Category: Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology Page 4 of 14

Delve into diverse topics including political ideology, socialization, women in politics, and more. Engage with insightful argumentative essays on American politics and beyond.

Trump Is Ineligible to Be President, Say Legal Scholars

By Connie Wilson

On August 22, 2023

In Editorial, Education, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, News, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics, Pop Culture

According to a recent publication by two Constitutional scholars, Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be President of the United States, because of the Constitutional prohibition under Section 3 of the 14th amendment, which bars anyone from elected office who has “engaged in” or “given aid or comfort” to an “insurrection or rebellion.”

The scholars—William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas—argue in a law review article that Trump’s attempted coup d’etat “automatically” disqualifies him. The scholars say that “every official, state or federal, who oversees elections has the authority to bar Trump from the ballot.

Baude and Paulsen are not Biden-loving partisans, according to Matt Ford in “The New Republic.” They belong to the Federalist Society, the powerful right wing organization that helped stock the Supreme Court with conservatives.

Section 3 addressed the problem of Southern states sending Confederate official to Washington D.C. after the Civil War. The terms “insurrection” and “rebellion” should apply to “only the most serious of uprisings against the government.”

Baude and Paulsen’s “powerfully argued” case reaches the “obvious conclusion” that Trump tried mightily in several extra-legal ways to overturn an election he had clearly lost. Thus, he “engaged in insurrection and rebellion and gave aid and comfort to other who did the same.”

Legally, the argument is “very compelling,” said Zack Beauchamp in “Vox.” However, MAGA Republicans might well react with violence to a Supreme Court that might agree with Article 14, Section 3, making January 6th into a prelude to more disaster.

Chris Christie: GOP Savior or GOP Gadfly?

By Connie Wilson

On June 22, 2023

In Editorial, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, News, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics, Television

Christie in 2022

Frank Bruni is a contributing Opinion writer who was on the staff of The Times for more than 25 years. He wrote a June 21^st opinion about Chris Christie’s recent remarks during his CNN Town Hall appearance. Mr. Bruni found Christie’s remarks as refreshing and as necessary as I did, in watching this appearance.

I had also just completed reading Margaret Haberman’s book on Donald J. Trump. Haberman, the New York Times writer assigned to cover Trump over decades, interviewed hundreds of personal friends of DJT and related that Christie was very definitely trying to snag the VP nomination for himself during 2016.

Most of us who watched Mr. Christie during his Sunday morning talk show appearances know that he was the politician tapped to “prep” Donald J. Trump for debates during his run, although DJT was not a willing student at all times. One of the more startling facts that Haberman rehashed was how Trump, himself, kept Christie wondering about who would ultimately be his running mate. The three finalists were said to be Pence, Christie and Newt Gingrich. Trump called up the Indiana Senator and told him to fly out for the announcement, and Christie got wind of the Pence family’s arrival in Teterboro, N.J. It was not a happy conversation when Christie realized that Trump had been jacking him around for literally months, I’m sure.

Here’s what Frank Bruni had to say: “Chris Christie made a complete fool of himself back in 2016, fan-dancing obsequiously around Donald Trump, angling for a crucial role in his administration, nattering on about their friendship, pretending or possibly even convincing himself that Trump could restrain his ego, check his nastiness, suspend his grift and, well, serve America. But then Christie, a former two-term governor of New Jersey, had plenty of company. And he never did style himself as a saint.

It’s all water under the George Washington Bridge now. The Chris Christie of the current moment is magnificent. I don’t mean magnificent as in, “He’s going to win the Republican presidential nomination.” I don’t mean I am rooting for a Christie presidency and regard him as the country’s possible saviour.

But what he’s doing in this Republican primary contest is very, very important. It also couldn’t be more emotionally gratifying to behold. He’s telling the unvarnished truth about Trump, and he’s the only candidate doing that. A former prosecutor, he’s artfully, aggressively and comprehensively making the case against Trump, knocking down all the rationalizations Trump has mustered and all the diversions he has contrived since his 37-count federal indictment.”

In a poll released on Friday by The New Hampshire Journal, Christie had pulled into third place among Republicans in the state, far behind Trump, who had 47 percent of the vote, but not far behind Ron DeSantis, who had just 13. Christie had 9, followed by Mike Pence with 5. That partly reflects Christie’s decision to make his initial stand, so to speak, in New Hampshire. But it also reflects something else: He’s excellent at this.

Christie is to DeSantis what a Roman candle is to a scented votive. He explodes in a riot of color. DeSantis, on his best days, flickers.”

