Mediaboss Marketing

Donald J. Trump has perpetuated a fraud on the American people. It was assumed that he was competent. At his inauguration he stated: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

This president has never respected that oath for what it means to us as Americans. Abraham Lincoln said it best in his Gettysburg Address that this is a government of the people, by the people, [and] for the people. Paying no attention to law or American traditions, Donald Trump governs as though the United States of America is a government of Donald Trump, by Donald Trump and for Donald Trump.

Welcome to Donald Trumps fascist America! Democracy has been lost in America. This president, Donald J. Trump, and this White Nationalist Republican Tea Party have stolen our democracy. The evidence brought by the Democrats in their articles of Impeachment were overwhelming. While Trump claims the phone call with Ukranian President Volodymymr Zelensky was perfect, Purple Heart recipient Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindmans testimony makes clear that call was anything but perfect.

In that call, the President sought a quid pro quo relative to providing military assistance in exchange for dirt that would hurt Joe Biden. The actual transcript of that call, not the White House prepared summary, would show Trump broke the law. He was involving a foreign government on our election. That act required Congressional oversight, which the President sought to obstruct.

Yet, when the Democratic Party majority, a diverse panel, tried to hold this president accountable, they were undermined by a blind loyalty to Donald Trump and the (white) Republican Party. For the Republican Senate Majority to have not convicted him and removed him was certainly partisan. On a partisan basis, he was acquitted. It was partisan corruption. Partisan corruption undermines democracy. Partisan corruption enables fascism. The case against the President was clear.

What we have here is racist rule. What we have here is a white nationalist Republican Party denying constitutional rule to that very diverse Democratic Party. Mitch McConnell is playing the role of stealth Grand Wizard. For democracy to work, it must be based upon integrity not lies. The Republicans in both the House and the Senate lied when it came to Donald Trumps guilt. That is rule by thuggery not reason.

In 2016, Donald Trump was rejected by the majority of American voters. He lost by 3 million votes. That is not unimportant because we need to understand how Donald Trump won and what is the significance of that victory? He won for two reasons: 1) he was a birther and 2) the electoral college.

Many people think Donald Trump won in spite of bring a birther. No, he won a majority of the white vote because he was one of them. He talks like they talk. Like him, many of that majority believes in conspiracy theories. We do know this that majority who are Trump supporters are not offended by his racism. Many of them are low information voters, just like some would say he is a low information president. (He did not know the significance of Pearl Harbor.)

Trumps base are Fox News fans. Recall that Fox News is the No. 1 cable channel. It is the No. 1 cable channel because it gives them what they want, rather than provide more accurate information. Recall the older Fox News viewer in Grand Rapids who attended Congressman Justin Amashs town hall. She learned for the first time that the president had done something wrong.

While that white majority votes for Trump, a more educated minority of whites, generally, vote for Democrats. It is this more educated white minority, along with people of color who are the future of the country. This is the Obama coalition. Older generations of whites represent fewer and fewer voters. They are not Americas future.

The bad news is that a rejected candidate might get elected again. The majority rejected Donald Trumps racism. His sexism, his misogyny, his vulgar undignified behavior has been an embarrassment overseas. The electoral college was there to protect the former slave states. It needs to go. Otherwise, another rejected candidate will become president.

In conclusion two things stand out: Being a birther Donald Trump was in way above his head. A pandemic and an economic collapse will take more than a cheerleader and wishful thinker. Even as a performer, Donald Trump was not good at acting the part. As a con man he has no idea what to do.

If the loser becomes winner the election, he has less legitimacy. A majority of the American voters had determined Donald Trump to be unfit. So, what did we get from this rejected president? Someone more concerned about improving his bottom lines than saving lives, coronavirus be damned.

Robert Newby is professor emeritus of the department of sociology, anthropology and social at Central Michigan University

See the article here:
Column: Tea party white nationalist corruption saves the president from removal - The Morning Sun

Like everybody else nowadays, Im lugging a heavy heart around in my chest. So I like to escape into the past now and again, and dream about how things might have been.

