Watching "President," "Chancellor," "Emperor" Trump, or whatever title he prefers, performing the other night, I could not help but notice how brilliantly choreographed the presentation was. Meanwhile, in contrast, my Democrats appeared rudderless. I kept watching Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, both of whom I respect, waiting for one of them to somehow signal to the Democratic contingent when to stand and when to remain seated, when to clap and when to refrain. It never happened, of course, as we, as a party, played into the "master" grifter's hand. Meanwhile, I can certainly empathize with Representative Green, having acted as he did more than a few times myself, but I realize that it was exactly the emotional reaction that the directors and producers of the "show" were looking for. Let's face it, there's a new "director" in town and he is enormously talented as well as remorseless in pursuit of his goals, which are published in perfect English in Project 2025. On the other hand, our current Democratic National Committee, dominated by "Progressives", whatever the term means, has a really abysmal track record, not only failing to reach our "goals", whatever they are, but even in articulating the damned things in a coherent manner!
At some point, we have to face reality! It may sound cruel to some, but the existential survival of our democratic republic is more important than trying to change the sex of little children before they know any better, more important than making lesser educated lower-wage earners feel that they are paying off other people's student loans or demanding that a job or a student slot is based on race or sex even though another applicant may be more qualified. Yes, it can be argued that these are all exaggerations of underlying issues, but the point is that, sadly, they are only slight exaggerations! As usual, our party has gone overboard, permitting and sometimes even encouraging what many see as transgender "propaganda" as opposed to "counselling". Instead of pushing blanket student loan forgiveness, maybe we should negotiate with banks and cover the interest up front, maybe even explain the difference between payback through public service vs. charity and perhaps we should demand more closely matching qualifications before awarding a position to someone based on "special" status. These are all examples of nuanced issues that need to be "hammered out" with tiny rock hammers, instead of sledges! Eventually the blowback will, as it has started to already, limit the long-term benefit of these programs as well as providing an excuse for various wretches to gut many other programs.
And then there is the first of two elephants in the room, first the Democratic Party's amazing inability to communicate to average citizens, be they Democrat, Republican or Independent. Generally, there are only a few issues that people normally care about: (1) "the economy, stupid" (2) family, and (3) foreign policy/defense. Currently we can throw in (4) parents' real fear that someone will try to convince their young child that "he" or "she" is not a "he" or a "she", (5) immigration, and (6) deranged traitors trying to take over the U.S. government. To most of us, these seem like perfectly obvious concerns. The economy, under Joe Biden, was actually doing quite well even though neither he nor his closest advisors seemed to know the first thing about economics. Luckily, whatever they kept their hands off of did quite well and they only interfered with a few things, mostly mergers and acquisitions. As for "family", allowing the transgender condition to become a major political issue without either side having any idea what they are talking about was a major failure of the Democratic community. We certainly should have seen it coming! As for foreign policy, everyone is familiar with the phrase "s__t or get off the pot!" Dems needed to explain why we were forbidden to provide more advanced weapons to Ukraine, if indeed, there really ever was a decent reason. By the same token, we needed to explain why we could not drastically increase our oil and gas exports sufficiently to supply Europe's needs in an effort to actually bankrupt the Russian military, another explanation for which I am still patiently waiting. Then there is that bipartisan, yes, you heard me right, bipartisan immigration bill that Trump killed simply because he wanted to keep the issue alive. You know, the one that would likely have passed if it were negotiated in the first years of the Biden presidency instead of the end of the fourth.
Meanwhile, for the first time since the Civil War, we have an attempted insurrection, an incompetent attempt incited by a cunning but ignorant ex-president to implement a violent takeover of the Congressional Building with the intention of kidnapping the Vice President and forcing him to falsify the delegate count in the presidential election. Where on earth did der Fuhrer Trump get that hilarious idea, from a comedy routine on Carol Burnett? At first, no one took the Fuhrer seriously; the vice president's certification is only a ceremonial event with no effect on the actual count. Surely the Fuhrer was aware of that, I mean no one could be that stupid, right, uh..., except maybe Fuhrer Trump and approximately 2,500 "MAGATS!" Unfortunately, that is how about half the population of this country looks at an actual insurrection, as bad comedy, assuming the insurrectionists are so mentally challenged that they should not be charged!!!