I would like to add that Christie’s performance on that CNN Town Hall, was, indeed, more like a Roman candle than the halting delivery of second place runner Ron DeSantis. I found his one-on-one answers to members of the audience to be spot-on, even when one asked about the infamous Bridgegate controversy that ended his time in New Jersey politics.

My enchantment with Christie’s fireworks makes me a cliché. In an observant and witty analysis in The Atlantic on Monday with the headline “Chris Christie, Liberal Hero,” David Graham inventoried the adoring media coverage Christie has garnered, noting that while there’s zero evidence that Christie could actually win the contest he has entered, “pundits are swooning.” It should be noted here that hard-core GOP voters were less thrilled with Christie’s sudden emergence as one of the few Republicans to let the truth prevail. Many of the most faithful Republicans—up to 70% in one poll—said they would not vote for him.

But the swoon isn’t about Christie’s prospects. It’s about the hugely valuable contrast to other Republican presidential candidates that he’s providing. And about this: The health of American democracy hinges on a reckoning within the Republican Party, and that won’t come from Democrats saying the kinds of things that Christie is now saying. They’ve been doing that for years. It’ll come — if it even can — from the words and warnings of longtime Republicans who know how to get and use the spotlight.

Did you see Christie’s CNN town hall last week? Have you watched or listened to any of his interviews? He’s funny. He’s lively. He’s crisp. And he’s right. Over the past few weeks, he has described Trump’s behavior as “vanity run amok.” Trump himself is “a petulant child.”

At the town hall: “He is voluntarily putting our country through this. If at any point before the search in August of ’22 he had just done what anyone, I suspect, in this audience would have done, which is: said, ‘All right, you’re serious? You’re serving a grand jury subpoena? Let me just give the documents back,’ he wouldn’t have been charged. Wouldn’t have been charged with anything, even though he had kept them for almost a year and a half.”

Other candidates, who prefer not to talk about the charges against Trump, are reportedly worried that his indictment will mean ceaseless chatter about him and extra difficulty promoting their own (muted and muddled) messages. Josh Barro, in his Substack newsletter Very Serious, nailed the absurdity of that, pointing out that Trump’s front-runner status and enormous lead over all of them guarantee that he’ll always monopolize the conversation, indictment or no indictment.

“The Republican nomination campaign cannot — and will not — be about anything but Donald Trump, and the media is not going to invite them on TV to talk about topics other than Donald Trump,” Barro wrote. “So, since they are going to talk about Donald Trump all the time, they had better talk about why he should not be nominated.” Christie is getting invitations and attention because he is doing precisely that. Maybe, just maybe, some of them will take note and wise up.

To the conundrum of what, if Christie qualifies for the Republican primary debates, he’ll do about the required pledge that he support whoever winds up getting the party’s nomination, he has apparently found a solution that’s suited to Republicans’ willful and nihilistic captivity to Trump, the stupidity of the pledge and the stakes of the race: He’ll sign what he must and later act as he pleases.

“I will do what I need to do to be up on that stage to try to save my party and save my democracy,” he told Jake Tapper on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday morning.

Let’s pivot from Trump and Trump analogues to Trump sycophants. In The Atlantic, Tom Nichols described how J.D. Vance, who once spoke with such disparaging and devastating accuracy about Trump, did a self-serving about-face in his 2022 Senate race in Ohio and, reprogrammed by that victory, never looked back: “What he once wore as electoral camouflage is now tattooed all over him, in yet another fulfillment of the late Kurt Vonnegut’s warning that, eventually, ‘we are what we pretend to be.’”

Chris Christie, superhero? He has his own supersize vanity. He is arguably playing the only part in the crowded primary field available to him. And those dynamics may have as much to do with his assault on Trump as moral indignation does. Even so, saving his party and country agrees with him.

DeSantis, Pence, Tim Scott, Nikki Haley and other Republican presidential candidates are clearly telling themselves that they can’t do any good down the road if at this intersection they provoke Trump and run afoul of his supporters.

Where have we heard that before? It’s a version of what Christie said to himself in 2016. He now sees the folly of that fable.

Tucker Carlson Out at Fox: Memories of His Bow-Tie Days

By Connie Wilson

On April 25, 2023

In Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, News, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics

Tucker’s last segment on Fox was about eating bugs. And then he said he’d be back on Monday (another lie). I had the misfortune to see Tucker “live” in 2008 when he was one of the speakers at the Libertarian convention in Minneapolis (MN), held at the very same time as the GOP convention in St. Paul. He was still in his bow tie phase and looked and acted like a total doofus, but the entire convention ($17 for entry; I was press) was a surreal experience. Alongside Tucker onstage were Ron Paul (Sr.), former Governor of Minnesota Jessie Ventura and Barry Goldwater, Jr., who was the spitting image of his father. It was a totally weird experience, which I will explore in greater depth on my WeeklyWilson blog, because I still marvel that I was there at all.

