Trump's Project 2025 Is 'Blueprint For Soft Coup' -- Like Orban's Hungary
Hungarian President Viktor Orban
With Project 2025, former President Donald Trump's allies in the Heritage Foundation lay out a game plan for radically overhauling the United States' federal government if he defeats President Joe Biden in November and returns to the White House in January.
The idea behind Project 2025 is to fill the federal government with Trump loyalists who are fully committed to the MAGA agenda, including Christian nationalism. According to CNN, Heritage's Project 2025 and the America First Policy Institute — another group promoting ideas for a second Trump term — are looking to far-right Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán as an authoritarian role model.
During an early May segment, MSNBC's Ali Velshi discussed Project 2025's goals with two Trump critics: conservative Republican Olivia Troye (a former aide to ex-Vice President Mike Pence) and liberal Vanity Fair journalist Molly Jong-Fast.
Velshi told viewers, "The threat that Project 2025 poses to our democracy cannot be overstated…. Probably the most troubling aspect of Project 2025 is its plan to grant Donald Trump unchecked power over the executive branch…. Project 2025 is ultimately a blueprint for a soft coup, one that replaces our age-old system of checks and balances with cronyism."
Jong-Fast shares Velshi's views on Project 2025, warning that much of the Republican Party has embraced "authoritarian Trumpism."
The Vanity Fair writer told Velshi and Troye, "One of the things that I think is the top line here is that every single government agency will be politicized. So, that means that from the FDA to the DOJ to the EPA, every single part of the federal government will be serving Trump and his Republican Party. And if you think about that, that's actually really terrifying…. Now, imagine an entire federal government that serves as a campaign arm to Donald Trump."
Velshi noted that the Heritage Foundation, historically, has been a "fairly mainstream conservative think tank" that "was once associated with Reaganism" — and the conservative Troye agreed with Velshi that Project 2025 is a "radical plan by the far right."
Troye told Velshi, "This is not a conservative plan. It is the more extreme arms of conservatism that you are seeing reflected in here. And I think it goes to show the complete transformation of the Heritage Foundation — a group that actually, for a long time, has been long-respected."
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
- 'Portrait In Cowardice': Chris Sununu Bends The Knee To 'Crazy Loser' Trump ›
- Why Democrats Shouldn't Fear A Comparison Of Biden And Trump ›
Start your day with National Memo Newsletter
Know first.
The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
The same coalition of groups that drove center-right group No Labels to abandon its efforts to run a 2024 presidential candidate has now identified its next target: Anti-vaccine activist-turned independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
According to Politico, a collection of outside groups and super PACs are now mobilizing to educate a specific subset of voters about RFK Jr. through a coordinated information campaign. Matt Bennett, who is president of the center-left group Third Way, said they're specifically zeroing in on younger voters they call "double haters," who dislike both President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump. And they're specifically aiming to engage with voters in swing states where the son of celebrated former Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy has met qualifications for ballot access. This includes Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire and North Carolina. RFK Jr. has also qualified for ballots in California, Nebraska and Utah, though those states are seen as less competitive.
"One of our biggest concerns is ensuring that this subset of voters absolutely positively understands who this person is and who he is not," Bennett said.
"He is not his father. His numbers reflect his dad’s popularity," he added. "He is a right-wing crank. People really do not understand that yet."
Democratic-aligned group MoveOn, which has 10 million members on its list, has shifted resources aimed at stopping No Labels toward its anti-RFK Jr. campaign. Another group taking part in the effort is Clear Choice, which is a super PAC focusing on driving down voter turnout for third-party candidates like RFK Jr., along with Jill Stein and Cornel West, who are running on the Green Party and independent ballot lines, respectively. Pro-Democratic super PACs Future Forward and American Bridge have also joined in on the campaign.
The groups are running on the message that, according to a League of Conservation Voters (LCV) official, "a vote for RFK is a vote for Donald Trump." LCV senior vice president of campaigns Pete Maysmith told Politico that he wants to reach out to "voters who aren’t paying full attention yet and reminding them that "voting for Kennedy is throwing your vote away."
"What we’re seeing so far is that when voters hear even just a little about his extreme positions, they are a lot less interested," Maysmith said.
However, Democrats aren't the only ones who want to turn voters away from RFK Jr., In April, a Quinnipiac poll showed that former President Trump's narrow lead over President Joe Biden grows when RFK Jr.'s name is removed from consideration. After that poll was released, Trump tore into the environmentalist-turned-conspiracy theorist and alleged he was only running to help Biden.
"His Views on Vaccines are FAKE, as is everything else about his Candidacy," Trump said. "Let the Democrats have RFK Jr. They deserve him!"
As for RFK Jr.'s campaign, his New York state director, Rita Palma (who previously canvassed for Trump in 2016 and 2020), previously suggested that their main goal wasn't to win, but to "get rid of Biden" and "block Biden from winning the presidency."
"Two hundred seventy [Electoral College votes] wins the election," Palma said in April. "If nobody gets to 270 then Congress picks the president, so who are they gonna pick if it's a Republican Congress? They'll pick Trump, so we're rid of Biden either way."
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
Former President Donald Trump and Gen. Mark Milley, retired
According to the New York Times' veteran political reporter Peter Baker, the number one topic of discussion at Washington dinner parties and receptions these days is “Where would you go if it really happens?”
“It” being Donald J. Trump’s return to the White House following the November 2024 election.
Canada, some say. Others mention Portugal, Australia, even the United Arab Emirates. “The range and seniority of people who talk about it is striking,” Baker writes. “They include current and former White House officials, cabinet secretaries, members of Congress, agency directors, intelligence and law enforcement officials, military officers, political strategists, and journalists.”
Trump’s vows of retribution against his political enemies he has called “vermin,” his stated intention to prosecute pretty much everybody who has offended him, and his loose talk about disobedient generals deserving the death penalty have got a lot of people wondering if it can indeed happen here.
“It” being an overt fascist dictatorship.
One former Trump administration official turned critic told Baker, “People are feeling that it’s very obvious if a second Trump term happens, it’s going to be slash and burn.”
As for me, to put it in Arkansas vernacular, “I ain’t going nowhere.” First, because I’m too old to think about relocating to a foreign country, which is a difficult thing to do—even if you can afford it. Second, because while I yield to nobody in my contempt for Trump, I’m too obscure to persecute.
Besides, my wife and I could never agree about where to go. Chances are, for example, that I could qualify for an Irish passport, given that all eight of my great-grandparents were born there. Not long after we married, Diane was surprised to see tears in my eyes for the first time at the tomb of my great literary hero Jonathan Swift in St. Patrick’s Cathedral in Dublin. (Swift died in 1745, but lived on in my imagination.)
I have always felt at home in that country, which welcomes immigrants unlikely to become a burden on the public. The Irish are great talkers and listeners. They want to hear your story and tell you theirs. Now that they’ve quit killing each other over religion, the Republic of Ireland is one of the most peaceful countries on earth, and among the friendliest.
I’ll never forget how emotional I got seeing that rapscallion Bill Clinton with British Prime Minister Tony Blair on TV from Belfast announcing the Good Friday Accords. I thought I’d left all that Irish business behind when I followed an Arkansas girl home from school all those years ago. But no, there it was, deeply embedded.
But here’s the problem. I’ve always been a weather-maven. So here’s my summary daily weather report for Dublin over the next ten years: High, 56; Low, 42. Rain. At least 250 days every year fall within those parameters. Chilly, wet and windy. I don’t think I could fool myself into being happy with that.
The Arkansas girl’s people emigrated from France into South Louisiana by way of Cuba. (Her parents met at Louisiana State U, where he was a ballplayer.) She thinks France is the most beautiful and fascinating country in the world, with the best cuisine. The food is great even in the airport. When we’ve visited there, she’s frequently been stopped on the street by people asking directions. She has to haltingly explain that, appearances notwithstanding, she doesn’t actually speak the language.
So France is out. Even if we could afford it. Besides, she’d never leave Arkansas unless the entire Gang of Four—her closest girlfriends for forty years—agreed to come too. Me, I don’t know how I’d get along without my daily Boston Red Sox broadcast, or Arkansas Razorback basketball for that matter. Somebody’s got to load up the pack for their daily outing at the dog park, and it’s pretty much got to be me.
No matter. Because while I fear that the several months following the November 2024 election will be filled with turmoil and foreboding—Trumpist loudmouths have made it clear they will accept nothing but victory and will resort to violence if denied—I believe that Trump is not going to be inaugurated come January 2025.
The exact sequence of events is impossible to predict, but in terms the former Apprentice star would understand, the Trump Show is about to be cancelled. He has zero chance of winning the popular vote. None. The public is heartily sick of him. Just seeing his scowling face and listening to his endless boasting and whining have become almost unendurable.
For that same reason he has little chance of running the table in the so-called “swing” states. Also, this time around no amateur insurrection will take the authorities by surprise. Trump’s attempts to summon a mob to disrupt his New York trial have fallen flat.
So never fear, it’s almost over.
Gene Lyons is a former columnist for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, a winner of the National Magazine Award, and co-author of The Hunting of the President.
- Normalizing Trump, Network News Shows Ignore His Dictatorial 'Immunity' Claim ›
- 'Handmaid Of Fascism': Ronna McDaniel's New NBC Gig Provokes Fury ›
- The Children's Hour: Why So Many Proto-Fascists Are Also Pedophiles ›
- The Supreme Court's 'Immunity Club' And The Advent Of Fascist Jurisprudence ›
- Trump Lickspittle Kash Patel Says The Fascist Part Out Loud ›
National Enquirer covers smearing Hillary Clinton in 2016
Back in the antediluvian era of American politics, perpetrating dirty tricks was considered proof of bad character and potentially disqualifying for public office, depending on circumstances.
But as with so many other aspects of public life, the rise of former President Donald Trump heralded a steep decline in political ethics and the way that campaigns are run. And now, after nearly a decade of Trump-style politics, the sleazy conduct exposed in sworn testimony at his New York trial is dismissed with a shrug — especially by Republicans who ask nothing better of their leaders.
Leave aside for a moment the dubious practice of paying off women — an adult movie star and a former Playboy model — to ensure their silence about illicit trysts with Melania Trump's husband. (Having promised a spot on his Celebrity Apprentice TV show to porn actress Stormy Daniels, Donald Trump seems to have been paying at both ends.) Evangelical Christians who used to proclaim their indignation about licentious sexuality have discredited themselves thoroughly, which should not surprise anyone who has observed their antics over the past few decades.
What Trump did to silence Daniels and Karen McDougal was unsavory, and his effort to conceal it was probably illegal, but the truly dirty conspiracy involved the smearing of his political opponents.
According to the testimony of David Pecker, his friend and coconspirator who ran the National Enquirer tabloid, Trump and his henchman attorney Michael Cohen promoted the publication of scurrilous lies about his rivals on its front page.
At the same moment that Trump bestowed the nickname "Lyin' Ted" on Ted Cruz, his final opponent for the 2016 Republican nomination, he and his crew were overseeing the publication of outrageous lies about the Texas senator. In spring 2016, the Enquirer featured an absurd story, complete with a doctored photo, claiming that Cruz's father Rafael, an ordained minister, had been consorting with Lee Harvey Oswald just before Oswald assassinated President John F. Kennedy.
Insane as that accusation was, Trump used it to distract Republican voters from criticism of him by Cruz. On Fox News, he declared that "Cruz's father, you know, was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald's, you know, being shot. ... What was he doing with Lee Harvey Oswald, shortly before the death? Before the shooting? It's horrible." What's horrible, of course, is that Trump knew he was spouting an invented story, because it had been invented to benefit him.
The Enquirer went on to publish more fabricated tales about Cruz, including a claim that he had engaged in at least five extramarital affairs — again, while the tabloid was covering up Trump's actual and lengthy history of adultery.
After Cruz had been dispatched, and then prostrated himself cravenly to endorse Trump, the Enquirer moved on to smearing Hillary Clinton, a hobby pursued by the disgusting Pecker with gusto for years before Trump entered politics.
"The desperate and deteriorating 67-year-old won't make it to the White House — because she'll be dead in six months," the paper blared, insisting that the Democratic nominee suffered from brain cancer, strokes, alcoholism, multiple sclerosis and various forms of mental illness, all somehow concealed from the public and press. None of those mythical ailments actually afflicted the former secretary of state, who is still alive and well — and fighting to defeat Trump.
Much of the fake news published by the tabloid about Clinton was pitched by Steve Bannon, the Trump adviser who swindled thousands of donors to his "Build the Wall" charity — and only evaded prison thanks to a corrupt pardon. Naturally, Bannon is back and, like Trump, has endured no opprobrium for his amply proven crimes. Instead, he is a powerful influence on the far right and in Republican circles.
Back when Trump and his cronies oversaw the publication and broadcasting of all those falsehoods, he said repeatedly that he had nothing to do with the Enquirer and its raging defamations. He seemed to sense there was some shame in that kind of sick deception. But he and his attorneys no longer need to deny any of it, because on the American right, the worst kinds of deceit are accepted and even acclaimed, while their perpetrator is idolized.
And still, they will lecture the rest of us about "morality."
Reprinted with permission from Creators Syndicate
Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo.He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting newsroom formerly known as The Investigative Fund, and a senior fellow at Type Media Center. His forthcoming book, The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism, will be published by St. Martin's Press in July.On
Ryan Walters
Visitors to Oklahoma’s State Schools Superintendent’s personal social media page will notice a post vowing to “ban Critical Race Theory, protect women’s sports, and fight for school choice,” a post linking to a Politico profile of him that reads, “Meet the state GOP official at the forefront of injecting religion into public schools,” a photo of him closely embracing a co-founder of the anti-government extremist group Moms for Liberty, and a video in which he declares, “Oklahoma is MAGA country.”
This is Ryan Walters, a far-right Republican Christian nationalist who is making a national name for himself.
“God has a place in public schools,” is how Politico described Walters’ focus.
Last week the Southern Poverty Law Center published an extensive profile of Walters, alleging “hateful rhetoric toward the LGBTQ+ community, calls to whitewash curriculum, efforts to ban books, and attempts to force Christian nationalist ideology into public school classrooms.”
“Walters is superintendent of public instruction, and public schools are supposed to serve students of all faiths, backgrounds and identities,” Sarah Kate Ellis, president and CEO of GLAAD, told SPLC.
Walters is supporting new legislation in Oklahoma that follows in Texas’ footsteps: allowing untrained, unlicensed, uncertified, and unregulated religious chaplains and ministers to be hired as official school counselors.
“We heard a lot of talk about a lot of those support staffs, people such as counselors, having shortages,” Rep. Kevin West, a Republican, said, KFORreports. “I felt like this would be a good way to open that door to possibly get some help.”
Walters praised West, writing: “Allowing schools to have volunteer religious chaplains is a big help in giving students the support they need to be successful. Thank you to @KevinWestOKRep for being the House author for this bill. This passed the House yesterday and moves on to the Senate where @NathanDahm is leading the charge for this bill.”
As several Oklahoma news outlets report, there’s a wrinkle lawmakers may not have anticipated.
“With the Oklahoma House’s passage of Senate Bill 36, which permits the participation of uncertified chaplains in public schools, The Satanic Temple (TST) has announced its plans to have its Ministers in public schools in the Sooner State. If the bill advances through the Senate, this legislation will take effect on November 1, 2024. State Superintendent Ryan Walters, a vocal advocate for religious freedom in schools, has endorsed the legislation. The House approved SB 36 by a 54-37 vote on Wednesday,” a press release from The Satanic Temple reads. “The Satanic Temple, a federally recognized religious organization, has expressed its dedication to religious pluralism and community service.”
Walters responded on social media to The Satanic Temple’s announcement.
“Satanists are not welcome in Oklahoma schools, but they are welcome to go to hell,” he wrote.
Former Lincoln Project executive director Fred Wellman served up an equally colorful response.
“Hahahaha!!! You are an idiot,” Wellman wrote. “How did you not see this coming? Satanists, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Pastafarians…come one come all! After all you’re not trying to establish Christianity as the state religion are you? We had a whole ass revolution about that. There are history books about it…oh…right. Not your thing. What a fool.”
The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) served up a warning.
“The state of Oklahoma cannot discriminate against people or groups based on their religious beliefs,” the non-profit group wrote. “Walters’ hateful message shows, one again, that he only believes in religious freedom for Christians and that he is unfit to serve in public office.”
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) was strongly criticized Wednesday after promoting a historically and biblically false, antisemitic claim while declaring antisemitism is wrong.
As the House voted on an antisemitism bill that would require the U.S. Dept. of Education to utilize a certain definition of antisemitism when enforcing anti-discrimination laws, the far-right Christian nationalist congresswoman made her false claims on social media.
“Antisemitism is wrong, but I will not be voting for the Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023 (H.R. 6090) today that could convict Christians of antisemitism for believing the Gospel that says Jesus was handed over to Herod to be crucified by the Jews,” Greene tweeted.
The definition of antisemitism the House bill wants to codify was created by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.
Congresswoman Greene highlighted this specific text which she said she opposes: “Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.”
What Greene is promoting is called “Jewish deicide,” the false and antisemitic claim that Jews killed Jesus Christ. Some who adhere to that false belief also believe all Jews throughout time, including in the present day, are responsible for Christ’s crucification.
Greene has a history of promoting antisemitism, including comparing mask mandates during the coronavirus pandemic to “gas chambers in Nazi Germany.”
Political commentator John Fugelsang set the record straight:
“If only you could read,” lamented Rabbi Dr. Mark Goldfeder, Esq., CEO and Director of the National Jewish Advocacy Center. The Antisemitism Awareness Act “could not convict anyone for believing anything, even this historical and biblical inaccuracy. It only comes into play if there is unlawful discrimination based on this belief that targets a Jewish person. Do you understand that distinction @RepMTG ?”
“Not surprising,” declared Jacob N. Kornbluh, the senior political reporter at The Forward, formerly the Jewish Daily Forward. “Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has been accused in the past of making antisemitic remarks — including her suggestion that a Jewish-funded space laser had sparked wildfires in California in 2018, voted against the GOP-led Antisemitism Awareness Act.”
Jewish Telegraphic Agency Washington Bureau Chief Ron Kampeas, an award-winning journalist, took a deeper dive into Greene’s remarks.
“Ok leave aside the snark. The obvious antisemitism is in saying ‘the Jews’ crucified Jesus when even according to the text she believes in it was a few leaders in a subset of a contemporary Jewish community. It is collective blame, the most obvious of bigotries.”
“The text she presumably predicates her case on, the New Testament,” he notes, “was when it was collated a political document at a time when Christians and Jews were competing for adherents and when it would have been plainly dangerous to blame Rome for the murder of God.”
“Yes,” Kampeas continues, “that take is obviously one that a fundamentalist would not embrace, but it is the objective and historical take, and *should* be available to Jews (and others!) as a means of explaining why Christian antisemitism exists, and why it is harmful.”
CNN’s Edward-Isaac Dovere also slammed Greene, saying she “is standing up for continuing to talk about Jews being responsible for the killing of Jesus. (John & Matthew refer to some Jews handing over Jesus to Pilate,not Herod. But also: many, including Pope Benedict, have called blaming Jews a misinterpretation)”
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
- Evidence Of GOP Complicity In Kremlin Assault On America Is Now Overwhelming ›
- Margie Rips Fellow Republicans And 'Sold Out' Speaker On Bannon Show ›
- Twitter Finally Kicked Marjorie Taylor Greene To The Curb ›
- CPAC Promoted Virulently Anti-Semitic Conspiracist As Featured Speaker ›
- Far-Right 'Daily Wire' Finally Dumps Raving Antisemite Candace Owens ›
House Democratic leadership announced Tuesday that they’ll allow members to block any effort from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and her tiny team of nihilists to oust Speaker Mike Johnson, a reminder of where the power sits in the House.
“We will vote to table Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Motion to Vacate the Chair. If she invokes the motion, it will not succeed,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA), and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-TX) said in a statement.
Even among Republicans Greene’s tantrums have been wearing thin for a few weeks now, but since she had Reps. Paul Gosar of Arizona and Thomas Massie of Kentucky as cosponsors, the theoretical threat remained real—Johnson’s margin of error is that small.
So Greene has continued the bombast.
“Johnson will do whatever Biden/Schumer want in order to keep the Speaker’s gavel in his hand, but he has completely sold out the Republican voters who gave us the majority,” she tweeted Sunday. “His days as Speaker are numbered.”
Republicans feared Greene would make her move Tuesday, but as she and Massie were going into a meeting with the House parliamentarian, she said that “the plan is still being developed.” Then she and Massie left, telling reporters that they had been “developing plans.”
Maybe the speaker’s days aren’t so numbered after all, at least not by her doing. There’s always the possibility that more Republicans will quit, turning the majority officially over to Democrats, but it won’t be through Greene’s efforts. Even Freedom Caucus loud-mouth Chip Roy of Texas says it would be a mistake.
“I do not believe that is the direction that the American people want us to take right now,” he told reporters Monday.
That’s likely in part because Donald Trump has given Johnson his support, twice in two weeks, and he rules their world.
Once the fever broke on Ukraine aid and Johnson was forced to do the right thing, most of them, particularly Johnson, have had to accept the reality that Democrats have control where it matters, making sure that the government continues to function and critical legislation gets passed.
But leader Jeffries wants to make sure that Johnson remembers it’s on their sufferance.
“Mike Johnson doesn’t need too many Democratic friends,” Jeffries toldThe New York Times.
He also quipped that Johnson is lucky to have the enemies that he does.
“[Greene] is one of the best things the speaker has going for him because so many people find her insufferable,” he said.
But does Democratic intervention make Johnson weaker among Republicans?
“Republicans will have to work that out on their end,” Jeffries said. “The reality of this particular Congress is that we are functioning in a manner consistent with a bipartisan governing coalition in order to get things done for the American people.”
And Jeffries isn’t going to let Johnson forget it.
Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.
- Why Democrats Shouldn't Fear A Comparison Of Biden And Trump ›
- Margie Rips Fellow Republicans And 'Sold Out' Speaker On Bannon Show ›
- Democrats Standing With Republicans Against 'Pro-Putin' GOP Faction ›
- Flashback: What Mike Johnson Said As Mob Stormed Capitol On January 6 (VIDEO) ›
- Mike Johnson Seems Nice -- Until You Take A Closer Look ›
Former President Donald Trump
With little more than six months until Election Day, Donald Trump is preparing for an “authoritarian” presidency, and a massive, multi-million dollar operation called Project 2025, organized by The Heritage Foundation and headed by a former top Trump White House official, is proposing what it would like to be his agenda. In its 920-page policy manual the word “abortion” appears nearly 200 times.
Trump appears to hold a more narrow grasp of the issue of abortion, and is holding on to the framing he recently settled on, which he hoped would end debate on the issue after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. One day before the Arizona Supreme Court ruled an 1864 law banning abortion was still legal and enforceable, Trump declared states have total control over abortion and can do whatever they like.
Despite the results of that framing, Trump is sticking with that policy.
In a set of interviews with TIME‘s Eric Cortellessa, published Tuesday, the four-times indicted ex-president said he would not stop states from monitoring all pregnancies within their borders and prosecuting anyone who violates any abortion ban, if he were to again become president. He also refused to weigh in on a nationwide abortion ban or on medication abortion.
Recently, Trump backed away from endorsing a nationwide abortion ban, but in the past he has said there should be “punishment” for women who have abortions. The group effectively creating what could become his polices, The Heritage Foundation and its Project 2025, fully support a ban on abortion.
The scope of the TIME interviews was extensive.
“What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world,” Cortellessa writes in his article.
“To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding.”
TIME’s Cortellessa also notes that Trump “is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”
On abortion, Trump has repeatedly bragged he personally ended Roe v. Wade, which was a nearly 50-year old landmark Supreme Court ruling that found women have a constitutional right to abortion, and by extension, bodily autonomy.
But Trump has also “sought to defuse a potent campaign issue for the Democrats by saying he wouldn’t sign a federal ban. In our interview at Mar-a-Lago, he declines to commit to vetoing any additional federal restrictions if they came to his desk. More than 20 states now have full or partial abortion bans, and Trump says those policies should be left to the states to do what they want, including monitoring women’s pregnancies. ‘I think they might do that,’ he says.”
“When I ask whether he would be comfortable with states prosecuting women for having abortions beyond the point the laws permit, he says, ‘It’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not. It’s totally irrelevant, because the states are going to make those decisions.’ President Biden has said he would fight state anti-abortion measures in court and with regulation,” Cortellessa adds.
Trump in his TIME interview continued to hold on to the convenient claim as president he would have absolutely nothing to do with abortion.
But “Trump’s allies don’t plan to be passive on abortion if he returns to power. The Heritage Foundation has called for enforcement of a 19th century statute that would outlaw the mailing of abortion pills. The Republican Study Committee (RSC), which includes more than 80% of the House GOP conference, included in its 2025 budget proposal the Life at Conception Act, which says the right to life extends to ‘the moment of fertilization.’ I ask Trump if he would veto that bill if it came to his desk. ‘I don’t have to do anything about vetoes,’ Trump says, ‘because we now have it back in the states.'”
That’s inaccurate, if a national abortion ban, or any legislation on women’s reproductive rights, comes to his desk. And they will, if there’s a Republican majority in the House and Senate.
Brooke Goren, Deputy Communications Director for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) writes, “In the same interview, Trump:
– Repeatedly refuses to say he wouldn’t sign a national ban
– Left the door open to signing legislation that could ban IVF
– Stood by his allies, who are making plans to unilaterally ban medication abortion nationwide if he’s elected.”
Cortellessa ends his piece with this thought: “Whether or not he was kidding about bringing a tyrannical end to our 248-year experiment in democracy, I ask him, Don’t you see why many Americans see such talk of dictatorship as contrary to our most cherished principles? Trump says no. Quite the opposite, he insists. ‘I think a lot of people like it.'”
The Bulwark’s Bill Kristol, once a hard-core conservative Republican, now a Democrat as of 2020, served up this take on TIME’s Trump interview and overview of a second Trump reign.
“Some of us: A second term really would be far more dangerous than his first, it would be real authoritarianism–with more than a touch of fascism.
Trump apologists: No way, calm down.
Trump: Yup, authoritarianism all the way!”
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
Former President Donald Trump, evidently asleep during New York court proceedings on April 30, 2024
During part five of former President Donald Trump's ongoing criminal trial, the 45th president of the United States appeared to once again nod off during witness testimony, as he reportedly did multiple times last week.
MSNBC producer Kyle Griffin tweeted that Trump was having trouble staying awake during court proceedings, writing that he "appears to have fallen asleep while listening to testimony — at times appearing to stir and then falling back to sleep."
"Trump's eyes were closed for extended periods and his head has at times jerked in a way consistent with sleeping," he tweeted.
MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin corroborated the network's reporting on Trump "sleeping" in court, confirming that the former president was indeed "sleeping through a lot of" the trial.
"They tried a number of different devices to keep Trump awake, partially in response, or what appears to be in response to collective press corps observations," Rubin said. "When there are sidebars, an attorney doesn't leave his side anymore, because leaving him alone means leaving him to potentially sleep. He has a stack of papers with him at all times now to go through. But neither of those things seem to have protected Trump from his own exhaustion today," she added. "More than not, when I looked up to see how Trump was receiving the testimony, Trump was not receiving it all, because his eyes were closed."
The report of Trump supposedly dozing off drew a flurry of reactions on social media, with users on X (formerly Twitter) ridiculing the ex-president over his apparent inability to remain conscious during the proceedings that will determine his freedom.
Video journalist Aaron Rupar quote-tweeted Griffin's post and inferred that the response from media outlets would likely be an uproar "if Joe Biden did this."
Liberal YouTube commentator Brian Tyler Cohen opined that Mike Lindell — the MyPillow CEO who remains one of the most outspoken 2020 election deniers — "has the opportunity to do the funniest thing ever." Attorney Bradley Moss piled on, asking his followers "can someone please get the old man a pillow or something?" Progressive pundit Mueller She Wrote offered a nickname for the former president fashioned after Marlon Brando's iconic mobster character: "#DonSnorleone."
"Such low energy," tweeted Bloomberg TV contributor Daniel Micovic in response to Griffin's original tweet.
Online Democratic fundraising platform Actblue even joined in on the fun with a campaign finance-related tweet, posting "Wondering if his fundraising numbers are keeping [Trump] up at night."
Progressive social media influencer Chris Mowrey simply responded with quotes from Trump himself. One quote he posted was "We cannot have a low-energy individual as our president." Another read, "He’s always tired, he’s always got the lids heavy."
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
Former President Donald Trump in court
Supporters of Donald Trump who are most likely to reconsider their support if he is convicted in his Manhattan hush money trial have very Joe Biden-friendly profiles, according to a CNN poll on Americans’ views of the criminal proceedings.
While three-quarters of current Trump supporters said a criminal conviction would be immaterial to them, 24 percent said they "might reconsider" their support. In other words, of all the voters supporting Trump in the survey, 76 percent were MAGA diehards, while roughly a quarter were more malleable.
So let's take a look at a profile of these squishier Trump supporters, according to the survey:
- They are younger: 64 percent who said they might reconsider were under 50.
- They are less likely to be white: 49 percent who said a conviction could matter were people of color, while just 17 percent of whites said the same.
- 63 percent said Biden legitimately won 2020.
- 20 percent said they backed Biden in 2020.
- 49 percent are independents.
- 50 percent are ideological moderates.
"These are the exact voters who propelled Trump to his very narrow lead in the polling average. Younger voters, independents, Black and Latino voters are groups Trump struggled with in 2020 but is doing better with now,” points out Dan Pfeiffer, White House communications director for the Obama administration.
The 2024 presidential race is effectively even now, with the 538 aggregate giving Trump just a one-point advantage. Both camps need to persuade more voters into their corners to cement a win, but Biden even more so given Republicans' built-in advantage in the electoral college. And a candidate always wants the pool of voters they need to woo to be predisposed to supporting them in the first place.
For Biden, that means he wants those squishy Trump supporters to generally be younger, voters of color, people who view themselves as moderates, people who believe he won 2020 legitimately, and people who voted for him last time. That includes everyone from the poll who could be persuaded to vote for Biden if Trump is convicted.
Perhaps more importantly, CNN may have located the exact profile of the Trump supporters who have enough doubts about him to admit as much to a pollster. That alone suggests that they could be open to other Democratic arguments against Trump, so the Biden campaign could begin its persuasion efforts even before a verdict comes down.
Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.
- Why We Know Trump's MAGA Is A Toxic Cult, Not A Political Movement ›
- Pew Data Disproves Reported Trump Advance Among Minority Voters ›
- Go, Nikki, Go! Every Vote For Haley Is A Vote Against Trump ›
- America's Two-Tiered Justice System -- And Why Trump Is Not Its Victim ›
- Will Voters Blame Trump For Loss Of Abortion Rights? ›
Kari Lake
Arizona GOP candidate Kari Lake hopes to secure a US Senate seat this year with the help of her longtime ally — Donald Trump — but the ex-president's support isn't promised, according to The Washington Post.
In January, Arizona Republican Party Chairman Jeff DeWit abruptly resigned after Lake "warned that she would 'leak additional recordings of their private conversations.'
When she later publicly endorsed fellow MAGA supporter Gina Swoboda to replace DeWit during a Republican event, Lake "was met with 'boos and jeers as she took the stage.'"
The Postreports:
Trump’s top advisers were furious after a Lake ally released a recording of then-Arizona GOP Chairman Jeff DeWit encouraging her to stay out of the Senate race, which embarrassed the party chairman and led him to resign.
Trump was more surprised than angry when told about the January incident, according to three people familiar with his reaction. 'She tapes everything?' he asked, sitting in a New Hampshire hotel suite before taking the stage on the night he won that state’s primary. 'That’s good to know.'
Now, the newspaper reports, "Since Lake jumped into the race, Trump has repeatedly expressed skepticism about her political prospects in a state he sees as key to his bid to return to the White House, and has shown annoyance with her frequent presence at his Florida resort, according to five people close to him, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe his comments."
Furthermore, the Post notes the incident "killed any desire by some elected Republicans in the state to communicate with her, fearing they could be secretly recorded."
One top Arizona Republican told the Post, “Whether they end up voting for Kari Lake or not, they don’t trust her. They think they’re being recorded and it’s a running joke.”
The newspaper emphasizes, "So far, there has been no public schism between Trump and Lake, and the Senate candidate was at Mar-a-Lago again this month for a fundraiser. But Trump’s frustration with Lake has only increased over the past year, heightening the tension between the presumptive GOP presidential nominee and one of his most prominent followers — casting doubt on whether Republicans can present a sufficiently united front to win a key U.S. Senate contest and a presidential battleground state."
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
- Arizona Republicans Mock Protesters After Killing Abortion Ban Repeal ›
- Will Voters Blame Trump For Loss Of Abortion Rights? ›
- Instead Of Fixing Harsh Abortion Law, Arizona Republicans Flee State House ›
- Arizona Republicans Pushed Abortion Ban -- And Now They're Terrified ›