I would like to have been in Boston for the Tea Party for example, and I picture myself at the Bell In Hand Tavern, holding forth in front of my fellow Bostonians

Guys, forget the Boston Marathon, you couldnt finish it anyways. No, there are more important issues at hand, for whom the bell tolls. The Lymies are out to tax our tea! You heard me right, tax our tea without representation! I know you dont drink it, I cant stand it either, but when we can no longer afford to pay for our ladies tea parties, well, there will be hell to pay! So dang it, we need to throw a tea party of our own, and heres my idea hear me out! Let me buy the house a round, and hear me out!

When we leave the Bell In Hand Tavern tonight after last call, we strip down, paint each other with war paint to look like wild Mohawk Indians, and jump the three English cargo ships in our harbor. Now I see some of you wiping your mouths with your napkins to hide your smiles, but Im serious. Once aboard those cargo ships we throw the night watchman and all 90,000 pounds of tea into Boston Harbor!

One of the doubters raises his hand and shouts out, Thats the craziest idea I ever heard! I shout him down and buy him a beer to keep him quiet. Then I launch into my master plan from the top.

Now, listen up. There are 60 of us Mohawks and only three English ships. Twenty Mohawks board each ship at the stroke of midnight and start heaving chests of tea over the side, along with the night watchman.

Some lummox asks, So what do we do when English troops arrive to kill us Mohawks?

Of course I have the answer ready, and I deliver it with panache, lan and a Lager

When the English troops arrive to kill us Mohawks we will already be Bostonians again, and we will not quarter them, and what are they going to do? They will be out in the cold and we can at last tell Olde King George to go fly a kite to the moon!

Of course, what does happen when the English troops arrive we can discuss on another day

What we do know is that the Boston Tea Party worked its bazar magic on that December night in 1773, and the ladies of Boston were able to continue their private tea parties sans taxes. I will sign an affidavit to that statement, and this is where my short history of the Boston Tea Party comes to an end. I only wish I could have been there

Learn more about McAvoy Layne at http://www.ghostoftwain.com.

Read more:
Pine Nuts: A short history of the Boston Tea Party - Sierra Sun

I'm old enough to remember the last economic crisis America suffered.

In 2008, I'd just broken into the business as a financial writer and had a front-row seat to the meltdown.

Day in and day out, I reported and analyzed all of the moving parts...

The subprime loans and bad mortgages, the sovereign debt and collateralized debt obligations, car companies that overextended themselves, the banks that bet against their own clients...

All of it.

I also remember the bailouts, like the $787 billion American Recovery Act and the protests that erupted in its wake.

You remember the Tea Party, too, right?

I'm sure Mark Meadows does. He was a member as a Representative of North Carolina, and the founder of the House Freedom Caucus.

In that capacity, he advocated to cut spending, resist raising the debt ceiling, and spearheaded the charge to shut down the government in 2013.

"President Obama continues to fail to heed the warnings of economists and the desire of the American people to reduce government spending and balance the budget," Meadows said. "With the national debt at over $20 trillion, the consequences of allowing our spending problems to continue to go unresolved are extremely dire."

But that was then; this is now.

Today, Meadows is serving as President Trump's Chief of Staff and was one of the chief architects of the $2 trillion stimulus plan that just sailed through Congress.

That's more than double the size of Obama's package, but if Meadows objected to the price tag, he certainly didn't say so publicly.

But this is different, right?

This is a time of real crisis. This is the time to throw caution to the wind and pull out all the stops.

As a fiscal conservative, Ive long been concerned about deficits and debt, Texas Sen. John Cornyn said. But I dont think thats a discussion we should be having when we are in a national emergency. We are already on a war footing, and weve got to beat this virus.

Sure.

Except that doesn't really track either not when the national debt already totaled $23.5 trillion before the Coronavirus even broke out in China.

And not when the federal deficit grew from $587 billion in FY2016 to more than $1 trillion in FY2020.

Indeed, this new fiscal albatross only came after the government racked up $624.5 billion in red ink in the five months from October to February.

And there's going to be more.

Americans haven't even received their first round of $1,200 stimulus checks and a second round is already being discussed.

We could very well do a second round, President Trump said Monday. It is absolutely under serious consideration.

Trump is also pushing for a massive infrastructure bill, prompting Democrats to dust off the $760 billion spending package they outlined in January.

Oh yes, you better believe the Democrats are on board.

You'll Never Be On The Inside!

So join Outsider Club today for FREE. You'll learn how to take control of your finances, manage your own investments, and beat "the system" on your own terms. Become a member today, and get our latest free report: "World Economic Collapse: Grow Your Wealth in A Bear Market Epidemic"

After getting your report, youll begin receiving the Outsider Club e-Letter, delivered to your inbox daily.

We must double down on the down-payment we made in the CARES Act by passing a CARES 2 package, which will extend and expand this bipartisan legislation to meet the needs of the American people, says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Make no mistake, we're going to have spent more than $5 trillion on stimulus by the time this is all over.

And while Americans will be more than happy to cash a few extra checks, the overwhelming majority of that money is going to go to businesses and corporations.

Of course, it's going to be hard to know the precise distribution, because earlier this week President Trump fired the guy who was charged with overseeing the $2 trillion pandemic stimulus.

Up until Tuesday, Glenn Fine was the Pentagons acting inspector general and head of the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee. The committee was built into the bill to create a watchdog that would submit quarterly reports and notify Congress if any agency refused to comply with its information requests.

It was literally his job to look out for malfeasance and ensure that the stimulus plan wasn't reduced to a slush fund for political allies and corrupt corporations.

But now he's gone.

So, too, is Michael Atkinson the intelligence community inspector general.

Trump fired him last week for notifying Congress of the whistleblower complaint that ultimately led to his impeachment something Atkinson was required by law to do.

And this week, in addition to firing Fine, Trump lashed out against Health and Human Services Inspector General Christi Grimm, whose office described widespread testing delays and supply issues at America's hospitals.

Now, Grimm is likely on the chopping block, as well.

To be clear, inspectors general have existed in the military since the countrys founding, but Congress established the position in statute in 1978 in response to Nixons abuse of executive power during the Watergate scandal.

But the president clearly has no tolerance for them or the oversight they're obliged to provide.

And yet, Congress continues to proffer up blank checks for the president to disburse.

Trillions of dollars flying out of taxpayer pockets, unchecked by Congressional oversight, and landing God knows where.

It's almost worthy of some kind of movement, some kind of rebellion, some public rebuke of government excess, corruption, and a surefire path to financial ruin...

If only one existed...

Fight on,

Jason Simpkins

@OCSimpkins on Twitter

Jason Simpkins is Assistant Managing Editor of the Outsider Club and Investment Director of The Wealth Warrior, a financial advisory focused on security companies and defense contractors. For more on Jason, check out his editor's page.

*Follow Outsider Club on Facebook and Twitter.

So, join Outsider Club today for FREE! You'll learn how to take control of your finances, manage your own investments, and beat "the system" on your own terms. Become a member today, and get our latest FREE report: "Three Big Profit Opportunities in Solar"!

We never spam! View our Privacy Policy

After getting your report, youll begin receiving the Outsider Club e-Letter, delivered to your inbox daily.

Originally posted here:
What the Hell Happened to the Tea Party? - Outsider Club

If youre looking for something to do during your time isolating at home, having a family tea party can be a great way to get the whole family together for some magical fun! Not only is tea good for your health, but many blends can provide calming relief which can aid with stress during these uncertain times.

To make this activity even better Toynk has released an enchantingteapot inspired by Genies lamp on their website, that will be the perfect addition to your home tea party!

We absolutely love this teapot thats made to mimic the style and details of Genies lamp, from Disneys Aladdin the popular animated movie released in 1992.

Its polished gold finish will have you feeling like royalty every time you use it and lets face it Its truly impossible for your tea time to feel anything less than magical when youre channeling genie vibes! Although sorry to say, there are no wishes included with this lamp look-alike. When you arent using it to serve up your favorite cup of tea, this teapot would make a perfect Disney decor piece to highlight in your kitchen, or really any room of the house!

This Disney teapot is made to look like gold, but the true material is ceramic which helps with keeping the contents of the pot warm for an extended period of time. It can hold 32 oz. and is hand wash only.

This tea-time accessory is officially licensed by the Walt Disney company and is currently retailing for $29.99. You can shop the magic lamp teapot by clicking HERE.

Also note that Toynk offers free shipping everyday, site-wide with no order minimum. It truly cant get better!

-SHOP: Bring Disney Magic Into Your Home Office With These Magical Products

-These Beautiful Castle Art Pieces Will Transform Your Hallway Into Main Street, U.S.A

Continue reading here:
Add Enchantment To Your Tea Time With This Teapot Inspired By Genie's Lamp - Inside the Magic

Introducing our Spring 2020 special section, Know Your Enemy.

In a widely read New Republic article published in the first days of Barack Obamas presidency, Sam Tanenhaus, a journalist and biographer of Whittaker Chambers and William F. Buckley, Jr., declared that Conservatism Is Dead.

He argued that advocates of the postwar conservative orthodoxya fusion of libertarian economics, anti-communism, and Christian traditionalismcould provide no satisfactory answers for Americans struggling with precarious employment and the collapse of the housing bubble. For Tanenhaus, it was Obama who represented the politics of Burkean compromise best suited to a world in crisis and flux. Out of touch with its times, conservatism, he predicted, would be relegated to the wilderness, shadow-boxing with twentieth-century ghosts until tiring itself out and expiring.

Tanenhaus was wrong. He failed to anticipate the potent ideological adrenaline that the Obama presidency would provide to the movements and institutions of the right, which, despite their high-minded rhetoric, had always been propelled as much by disdain for (and fear of) the lower orders as by philosophical principle. Beneath a familiar veneer of constitutional originalism, the Tea Party catalyzed an amorphous fear of the first black presidentand his plans to take over American medicine on behalf of undeserving racial othersinto a genuine movement. It revitalized the Republican Party, infusing it with young legislative talent and cash from hardcore libertarian donors like the Koch Brothers. Conservatives dominated state legislative elections in the Obama years, enabling a spree of gerrymandering and structural reforms (like voter disenfranchisement and union busting) to ensure that, despite a dwindling white majority, conservatism would have a triumphant second life in American politics.

Whether you see Trumps victory in 2016 as the culmination of decades of racial backlash, prefigured by the counter-revolutionary rage of the Obama years, or a radical break with the movement conservatism that preceded it depends on how you view the intellectual history of conservatism: through the rosy spectacles worn by the editors of National Review and the American Enterprise Institute, or as the product of a class that recognizes its duty to forget the violence of its foundation.

The thorough marginalization of those voices on the right who have refused to embrace Trumpand see him as out of step with conservative traditionis indicative of the current orientation of the movement. Most of the writers who contributed to National Reviews February 2016 Never Trump issue have become defenders of the president. Those like William Kristol, Jonah Goldberg, Charlie Sykes, and Jennifer Rubin who remain opposed are relegated to the sidelines of conservatism, viewed with suspicion by their former comrades. They wield little if any influence over the direction of the GOP and are resigned to begging the Democrats to pick a sufficiently moderate nominee for them to support in 2020.

The contributors to this section seek instead to recover the connections between conservative history and Trump, along with the seemingly novel formations emerging on the right. In his essay, Daniel Steinmetz-Jenkins offers an illuminating reappraisal of the evangelical questionhow did a religious community self-defined by puritanical virtue embrace a figure, in Trump, of pure vice and evident godlessness?by unearthing the white nationalism, Christian chauvinism, and American exceptionalism endemic to evangelicalism from its founding. Steinmetz-Jenkins confounds the recent effort by evangelical leaders to quarantine their doctrinal beliefs from the political adventurism of the rank-and-file; religious doctrine and secular politics are entangled, mutually constituting the political theology of evangelicalism.

This meld of faith and politics is evident in our forum of formerly conservative writers explaining why they left the right. Christian fundamentalisms of various flavors play a role in the upbringing and early politics of Matthew Sitman (co-editor of this section), Sarah Jones, Maximillian Alvarez, and Steinmetz-Jenkins. All found themselves mostly bypassing centrist liberalism as they moved from left to right, searching for a politics that repudiated the Iraq War and that took seriously the experience of economic precarity.

Other conservative intellectuals have sought to revive conservatism in order to appeal to the working class. In March 2019, a manifesto entitled Against the Dead Consensus was published by First Things, a redoubt of the Christian right that once provided the intellectual sustenance of George W. Bushs evangelical extremism. While stopping short of endorsing the president himself, the authors of the manifesto wrote that the Trump phenomenon has opened up space in which to pose these questions anew, asserting that any attempt to revive the failed conservative consensus that preceded Trump would be misguided and harmful to the right. In its place, they support a muscular faith-based politics, support for an idealized American worker, and anti-immigrant nationalism. They reject a pernicious individualism that they associate with the market fundamentalism of the right, the lefts embrace of transgender and abortion rights, and the pornographization of daily life in popular culture.

This post-liberal battle cry has found an unlikely champion in Harvard Law professor Adrian Vermeule, a respected and influential scholar who has become the countrys foremost advocate of integralismthe idea that the political priorities of the state should be subordinated to the moral aims of the Catholic Church. In a bracing essay, James Chappel finds the roots of Vermeules theocratic illiberalism, counterintuitively, in the technocratic jurisprudence he has elaborated elsewhere with the moderately liberal Cass Sunstein. If the administrative state can be used to nudge (in Sunsteins phrase) individuals toward optimal economic and public health outcomes, why couldnt agencies staffed by integralists nudge the public toward appropriate moral behavior?

Ross Douthat is known for translating these internecine conservative debates into terms that liberal New York Times readers can understand. In an interview with Sitman and Sam Adler-Bell, we press Douthat to explain how his own conservatism fits within the currents of post-liberalism, populism, and nationalism roiling the right, and whether a Trumpism without Trump is possible. Douthatlong an advocate of pairing economic populism with social conservatismoffers perhaps too sanguine an account of how a post-fusionist GOP might rebuild itself after Trump, glossing over some real disagreements about the best way to imagine the national community. Our dialogue also draws out some of the overlap between left and right critiques of individualism, posing the question of whether a social democratic president like Bernie Sanders might offer a different answer to the crisis of liberalism than Trump has.

Kirsten Weld concludes the section by widening our historical and geographic aperture to examine the ascendant Latin American right and its origins in the continents postcolonial histories. Her essay reminds us to look well beyond the twentieth century for answers to our contemporary predicaments. The racial, religious, and gendered hierarchies that conservatives across the globe seek to reconstitute and fortify are, ultimately, the inheritance of empire. And the task for the international left, as ever, is to eradicate the vestiges of colonialism and slavery from the structures of our societies.

Conservatism is hardly dead, and it may never die. The beneficiaries of existing social and economic hierarchies will always fight to maintain them against egalitarian movements for change. So too will the conservative longing for a lost or threatened sense of security, certainty, and rootedness serve as a powerful framework for opposing the imaginative promises of the egalitarian left.

But the certainty of resistance only raises our obligation to fightand to know our enemy.

Sam Adler-Bell is a freelance writer in New York City and co-host of Know Your Enemy, a podcast sponsored by Dissent.

Matthew Sitman is associate editor of Commonweal, a frequent contributor to Dissent, and co-host of Know Your Enemy.

Lauren Stokes is an assistant professor of history at Northwestern University, where she teaches German history and writes about the politics of migration and gender.

Go here to read the rest:
The Once and Future Right - Dissent