I had no intention of attending the Libertarian convention, which was dubbed something like “Rally for the Republic.” The entire reason for my presence can be summed up by one name: Phil Bennett.

Who is Phil Bennett, I hear you say. Well, at the time, I had paid Phil to come to my humble abode and teach me how to post using a WordPress blog and this was truly not my forte then or now. Phil had to come back three times to “fix” various problems I had, including placement of my pictures, and, at one point, he became so exasperated that—knowing I would be going to Minneapolis to cover the GOP convention in St. Paul—-he requested (demanded?) that I attend the Libertarian rally, which he knew was being held across town in Minneapolis at the same time. Phil had the power, as I knew I’d be calling on hm, sooner or later, and I wanted to be blogging more expertly from that point (2007) on.

So, I applied for and got Press Credentials for the Ron Paul Rally for the Republic Libertarian Convention and, oh, my! It was definitely an out-of-body experience.

Ron Paul, Sr., was then the presidential candidate and hopeful of the Libertarians (about whom I knew next to nothing) and he stood, center stage, while a hastily hung banner behind him fell to the floor. He had an aide standing directly behind him, a slightly portly fellow in a suit, who was glued to his cell phone the entire time the boss was talking. He was visible throughout Senator Paul’s speech, but acted as though he was texting his girlfriend back home.

Inside the Democratic National Convention of 2008 (Pepsi Center) in Denver, Colorado.

Onstage with Tucker and his bow tie, as noted above, was Jesse Ventura, the former Governor of Minnesota and co-star of “Predator,” who claimed that he was going to run for president in 2012. As we now know, that didn’t happen, and neither did the legalization of hemp, which seemed to be the chief plank in the Libertarian platform.

I was immediately led down front to the press box, where I found myself surrounded by a bevy of men who spoke English with a definite German accent and were trying to explain to me the basic tenets of Libertarianism. I also noticed a well-dressed young man wearing a badge to the real Republican convention, then going on across town in St. Paul. I finally asked him, “Why are you here? Aren’t you supposed to be across town at the Republican convention?” His response? “This is where the real action is.”

I still remember how much Barry Goldwater, Jr., looked like his father, the Arizona Senator. And, since I remembered Barry’s run for the roses and the slogan, “In your heart you know he’s right—far right,” seeing the young doppelganger onstage was a surreal experience, as was the entire convention.

During the breaks in the speeches the group of attendees, who closely resembled the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys we saw storming the Capitol on January 6^th, would assemble in the bar and hold forth on a variety of topics, none of them concepts with which I could identity at all.

It was truly a remarkable memory of my 2008 cross-country coverage of th: e presidential season, which began in Iowa, included Florida (Rudy Giuiliani’s “run” or “trot”), involved entrance to both the DNC and the RNC conventions in Denver and St. Paul, and also involved the Belmont Town Hall meeting in Nashville, Tennessee.

For a more up-close-and-personal view of that adventure, which earned me the title Yahoo Content Producer of the Year for Politics, I recommend “Obama’s Odyssey”, volumes I and II, both available on Amazon and both exceedingly readable.

If I can find pictures from that campaign experience of 15 years ago, I’ll include them with this article on my still-in-existence blog, but, otherwise, it’s strictly going to be pictures of Tucker Carlson.

Texas Attorney General Paxton Racks Up $3.3 Million Settlement Bill & Wants Taxpayers to Pay

By Connie Wilson

On February 19, 2023

In Editorial, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, News, Politics

[This editorial from the “Austin American-Statesman” is in reference to the $3.3 million settlement that Texas taxpayers are supposed to pick up the tab for. It ran on Wednesday, February 15^th.]

Image result for image of attorney general ken paxton texas

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton

After agreeing last week to settle a whistleblowers’ lawsuit against him that will likely cost Texas taxpayers $3.3 million, ethically compromised Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Friday tried to falsely spin it as a win—for taxpayers.

“I have chosen this path to save taxpayer dollars and ensure my third term as Attorney General is unburdened by unnecessary distractions,” Paxton said in a statement.

Even for a public official as shameless as Paxton, this absurdist political spin is breathtaking. The fact is that Paxton’s firing of 8 whistleblowers who credibly accused him of bribery and abuse of office is almost certain to cost Texas taxpayers millions, just as it has cost the Texas attorney general’s office reputational damage that can only be repaired when Paxton, re-elected to a third 4-year term in November, is no longer in office.

Settlement Agreement Raises Questions About Use of Tax Dollars

The mediated tentative settlement agreement requires a $3.3 million settlement payment to 4 of the whistleblowers and an apology from Paxton to the plaintiffs, but not an admission of wrongdoing. The agreement raises serious questions about the propriety of asking Texas taxpayers to pay the settlement on Paxton’s behalf. The agreement is contingent on “necessary approvals for funding,” which means the Texas legislature may have to consider a funding request.

It’s certainly convenient for Paxton to ask taxpayers and Texas lawmakers to clean up the mess he made while professing he’s doing it “to save taxpayer dollars, but lawmakers must not let him off the hook easily, and should investigate whether the payment is an appropriate use of tax dollars.

Paxton has argued that Texas law allows for the expenditure of tax money to defend against multiple lawsuits filed against him during his tenure as attorney general. But Andrew Cates, who wrote a book called “Texas Ethics Law” said that doesn’t make it right, especially when the issue is a multi-million dollar settlement stemming from the firing of whistleblowers.

Cates said, “This is one of those just because you can doesn’t mean you should situations. I, personally, believe it would be more appropriate for him to take it out of his campaign fund.” Cates pointed to a Texas statute that allows campaign donations to pay the legal bills of a candidate or office-holder.

The whistleblower saga began in 2020 when 8 attorneys in the attorney general’s office—all of them appointed to their positions by Paxton—either resigned or were fired after telling federal investigators that they were concerned that Paxton was using the power of his office to help Austin investor Nate Paul, whose home and offices were searched by federal investigators in 2019. They accused Paxton of illegally using his office to help Paul, in exchange for benefits that included a $25,000 donation to his re-election campaign, remodeling Paxton’s home, and giving Paul’s alleged mistress a job. Overriding a decision by his agency’s Charitable Trusts division, Paxton also directed his office to intervene in a lawsuit against Paul lodged by The Mitte Foundation.

Paxton’s Legal Bills Are Adding Up

The allegations against Paxton are sadly unsurprising when considering his time in office. For 7 years he has been under federal indictment for securities fraud and the State Bar of Texas has sued to sanction him for his shameful role in trying to overturn the legitimate presidential election of 2020. Nor should Texans be surprised that, once again, Paxton is asking for a handout to help him pay for his legal fees. So far, according to the Dallas Morning News, Paxton has run up half a million dollars in legal fees. Instead of relying on state attorneys, Paxton hired outside attorneys, one of whom charged $540 an hour, paid by taxpayers.

After years of questionable behavior that has been rewarded by election to a third term, we’d be naïve to expect Paxton to become a paragon of virtue at this late stage of his career. …Texas needs an attorney general who is looking out for their best interests, not just his own

Printers’ Row Rained Out For Me on September 11, 2022

By Connie Wilson

On September 12, 2022

In Books, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Politics

Well, if any of you were Chicago residents, you know that it rained A LOT today, Sunday, September 11th.

I have to confess that I did not make it to the IWPA booth at Printers’ Row for precisely that reason.

I got up about 9 a.m. (early, for me) and it was raining.

I had a cup of coffee and sat around for over an hour, thinking it would let up.

It did not.

I went back to bed and got up closer to 11 a.m., and I consulted the hour by hour weather forecast, which said that there was a 100% chance of rain for the next several hours.

About 1:20 p.m. the rain actually ceased…briefly. It was right back at it within half an hour.

BEE GONE: A POLITICAL PARABLE

Not to be too big a wuss, but dragging a box on wheels through the wet streets of Chicago is not great for paperbacks, and paperbacks were what I had with me. I was going to go with the political books of the hour, because, as we used to say about Nixon, “We won’t have DJT to kick around any more.” (Or so I fervently hope).

If you had your TV sets tuned to the Bears game at Soldier Field, right across the street from me, you will know that it was really pouring down during the game. Enough said.

My apologies to any of you who did make it out, but I could not imagine that there would be more than one or two folks brave enough to saunter down to Polk Street during the downpour.

The books I had with me are all available on Amazon, and I hope you check them out.

Hundreds of Top Secret and Classified Documents Found in Mar-a-Lago Raid

By Connie Wilson

On August 31, 2022

In Editorial, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, News, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics

The search at Mar-a-Lago on Aug. 8 found twice as many classified documents as Trump’s lawyers had turned over voluntarily, despite promising they had returned everything. This was also despite two attorneys (one named Evan Corcoran—hope he’s no relative) signing off and telling the FBI that those they had initially taken were the extent of it, when they were not.

