Lady) just represents traditional Republicanism, traditional Conservative Republicanism. It’s Donald Trump and his MAGA movement, who are the true RINOS, who are trying, if they haven’t already succeeded, to take over the Republican Party and turn it into a new political party, based on the right-wing-populist values, that I’ve already laid out.

Posted in Book TV, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Alan Dershowitz: What Happens if Donald Trump Gets Convicted Before The Election?

Alan Dershowitz: What Happens if Donald Trump Gets Convicted Before The Election?Source:Alan Dershowitz– talking about Donald Trump’s legal cases.

Source:The New Democrat

“The Dershow staring Alan Dershowitz: My legal analysis: what happens if Trump gets convicted before the election?”

From Alan Dershowitz

Just to give you my political analysis as far as what happens if Donald Trump goes to trial in Washington: (which is the only case that has a shot of being tried and getting a decision on before the 2024 elections)

The election would be over at that point. There are polls including from CNN and other places, where 1/4, perhaps even as many as 1/3 Republicans, would not vote for Donald Trump if he’s a convicted of a felony, before the 2024 election. Trump can’t afford to even lose 10% of the Republican Party, especially if there’s a large Democratic turnout and President Biden wins Independents overwhelmingly again.

There were polls in even Iowa and New Hampshire that showed a large percentage of Republicans wouldn’t vote for Donald Trump, if he’s a convicted felon before the 2024 election. You could argue that the Donald Trump doesn’t need a conviction even, before he loses the election, because of all the evidence against him relating to the January 6 insurrection, as well as his own people from his own administration, testifying against him, perhaps in the late spring or summer this year.

Posted in Alan Dershowitz, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CNN: ‘Watch Joe Biden React To Hecklers’ Repeated Interruptions During Speech’

CNN: Watch Joe Biden React To Hecklers' Repeated Interruptions During SpeechSource:CNN– President Joseph R. Biden (Democrat, Delaware) at a political rally in Virginia.

Source:The New Democrat

“President Joe Biden’s abortion rights rally in Virginia was beset by repeated protests over his handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as he delivered remarks. CNN’s expert panel discusses.”

From CNN

Joe Biden needs to young voters to vote for him in big numbers in 2024. There’s no question about that. I don’t think he can rely on Independents and mainstream adult Democrats, (my words) as well as a certain chunk of center-right Never-Trump Republicans to either vote for him, or vote for someone besides Donald Trump, or not vote at all, to defeat Donald Trump. This election is too important and he needs to go after as many voters and get them to the polls as possible.

The problem here is that there’s only so much that Joe Biden can do for young voters, who tend to be very left-wing and inexperienced as far as how the real world works, and tend to be way too idealistic to look at these issues objectively.

“Give peace a chance” is not a foreign policy. President Biden is not going to cut off Israel. I think what the President can at most right now, is keep giving speeches on the importance of Israel defending itself and eliminating the Hamas threat to the Jewish State, while at the same time arguing that Israel needs to evacuate as many Gazan civilians as possible and get those folks to safe areas, as they’re eliminating the Hamas terrorist threat against the Jewish State. And hope these young voters get introduced to reality and start living in the real world.

Posted in CNN, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Michael Popok: ‘Donald Trump’s Lawyers Who TURNED AGAINST HIM All Join Forces’

Meidas Touch: Donald Trump’s Lawyers Who TURNED AGAINST HIM All Join ForcesSource:Meidas Touch two of the former President’s men who testified against Defendant Don.

Source:The New Democrat

“Key lawyer witnesses against Trump for election interference , his former White House counsel (Pat Cippolone) and former attorney general (Bill Barr) have decided to bide their time until they testify by joining forces to found a new law firm, using a law firm name that is intended to mock Trump. Michael Popok of Legal AF breaks down why Cippolone and Barr literally working together spells doom for Trump at trial.”

From the Meidas Touch

What Michael Popok laid out are basically the two legal wings of the modern Republican Party. One of those wings could also be called the Grand Ole Party. And these are Conservative Republicans, Conservative lawyers, who believe in conserving the American republic, our form of government, the Constitution, our individual rights, democracy, and rule of law.

There might be some exceptions here, but the people who are left to represent Donald Trump in all his legal struggles, are the MAGA Party, are MAGA lawyers. They go by the policy that just because you should lose on the facts and evidence, doesn’t mean you’ll lose or should even lose. Because they could try to delay and obstruct, with all sorts of worthless motions and appeals, in attempt to delay the prosecutors from even putting on their case against their client.

Put the entire modern Republican Party together and it’s not what was called the Grand Ole Party, because MAGA which has no interest in conserving anything that relates to our Constitution, our form of government, the rule of law, our democracy, etc, is so dominant in today’s Republican Party today. But the modern Republican Party still has GOP Republicans in it, that are led by the Conservative Republican lawyers that have already been mentioned here, as well as George Conway and other Conservatives.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment