Tag: book

Posted on

Jared Kushner Discusses His New Book “Breaking History” On Fox News’ Hannity Show

$upport via Cash App

Former President Trump’s Senior Adviser and Son-in-Law Jared Kushner, appeared on Fox News’ Hannity show (08/22/22) to discuss his new book, “Breaking History, A White House Memoir”. The basic premise of Kushner’s book is that his Father-in-Law accomplished quite a lot in four years, and would have done much more, had he not been subjected to “false investigations”.

Kushner specifically told host Hannity (1:50): “You were speaking earlier about all of the different accomplishments he was able to have economically. Those weren’t an accident. It’s been awful to watch the inflation that’s happened, the rising gas prices, but all that happened under the guise of all the investigations and attacks and I write extensively in the book. Every one who has read it says that it’s a very fast-paced read and that’s because I weave together all of the efforts to try to push forward on the different policies, while simultaneously dealing with all these false investigations that we had to fend off because even though they were based on crazy accusations from the beginning, whether it was the Russia hoax, or trying to get Trump, or impeach him for trying to  investigate corruption in Ukraine, they were serious accusations and we had to take it.”

Kushner also said his book lays out how former President Trump negotiated a deal between Russia and Saudi Arabia in order to save our oil and gas industry. He appeared to blame the current problem we have with high gas prices, on the fact that President Biden doesn’t get along with world leaders like his Father-in-Law did.

He specifically told host Hannity(2:47): “President Trump got along with people in the world. He got along with Vladimir Putin, he got along with President Xi. That didn’t mean he didn’t have tough discussions with them, but I really go through the way that he dealt with them, which is how he kept the world peaceful. All the critics who were lying about the Trump administration for four years, they were saying that if Trump was elected, he would lead to world war three, but we had six peace deals during Trump’s time, and the world was a very very safe place. We go through all that extensively in the book.”

Kushner also talked about his efforts to broker a peace deal in the Middle East. He said(4:10): “One of the efforts that I worked on, that I detail in the book, was the efforts in the Middle East to try to bring peace between Israel and the Arab countries, and that’s something that the conventional thinking was that it would never happen, but President Trump was an outsider. He brought a businessman’s approach to Washington. Businessmen are results-driven, unlike politicians who generally want to just process…I write about how an outsider without a lot of political experience, and a team, came in and were able to achieve results that the political career people were not able to achieve, and so the book really goes through that in detail.”

The interview then came to the million dollar question which every viewer had probably tuned in for, and that is, whether former President Trump would run again in 2024. I got the sense from Hannity’s questioning, that he was almost dissuading Trump from running again because of the toll his presidency has had on his family, but I’ll let you be the judge on that.

Hannity(4:54): “When you factor in all that your family went through, we’re talking about Don Jr, and Eric, and Lara, and Ivanka…when you factor all of that in, do you want him to? Would you want to go through that again?”

Kushner responded in relevant part(5:31): “I think that the way we all viewed it, is that the cost of service, and of the attacks, was very small relative to the impact that President Trump and his administration were able to make for so many people and their families…”

I think it’s safe to say that any reasonable person presented with Kushner’s “small cost” response to Hannity’s question, would conclude that he believes former President Trump will indeed run again in 2024.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

What is Christian Nationalism? An Interesting CNN Segment Delved Into It

$upport via Cash App

An interesting segment on CNN’s Reliable Sources show (07/31/22) delved into the new hot political topic, and that is, Christian Nationalism. So what is Christian Nationalism? Host Brian Stelter brought in Katherine Stewart, who has studied this topic for years, to shed some light on the issue. Stewart is the author of the book “The Power Worshippers–Inside The Dangerous Rise Of Religious Nationalism”.

This intro by host Brian Stelter is important for establishing the context for the ensuing debate:“Roughly 70% of Americans identify as Christian, and this segment is not about most of them. This segment is about the rise of a White Christian Nationalist movement in the U.S. It’s emerging in the news more and more, you are probably hearing the term Christian Nationalism more and more. Here is one expert’s definition:’Christian Nationalism is the belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity, and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way.’ Many observers feel that would threaten our diverse, healthy democracy in the U.S. We are seeing some Republicans in the U.S. embrace the term Christian Nationalism, for example [Reps] Marjorie Taylor Greene…Lauren Boebert…”

Here’s how Katherine Stewart defined Christian Nationalism (video at ):“Christian Nationalism is basically the idea that America was founded as a so-called Christian nation, our law should be based on the Bible, and supposedly right-thinking believers need to reclaim America’s past.”

Stewart said this is dangerous because “it’s a radically anti-democratic ideology. It rejects the principles of pluralism and equality, that represent the best of the American promise. The movement, it’s not just an ideology, it’s also an organized quest for political power.. it’s a political movement. This movement has built up…a sort of a dense organizational infrastructure over decades, that includes right wing policy groups, legal advocacy groups, networking initiatives, that get the leadership on the same page…[including] Supreme Court Justices.”

Stewart went on to expound on her argument re the U.S. Supreme Court saying, all the six conservative justices on the high court are either current or former members of the Federalist Society, which she says “is an organization that plays an outsized role in shaping our courts.” Just so you know, the Federalist Society is part of the “dense organizational infrastructure” Stewart alluded to earlier.

Stewart said Trump’s presidency was key to the Christian Nationalist movement because he “threw open the doors to leaders of this movement. It’s a leadership-driven movement, it’s not defined by the attitudes of the rank and file. Those attitudes are actually shaped by the leadership of the movement. He [Trump] offered them unprecedented political access, offered them of course the justices they wanted. This is a movement that represents the minority of our country. Most American Christians reject the politics of conquest and division this movement represents.”

There’s no other way to interpret Katherine Stewart’s remarks on CNN’s Reliable Sources other than(I’ll be happy to stand corrected of course), power hungry conservatives have schemed for decades on how to use Chritianity to achieve political power, and they finally got their opening with the Trump presidency. Trump elevated the leaders of this movement, and what we’re witnessing today with Reps Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert and others, are simply efforts to make Christian Nationalism a mainstream movement in America. Remember, as Katen Stewart correctly pointed out, a majority of Christians don’t agree with this effort to essentially hijack Christianity for political gain.

The CNN segment singled out Reps Marjorie Taylor Greene(R-GA) and Lauren Boebert(R-CO) as illustrations of this budding Christian Nationalist movement, but if anyone out there is looking for the classic example to date, it is, in my humble opinion, none other than former Arkansas Governor and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, a former Pastor, who has now fully embraced Trumpism. Mike Huckabee not only got his daughter Sarah to work in Trump’s White House, but also made sure she secured Trump’s endorsement for her run for Arkansas Governor, a job she is largely expected to bag.

Huckabee has also recently authored “christian” books themed around the Trump presidency. If Mike Huckabee, and his daughter Sarah for that matter, are not the classic examples of the abuse-Christianity-for-political-power-movement, I don’t know who is.

An important piece of advice Karen Stewart gave to the mainstream media when covering this Christian Nationalism movement, is to never forget that it is a leadership-driven movement. In other words, don’t focus too much on what the rank and file go out there and do in furtherance of the movement(often viral videos on social media attacking gays, pro-choice activists, etc), but rather, on the leaders of the movement, who indoctrinate them into doing this stuff. Hmm, very interesting.

Bottom line folks, many Christians, including Yours Truly, regarded former President George W. Bush and his wife Laura (Texas pride–deal with it), as very good representations of a Christian family–despite whatever differences one might have had with their political beliefs. Interestingly, Trump, the leader of the “christian” nationalist movement, has never humbled himself to say anything good about the God-fearing Bushes. That, my friends, is all you need to know about this “christian” nationalist movement. It is anything, but Christian.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

Senator Mike Lee Says He Reached Out To State Legislators Re 2020 Elections To Clarify Rumors, Not To Influence Them

$upport via Cash App

Senator Mike Lee(R-UT) appeared on Fox News Sunday(06/19/22) to discuss the floundering bipartisan gun control negotiations currently going on in the Senate in the wake of the horrific shooting at Robb Elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, which left 19 children and two of their teachers dead. The interview then turned to the January 6th investigation, and specifically, Senator Lee’s alleged involvement in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. When host Shannon Bream asked Senator Lee about claims that he was involved in the scheme to create fake Trump electors in the states, Senator Lee gave a very interesting response. He said he reached out to legislators in various states only to clarify certain rumors about efforts to withdraw or reallocate electors, but denied ever trying to influence any of them to create fake electors for Trump.

The question now is whether the January 6th Committee will take Sen. Lee’s assertion as the truth, or dig deeper to find out whether he did indeed pressure state legislators on Trump’s behalf, conduct that constitutes a crime in most states.

Host Shannon Bream(video at 6:04):“Your own text messages have come up with respect to Mark Meadows. They’ve been highlighted. Here’s what the Salt Lake Tribune said about that…’New court filings raise questions about Sen. Mike Lee’s involvement in attempts to overturn the 2020 election.’ Your response?”

Senator Mike Lee:“Well, first of all,look, I knew how bad Joe Biden would be as President. I knew what a disaster he would be in the Oval Office, and there were some uncertainty in the wake of the election. As we approached the end of December, there were rumors that continued to circulate, suggesting that some states were going to be reallocating, withdrawing and reallocating their electoral votes. Because Congress has a role in that, and I as a Senator would be required to certify those, I wanted to find out. So I communicated with Mark Meadows to try to find out whether the rumors were true. I couldn’t get answers, so I reached out to state lawmakers in various states, not trying to influence anyone, simply trying to find out whether the rumors were true. The rumors weren’t true, no state had any intention of withdrawing it’s slate of electoral votes, that made it an easy decision on my part to vote to certify the results of the election.”

There’s no other way to interpret Senator Lee’s remarks on Fox News Sunday other than(I’ll be happy to stand corrected of course), he admits reaching out to state legislators in various states regarding electoral college votes, but that his outreach was only limited to his desire to clarify some rumors. He never influenced any of the state legislators to come up with a scheme to create fake electors for Trump.

Any reasonable person presented with Senator Lee’s explanation–that his outreach to state legislators was only limited to clarifying some electoral college rumors–will take issue with it, and at the very least, would be inclined to apply some “trust but verify” principle to it. Hopefully, this is exactly what the January 6th Committee will do with Senator Lee’s explanation.

Asked whether he would sit down and talk to the January 6th Committee if asked, Sen. Lee responded:“Oh sure…I’d always be willing to talk if they want to talk.”

Bottom line folks, efforts by Senator Mike Lee and his sidekick Senator Ted Cruz(R-TX) to overturn the 2020 election results, deserve further scrutiny by the mainstream media, now that the January 6th investigation is heating up. Hopefully the January 6th Committee will take Senator Lee up on his offer to sit down with them, because something tells me his explanation, that he reached out to legislators in various states only to clarify some rumors, will be debunked. The Committee should do the same for Senators Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham(R-SC), who have similar charges leveled against them. Simply put, the public is hungry for suit-and-tie insurrectionists to also face the music for their efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

Former AG Holder: Americans Should Prepare For An “Ideologically Driven” Supreme Court Not Tethered To Precedent

$upport via Cash App

Former AG Holder on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports show(05/12/22)

Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appeared on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports show (05/12/22) to discuss his new book “Our Unfinished March”. During his interview, he was asked about the controversy caused by the leaked draft Supreme Court majority opinion dealing with abortion, to which he gave a very interesting response. He said while the leak itself was a serious issue, the bigger problem Americans need prepare themselves for, is an “ideologically driven” Supreme Court, that will have little regard to precedent–an issue Democrats need to focus on as we approach the midterm elections.

Former AG Holder(video at 0:35):“I think the leak is unprecedented both in its breadth, its scope, and its completeness. We’ve heard rumors before about where the court is going to go, how the justices perhaps were aligned, but never actually seen a draft opinion, and that’s serious. That’s something that needs to be addressed. But what we really need to focus on is what’s contained in that leaked opinion, and where the court appears to be lining up. Looks like they are going to overturn Roe v Wade, inconsistent with the notion that you adhere to precedent that people have relied on over the course of the last 50 years. It’s an attack on the right to privacy, and so the question has to be asked, is it only going to be abortion that is going to be at risk, or is same sex marriage going to be at risk? The regulation of contraception, is that going to be at risk? Even interacial marriage. All of these things are based on the right to privacy, which this opinion in its form as we saw it, really goes after that right to privacy.”

Holder added that people need to get prepared for an “ideologically driven” Supreme Court, that is “not going to adhere to the extent that they should, to precedent.” This is of course very troubling given the weighty issues the high court is getting ready to deal with–affirmative action, gun cases, voting rights, etc. Democrats can capitalize on this Supreme Court issue, but only if they present it in AG Holder’s terms–an untethered high court that threatens many of the legal precedents we have come to rely on. This approach will likely drive more people to the polls this Fall, as opposed to only presenting it as an abortion/reproductive rights issue.

Bottom line folks, Dems sucking at messaging is nothing new. “Leakgate” presents them with an opportunity to drive Dem voters afraid of an untethered Supreme Court, to the polls in record numbers, and bucking the midterm election trend which typically favors the party out of power(GOP). Hopefully Dems will get their Supreme Court messaging right this time around by railing against the MAGA Supreme Court as an affront to all the legal precedents we have come to rely on for decades.

It’s also worth noting that former AG Holder, a self-described “institutionalist”, said that after initially being opposed to a criminal prosecution of former President Trump, he now believes, given the revelations about his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, that he needs to be held accountable. Surely, current AG Garland has to take this seriously, coming from a former prosecutor, who recently held his position.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

Elie Mystal Says If Rep Marjorie Taylor Green Wasn’t A White Republican She’d Be Charged With Perjury

$upport via Cash App

Elie Mystal on MSNBC’s Cross Connection Show(04/23/22)

Elie Mystal, Justice Correspondent for The Nation and Author of the New York Times bestselling book “Allow Me To Retort: A Black Guy’s Guide To The Constitution”, appeared on MSNBC’s Cross Connection show on 04/23/22. Mystal dropped a bombshell on the show, telling host Tiffany Cross that the only reason Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene(R-GA) has not been charged with perjury for her highly evasive court deposition on 04/22/22, was because she is a White Republican woman. He added that if Reps Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, or Ayana Pressley(all women of color), had engaged in similar conduct, they would have been hit with perjury charges before they validated their parking. Whoa!!

Host Tiffany Cross(video at 1:06):“She[MTG]was clearly involved and I’m just curious your thoughts on what repercussions this case might have on other pro-insurrectionists who are currently in office, or currently running for office?”

Elie Mystal: “Well, I don’t think there are going to be repercussions because she is a White Republican woman, quite frankly. Black people cannot get away with this. The evasiveness that we saw at her hearing yesterday, where she all but perjured herself versus the tape that you just played, Black people cannot get away with that. Everybody at home knows that. Everybody at home knows that if[Reps]Rashida Tlaib, if Ilhan Omar, if Ayanna Presley had tried what Marjorie Taylor Greene tried yesterday, they would have caught a perjury charge before they validated their parking…At the end of the day, what Marjorie Taylor Greene did was perjury and if she was a non-White person, she would be at least been investigated for that. In fact, if she was just a Democrat, she would be at least investigated for that. You know how I know that? Because I’m old enough to remember when Republicans impeached Bill Clinton for less. The evasiveness that Bill Clinton did in his deposition was less than what we all saw Marjorie Taylor Greene do yesterday…Republicans, and White people get away with this all the time.”

There is no other way to interpret Elie Mystal’s remarks other than race and class, even in 2022, are still major factors when it comes to how our criminal justice system makes decisions about who to prosecute and who not to. According to Elie Mystal, White Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Greene are the biggest beneficiaries of such decisions because they are almost always let off the hook for conduct that Blacks and Browns would almost certainly be prosecuted for–a sad state of affairs indeed.

Bottom line folks, it’s not a lot to ask that “equal justice under law” mean exactly that–equal justice under law. It doesn’t take a genius to realize, given her numerous public utterances, that Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene serially lied under oath on Friday 04/22/22.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

Trump Lashes Out At AG Barr For Not Going After Hunter Biden

$upport via Cash App

Former President Donald Trump called into Fox News’ Sean Hannity show(04/13/22) where he among other things, lamented the weaponization of law enforcement for political purposes. Trump joked that in the last five years, he has gone through “more investigations than Al Capone, Jesse James and Billy the kid put together.” Yours Truly found this quite interesting because even though weaponization of the criminal justice system for political purposes is a legitimate topic of concern, Trump’s DOJ was brazenly political, especially under Attorney General William Barr. As a matter of fact, Trump admitted to host Sean Hannity that he was frustrated with AG Barr’s refusal to prosecute President Biden’s son Hunter, during the 2020 campaign season.

Trump specifically told Hannity(video at 32:00 onwards): “I’ve gone through in five years, more investigations than Al Capone, Jesse James and Billy the kid put together…They’ve weaponized law enforcement essentially, they’ve weaponized the AGs in the states..and district attorneys…I mean, it’s such a horrible thing that they are doing, and I just don’t think the people of the country are going to take it. but I just, based on past, I think probably nothing will happen[to Hunter Biden]. Look, we also had a chance, but Bill Barr, the Attorney General, didn’t want to be impeached, they[Democrats] were vicious with him…How do you not get impeached? You just sit back and relax and wait out for your term to end, and that’s what he did, and it was a sad thing and a sad day for this country, then he writes his crummy book, which was so false…He was so afraid of being impeached, that he refused to do his job.”

There’s no other way to interpret Trump’s remarks on Hannity other than, he was infuriated by his own AG Bill Barr, for not prosecuting Hunter Biden during the runup to the 2020 presidential elections, a move that Trump knew would give him political advantage over his opponent Joe Biden. This, needless to say, would have been the quintessential weaponization of the criminal justice system. Put another way, Trump is not concerned about the legitimate problem surrounding the weaponization of the criminal justice system, he is just mad that his own AG refused to go along with it when it came to Hunter Biden.

Bottom line folks, as we have seen with many other issues involving former President Trump, projection is always a major theme. As Trump is now complaining about weaponization of the criminal justice system, it must not be left unsaid that his own DOJ was notorious for that. Trump’s remarks also raise serious questions about the Hunter Biden criminal investigation. If Bill Barr was against the investigation while he was AG, why is he now saying on cable TV that Hunter should be investigated?

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Posted on

Who Are The 1,000 People Listed In Epstein’s Address Book

Back in September, a federal judge intimated that she was inclined to release the names of the 1,000-plus people the now deceased accused child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein had listed in his address book. Epstein’s contentious address book is part of a defamation lawsuit filed in 2015 by one of his accusers Virginia Roberts Giuffre. Because it is assumed by the general public that whoever Epstein listed in his address book was either a participant or a witness to his child sex trafficking schemes, the news that the federal judge was set to release the names in the address book was very welcome news to the public.

This is especially so due to the fact that Epstein’s suicide in August had raised fears that without his personal testimony, the public would never know which powerful individuals partook in his illicit global rendezvous where children were sexually abused. It was for this reason that Epstein’s suicide drew wild public speculation of a cover-up.

At a court hearing in the beginning of September, the federal judge presiding in the lawsuit intimated that she was inclined to release the names of the people listed in Epstein’s address book and urged any opposing motions to be filed quickly. This to the public was a signal that the address book would be public before the end of September or sometime in October. Well, October is drawing to a close and there’s still no decision on the address book leading many to reignite the cover-up speculations that followed Epstein’s suicide.

Bottom line, as Yours Truly stated in an earlier post, Epstein was a test case for the U.S. criminal justice system. The test was whether someone as rich and powerful as Epstein could face punishment commensurate with the seriousness of his crimes. His suicide in prison has robbed the public of an answer to this question. All that remains is his priced address book. Will the public also be robbed of an opportunity to see who Epstein listed in his address book? As Trump famously says, “We’ll see what happens.”

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out.

You may reach the author via email at author@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com