The documents had been seen by members of the club, some of whom ratted The Donald out about his lax handling of the sensitive documents, marked Top Secret, Secret and Confidential. Regardless of how “sensitive” the documents were, they should not have been removed from the White House. It is not true that “they all do it” and that “Obama took some, too.” All previous presidents followed elaborate protocols for when and where they could even look at the documents, but Trump apparently kept some of his “mementos” in his desk drawer and would show it to casual Mar-A-Lago visitors. Among those items were the “love notes” from the North Korean dictator to Mr. Trump. Another he had removed was the letter left him by former President Barack Obama.

The blacking out (redacting) of much of the search warrant language was necessary to protect both the witnesses who have testified to seeing the documents in Mar-A-Lago and to the identity of other secret sources, whose very lives might be endangered.

Apparently, Trump considered anything he touched during his time in office “his.” He considered himself to be much like a king and everything was “his.”

Even if the documents were as ordinary as the menu for breakfast (and they weren’t) removing them from the White House was wrong and an obstruction of justice, and, since the many polite government requests to give them back ended with only a partial return of the papers, the FBI conducted its raid on Aug. 8th. And, to make matters worse, the ex-president and his cronies attempted to move the documents around to prevent the government from seeking their rightful return.

As the “New York Times” put it:

“The investigation into Mr. Trump’s retention of government documents began as a relatively straightforward attempt to recover materials that officials with the National Archives had spent much of 2021 trying to retrieve. The filing on Tuesday (Aug. 30) made clear that prosecutors are now unmistakably focused on the possibility that Mr. Trump and those around him took criminal steps to obstruct their investigation.

Investigators developed evidence that “government records were likely concealed and removed” from the storage room at Mar-a-Lago after the Justice Department sent Mr. Trump’s office a subpoena for any remaining documents with classified markings. That led prosecutors to conclude that “efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government’s investigation,” the government filing said.

The filing included one striking visual aid: a photograph of at least five yellow folders recovered from Mr. Trump’s resort and residence marked “Top Secret” and another red one labeled “Secret.”

It is time. LOCK HIM UP!

The legal filing included a photo of documents seized at Mar-a-Lago.Department of Justice

List of Sitting Lawmakers in IL, TX, TN, Who Betrayed Our Democracy

By Connie Wilson

On July 20, 2022

In Editorial, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, Politics, Texas

As the January 6th Commission convenes in Prime Time on Thursday evening (7/21), it is good to remember those representatives and Senators who betrayed our democratic values on January 6th. I have listed the states where I live and where my son and daughter live, as the names on the lists below do not deserve our future votes for office.

Here is an opinion reprint from “Daily Kos” that names the traitors in office.

by Brandi Buchmann

Now that the January 6th committee has spent more than a year investigating the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, they have unearthed evidence, in physical records and eyewitness testimony, that overwhelmingly suggests former President Donald Trump desperately schemed to retain power after losing the 2020 election and saw this plot aided or advanced by an increasingly craven series of lawmakers, lackeys, lawyers, aides, and right-wing extremists.

Many of those lawmakers who parroted Trump’s meritless claims of voter fraud did so at relatively the same clip he did, using their sizeable platforms, power, and influence to promote conspiracy theories about the results of the election that were disproven by the nation’s Justice Department and intelligence apparatuses and dismissed by court after court and judge after judge—including those judges Trump appointed.

When Congress finally met for the joint session on Jan. 6 to count certified elector slates and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi gaveled in, throngs of protesters would breach Capitol police barriers just minutes later. Trump, live from the Ellipse, was finishing a speech where he urged his supporters to march on the Capitol. One line encouraging this in his draft speech, according to White House records provided to the committee by the National Archives, shows Trump ad-libbed this call to action four times on Jan. 6.

Testimony and other evidence collected by the committee indicate too that Trump initially tried to conceal a plan to march on the Capitol even as he, members of his campaign staff, and rally organizers moved full steam ahead. This detail drastically undercuts claims by Trump and his allies currently in Congress that say January 6 was a peaceful protest that spontaneously went awry.

The committee has also shown evidence of at least six Republican lawmakers seeking preemptive pardons from Trump in the wake of the insurrection. In a request spearheaded by Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama, he went so far as to ask for a preemptive pardon for all 147 members of Congress who lodged an objection to Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory. Brooks also requested pardons for 126 Republicans who joined an amicus brief filed in Texas that sought to challenge election results in Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, and Pennsylvania.

Brooks has since defended his ask while simultaneously trying to distance himself from his own inflammatory remarks delivered at the Ellipse on Jan. 6.

It was Trump who told Brooks to make the pardon request, he wrote, in a Jan. 11, 2021 email.

Notably, Brooks said he was making his inquiry “pursuant to a request” from Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida. More than six weeks after Trump finally left office, it was reported for the first time by The New York Times that Gaetz was under investigation for alleged sex trafficking and sex with a minor.

In addition to Brooks and Gaetz, Hutchinson specifically named House Republicans Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Andy Biggs of Arizona, and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. All have issued various denials about the pardons but remain vocal, staunch supporters of Trump and have continued, until now, to cast doubts or aspersions on the Jan. 6 committee’s work and standing.

Trump never issued the pardons and Brooks fell out of favor with him after he urged prospective voters during his failed campaign for a Senate seat to put the 2020 election “behind them.” Trump said Brooks went “woke” and endorsed his opponent.

The Senators who voted to overturn the 2020 election after the insurrection are:

House members in Texas, Illinois and Tennessee who voted to overturn the 2020 election results after the insurrection:

One additional Texas legislator on the list has subsequently died.

Did Chuck Grassley Collude with the January 6th Trump Insurrection?

By Connie Wilson

On July 19, 2022

In Editorial, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics, Pop Culture

Since we are on the border with Iowa, it is important to present this Mark Karlin article that ran on “Daily Kos.” Karlin’s point that the Secret Service should know enough not to delete phone text messages sent on one of the most momentous days in our country’s history, January 6, 2021 is common sense. The possible involvement of 88-year-old Iowa Republican Senator Charles Grassley in Trump’s plot is something to consider if you are an Iowa voter going to the polls at mid-terms. This year, Admiral Franken (Grassley’s probable opponent) is a charismatic alternative to the 88-year-old Chuck Grassley and—if Grassley’s slip of the tongue is legitimately a sign of Grassley’s allegiance to DJT, do you want to support a candidate willing to overthrow democratic elections who may not support the democratic principle of the peaceful transition of power?

***

By Mark Karlin

The bombshell that the pro-Trump Secret Service deleted crucial text messages from January 5 and January 6, 2021, may be a “connect the dots” moment. It’s not just that this excised communication could have corroborated Cassidy Hutchinson’s second-hand account of Trump lunging for the steering wheel and grabbing a Secret Service member to try and compel them to drive him to the Capitol after the January 6 rally.

There might be something much more profoundly concerning: there might be Secret Service collaborators in Trump’s coup plot.

Let’s begin with a July 16, 2021, article from the Independent that is entitled, “Mike Pence refused to get in car in the midst of the January 6th riots, fearing Secret Service ‘conspiracy’, reports claim”:
Former Vice President Mike Pence purportedly refused to get into a vehicle with Secret Service agents amid the 6 January riots out of fear there was a “conspiracy” to “vindicate the insurrection”….
Mr Pence refused to evacuate the Capitol a number of additional times on January 6th as pro-Trump rioters stormed the building in a bid to prevent the certification of the 2020 election results.
In the midst of the riots, Mr. Pence was evacuated from the Senate chamber to his ceremonial office, where he remained protected by Secret Service agents alongside members of his family present that day. He was also the only elected executive branch member calling for help for the besieged Capitol, as President Trump did nothing for hours. (This will be the subject of the next January 6th Commission hearing in prime time this week.)

Then, let’s move to an eye-raising detail involving the oldest member of the Senate, Charles Grassley (R-IA), about a January 5, 2021, comment he quickly backtracked on. Heather Cox Richardson recalled the short-lived claim in her July 13 column:
On January 5, Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA), who was the president pro tempore of the Senate, the second highest-ranking person in the Senate after the vice president, talking to reporters about the next day, said: “Well, first of all, I will be—if the Vice President isn’t there and we don’t expect him to be there— I will be presiding over the Senate.”

Grassley’s office immediately clarified that Grassley meant only that he would preside over counting of the Electoral Votes only if Vice President Mike Pence “had to step away during Wednesday’s proceedings,” and that “‘[e]very indication we have is that the vice president will be there.”

Richardson writes that the largely forgotten “we don’t expect him [Pence] to be there” statement combined with Grassley’s claim that he would then preside over the electoral count “continues to bother” her, as it should. Grassley’s statement appears, given that democracy was at stake, as something more than casual. It seems to reflect the possibility of someone who knew of Trump-world plans, but was quickly told to retract his “prediction.”

Charles “Chuck” Grassley (age 88)

Who knows if Grassley would have accepted the Biden electors in the swing states, given the strenuous pressure from team Trump, if he had been presiding over the electoral count? His eye-popping statement of January 5 certainly raises that question. Why would Pence need “to step away”? Why would Grassley even consider such a possibility the day before the count and insurrection unless he knew more than he was saying? Why was Pence fearful of the Secret Service driving him from the Capitol, with the result being, amidst the mob activity still in full swing at the time, that the electoral count would be delayed indefinitely or Grassley would preside over it when it resumed if Pence had complied?