Meanwhile, despite ï ? ? žhundreds of millions of dollars in the Democratic coffers available for political ads we do not bother to try to convince the voters that there has been a viable, even if ignorant and treacherous, attempt made to take over their government. Were we so naà ï ? ?veï ? ? as to think that it was so obvious that we did not need to explain it? Where was the constant barrage of media ads showing the worst of the violence along with pictures and videos of its instigator urging them on? And, what of the Democratic Attorney General, intimidated by baseless Republican claims that he is unfairly prosecuting MAGA instigators, failing to arrest Mr. Trump for treason? The MAGA Supreme Court Justices, all in debt to the Federalist Society's Leonard Leo and his rich friends who have apparently "donated" hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars to them, are apparently warned by Leo that they have to protect the ex-president from arrest or risk exposure of their own sins. Leo, who certainly must feel with good reason that he, not Trump, runs the country, has to have detailed dossiers on all of them (as well as the other SCOTUS members for that matter). So, with his "help" they come up with the questionable concept of presidential "official acts" as well as the ridiculous idea that the special investigator appointment is unconstitutional!
The trouble is, a few serious problems still exist. Though the president is now in the process of being protected from the federal courts, he may not be protected from the state or the "D.C." court depending on what offense he commits. Worst of all, he has no automatic protection from the "court of public opinion." Thus the MAGA Justices are forced to make a major decision that may have enormous consequences in the near future. In a glorious act of self sacrifice, they are willing to make themselves automatic accessories after the fact in any "official act/ crime," past or future committed by their MAGA employer. This they do by overturning the Crime-Fraud Exception to the principle of Attorney Client Privilege. In an attempt to protect the ex-president from conviction in the court of public opinion, they declare that the president's advisors cannot testify if the president's "crime" is deemed "an official act." Normally, an attorney and the client forfeit "privilege" if they are both involved in a crime. The question, of course, is whether the ex-president is immune from prosecution for a "crime" because it is designated as an "official act" or is the act itself now considered "not a crime." If he is simply immune, then the advisor would be forced to plead the fifth amendment or testify. If the crime is nullified, i.e. "not a crime," then, voila! testimony can be avoided.
Crime (at least "federal crime") nullified, case dismissed, right? Yes, but what if the MAGA Court decides that the state "crime" is nullified as well? The ex-president has a party and celebrates! Not so fast, however. It can be argued that the act being considered "not a crime" is so due purely because it is an act committed by the president. Is he then considered "above the law?" Obviously, the MAGA justices are claiming that under limited circumstances, the president is above the law, something which clearly violates not only the vague principle of the "Rule of Law," but the 14th Amendment quite specifically, since by protecting a presidential "crime" any victim(s) affected by the crime are denied due process. Sorry folks, can't do that without changing the 14th Amendment.... What if Mike Pence had been injured or killed by the insurrectionists? What option would he or his family have had against the president or, for that matter, the presidentially pardoned perpetrators? Worse yet, if a victim seeks "justice" and it is summarily denied, may he seek it on his own? Of course not, a crime is a crime, right? Uh... sort of, that is, but not really, according to the MAGA justices. On the other hand, the issue would be as clear to a jury as a pile of sh..., uh... mud, yes, mud. As long as the victim kept his "crime" of retribution to a minimum, I suspect, the worst he could expect would be a hung jury. Damn that pesky 14th amendment! Oh, and damn those MAGA justices, the ones who would certainly be impeached if the somnambulistic Democratic Party would simply wake up and move a little bit closer to the center where, you see, most of the votes happen to reside.... What a unique idea!
...Almost forgot the second "elephant in the room." So far, literally, Mr. Trump certainly has acted as an "agent" for Vladimir Putin and Russia, dismantling the U.S. government, deserting our allies, destroying our economy, saving Russia from the brink of military defeat and bankruptcy, and purposely contributing to the slaughter of thousands of Ukrainian civilians, but what kind of agent? At some point, even Leonard Leo, MAGA Republicans and, indeed, every one of us will have to ask ourselves if Trump is merely acting as a "useful idiot" of Vladimir Putin or as an "official" Russian agent? (I wonder, would MAGA justices call that an "official" act?) And, for that matter, at what point would MAGA followers "officially" be called "useful idiots" as well? My suggestion to the DNC: it's time to break out the artillery and start paying attention to the elephants trampling over us instead of the little mice nibbling at our toes.
Al Finkelstein
Post Article Comment and Rate This Article