This leads to the erasure of Secret Service texts from January 5 and 6 in 2021. According to a July 15 article in The Washington Post:
A government watchdog accused the U.S. Secret Service of erasing texts from Jan. 5 and 6, 2021, after his office requested them as part of an inquiry into the U.S. Capitol attack, according to a letter sent to lawmakers this week.

Joseph V. Cuffari, head of the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General, wrote to the leaders of the House and Senate Homeland Security committees indicating that the text messages have vanished and that efforts to investigate the Jan. 6, 2021, attack were being hindered….
Cuffari emphasized that the erasures came “after” the Office of Inspector General requested copies of the text messages for its own investigation..

10 Presidential Quotes That Changed History: Do You Recognize Them?

By Connie Wilson

On July 15, 2022

In Editorial, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics

These 10 presidential quotes were gathered and explained by folklorist and free lance writer Ben Gazur. He went into some detail about the background of each quote, which I am not going to do. Let it simply be a test of your knowledge of each of these presidents that you recognize the quotes. Mr. Gazur gave the background of each quotation, and its significance in history. Since I tend to write about politics a lot, they seem apropos. I’d need some time and some access to political books read to compile my own Top Ten Presidential quotes, but these are all good.

The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant… I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.
— George Washington

A house divided against itself cannot stand.’ I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.
— Abraham Lincoln

With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.
— Abraham Lincoln

It is that the world be made fit and safe to live in; and particularly that it be made safe for every peace-loving nation which, like our own, wishes to live its own life, determine its own institutions, be assured of justice and fair dealing by the other peoples of the world as against force and selfish aggression. All the peoples of the world are in effect partners in this interest, and for our own part we see very clearly that unless justice be done to others it will not be done to us.
— Woodrow Wilson

Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
— Franklin D. Roosevelt

The United States pledges before you — and therefore before the world, its determination to help solve the fearful atomic dilemma — to devote its entire heart and mind to find the way by which the miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his life.
— Dwight Eisenhower

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.
— John F. Kennedy

We cannot, we must not, refuse to protect the right of every American to vote in every election that he may desire to participate in… It is all of us, who must overcome the crippling legacy of bigotry and injustice. And we shall overcome.
— Lyndon Johnson

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!
— Ronald Reagan

For when we have faced down impossible odds, when we’ve been told we’re not ready or that we shouldn’t try or that we can’t, generations of Americans have responded with a simple creed that sums up the spirit of a people: Yes, we can. Yes, we can. Yes, we can.
— Barack Obama

July 12th Commission Hearing for the January 6th Coup D’Etat

By Connie Wilson

On July 12, 2022

In Editorial, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics, Television

I’m watching the taped committee hearings and am astounded at the description of the December 18th “Crazies” versus “White House Counsel” that apparently took place within the White House Oval Office (and, later, within what is known as the Yellow Oval Office in the presidential quarters.)

Herschmann, Cipollone and other members of the White House Counsel used the term “unhinged” and it is quite apparent that everything Hillary Clinton warned us about regarding Donald J. Trump’ temperament and how it made him unfit to hold high office was correct. The man didn’t want to admit defeat, so he was prepared to listen only to the crazies in the room and unwilling to listen to lawyers who had been loyal to him throughout his time in office and were—to put it mildly—sane by comparison with Rudy Giuilianni and the female lawyer Sidney Powell.

The meeting took place on December 18th and was so loud that people outside could hear the disturbance. Female attorney Sidney Powell—a major loon—-quoted Trump as saying something like, “You see what I’ve been dealing with” in reference to the sane lawyers advising DJT that none of the schemes to seize voting machines and declare martial law were going to fly.

Pat Cipollone, Chief White House Counsel, repeatedly told the crazies that they had no evidence for their claims of widespread voter fraud and even used the phrase, “put up or shut up.” The crazies couldn’t put up any evidence of voter fraud, because it did not occur in instances large enough to affect the outcome of Biden beating Trump in 2020. More evidence was presented that everyone in Trump’s “inner circle” had been telling him for some time that it was time to move on and admit that he had been defeated. Even his favorite child, daughter Ivanka, tried to get The Donald to think about conceding, but DJT’s narcissism knows no bounds and he was unwilling to admit defeat. (I couldn’t help but think how graciously Al Gore conceded in 2000 after the hanging chad controversy.)

Instead, on the heels of the unhinged December 18th meeting in the Oval Office, Trump released a tweet on Twitter on December 19th calling for all of the militant militia groups to come to the Capitol on January 6th. A woman’s group that had already applied for a permit to hold a rally asked to move its date up by two weeks in order to be present on January 6th, and two former militant Trump fanatical supporters testified about the influence of DJT on bringing them and their groups to the Capitol that day.

Testimony was heard from Dr. Donell Harvin, former Chief of Homeland Security and Intelligence, who said, “All the red flags went up at that point” referencing DJT’s December 19th tweet about coming to D.C. because it’s “gonna’ be wild.” He pointed to the coordinating of the random groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys and cited operational intelligence that was gleaned from watching the Internet and was “clearly alarming.”

The Proud Boys represent White Supremacy and promote violence. Many of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers have been charged with seditious conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States on January 6th. Dec 19, 10:22 am. Kelly Meggs: “I organized an alliance between Oath Keepers, Forida 3% and Proud Boys” to “shut this shit down” (meaning the Big Lie of Stop the Steal.)

Ministry of Self Defense encrypted communications were shared that showed maps, plans and other work coordinating with Trump allies, including Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. Flynn had connections with Roberto Minuto, Stewart Rhodes, and Roger Stone. (He is actually pictured giving the Proud Boys salute during an initiation of some sort in a photo.)

The tweet sent on Dec. 19th served as a rallying cry for these differing groups to join together. FOS: Friends of Stone focused on various pro-Trump events and followed Roger Stone. Nov. 14th encrypted e-mail was shown telling followers to go to their state capitols and cause problems with the voter count(s), which caused the Georgia Capitol to be invaded.

“If he doesn’t do it now, as Commander in Chief, we are going to have to do it alone, on our own, in a much bloodier way.” (Stewart Rhodes) Alex Jones is shown issuing threats: “We will be back in January!”

Encrypted chats showed that Kelly Meggs spoke directly with Roger Stone to make plans for January 6th. Stone used Oath Keepers as his security force. Stone admitted that the Oath Keepers were willing and ready to use violent force against anyone, including the National Guard, who might try to remove Donald J. Trump from the presidency. Lawyer for the Oath Keepers Kelley SoRelle, explained Roger Stone’s connection to the Oath Keepers.

Ali Alexander, Roger Stone and Alex Jones: an unholy trio represented the worst of the worst. Katrina Pierson testified that Trump liked the “crazies” who defended him violently in person. “Things have gotten crazy and I definitely need some guidance” she wrote to Mark Meadows, asking him for advice about allowing the radical speakers scheduled for Trump’s January 6th rally to appear; Mark Meadows returned her call 8 minutes later. She was raising the red flag because of the very suspect nature of some of the speakers.

“I will be making a Big Speech at 10 a.m. on January 6th at the Ellipse. Please arrive early, massive crowds expected. March to the Capitol after. Stop the steal!!” (A tweet not sent, but seen by the POTUS.) “Potus is going to call for it (the march) unexpectedly,” said Ali Alexander. Ali Alexander’ twitter clearly shows that DJT was expected to urge his followers to march on the Capitol and that it was a deliberate strategy settled upon by the President. Many lines pointing out Mike Pence’s failure to do Trump’s bidding were taken from his January 6th speech and then re-inserted after Pence refused to do DJT’s bidding.

Dec. 21st White House meeting:

Mo Brooks (R, Alabama) was involved, as were Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuiliani, Andy Biggs, Louis Gohmer, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Brian Babbitt, Matt Gaetz, Paul Goser, Andy Harris, and Jody Heiss. All were involved in discussing the role of the VP in certifying the electoral votes (“the Eastman Theory”).

There was a January 4th meeting between the President, the VP and John Eastman; Pat Cipollone (Chief White House Counsel and sane legal mind) was not allowed to attend. He subsequently scoffed at the idea of the VP being able to simply announce that he was not going to do his official job of determining the winner of the presidential election.

Sarah Matthews expressed that she was part of a group of aides in the Oval Office hearing “Ideas of how we can make the RINOs do the right thing.” Trump asked that the windows of the Oval Office be left open so that the Freedom Plaza rally (of crazies) could be heard. Ali Alexander: “1776 is always an option. These degenerates in the Deep State are going to give us what we want or we are going to shut this country down.”

A former Twitter employer who wanted Trump’s messaging to his followers shut down testified:
‘When people are shooting at each other tomorrow I will try to rest in the knowledge that we tried.’ (former Twitter employee who warned of Trump’s use of Twitter to stir up insurrection.)

Debbie Lesko (R, AZ) – “We have Antifa, we also have, quite honestly, Trump supporters who actually believe that we are going to be able to overturn the election and when we don’t, they are going to go nuts!”