TRUMP SAYS THIS IS LAST VOTE

The November Vote: A Battle for the Soul of American Democracy

In the lead-up to the November election, former President Donald Trump has made a stark proclamation to Christians: vote for him, and their religious and political needs will be perpetually safeguarded. This assertion, coupled with his self-declared Christianity—a claim that seems to lack substantiation in both membership and virtues—signals a dangerous shift towards theocracy and dictatorship. This election is not just another political contest; it is a battle for the very soul of American democracy, the rule of law, and the Constitution.

The False Prophet of Christian Values

Donald Trump’s public persona and actions raise significant questions about his claimed Christian faith. Christianity, at its core, emphasizes humility, compassion, and truth. Trump's record is replete with actions and rhetoric that starkly contrast these virtues. From his inflammatory and divisive statements to his policies that often marginalize the vulnerable, his conduct is not reflective of the Christian ethos of love and forgiveness.

The danger lies in the deceptive promise he extends to Christian voters: that by electing him, they can secure a future where their religious ideals dominate the political landscape. This promise, however, is a thinly veiled threat to the very foundation of American democracy. It suggests a move towards a theocratic state, where the separation of church and state—a cornerstone of American governance—would be eroded.

The Theocratic and Dictatorial Threat

Trump’s recent statements and unwavering commitment to implementing a theocratic governance model should alarm every American. A theocracy, where religious leaders control political decisions, is fundamentally at odds with the pluralistic and secular nature of the United States. Our nation was founded on the principles of freedom of religion, ensuring that no single faith dictates the lives of all citizens.

Moreover, Trump’s flirtation with dictatorial powers is not new. His previous tenure saw numerous instances where he attempted to undermine democratic institutions, disparage the free press, and consolidate power in ways that are characteristic of authoritarian regimes. His commitment to a dictatorial leadership style was perhaps most evident in his response to the 2020 election results, where he perpetuated baseless claims of fraud and incited an insurrection against the very seat of American democracy.

The Stakes of the November Election

This November, the stakes are higher than ever. The election is not merely a choice between two candidates; it is a referendum on the future of American democracy. Trump’s promise to Christians is a perilous path toward the dismantling of the rule of law and the erosion of constitutional safeguards that protect our freedoms.

Americans must recognize the gravity of this moment. Preserving our democratic principles and the rule of law depends on a collective commitment to reject any form of theocracy or dictatorship. This election is about upholding the values enshrined in our Constitution, ensuring that power remains accountable, and safeguarding the rights of all citizens, regardless of their faith.

A Call to Action

Every vote in this election is a vote for the future of our nation. It is a vote for preserving democratic norms, the rule of law, and the Constitution. It is imperative that Americans, regardless of their political affiliations, stand together to protect the integrity of our democracy.

Trump’s promise to Christians is a dangerous gambit that threatens to unravel the very fabric of our nation. We must remain vigilant and resolute in our commitment to a government that serves all its people, respects the separation of church and state, and upholds the democratic ideals that have defined America for over two centuries.

In November, vote not out of fear or division but with a steadfast dedication to preserving the democracy that binds us all. The future of our nation depends on it.

 

BIDEN'S DUTY TO DECLARE TRUMP INELIGIBLE

Preserving Our Democracy: President Biden’s Duty to Declare Trump Ineligible

In the face of an unprecedented threat to our democracy, President Joe Biden has a crucial role in preserving the integrity of the United States. The potential re-election of Donald Trump poses a clear and present danger to our democratic institutions, and it is within Biden’s authority to declare Trump ineligible for the presidency, even if Trump wins the electoral college vote.

The Case for Ineligibility

The arguments for Trump’s ineligibility are manifold and compelling. They stem from his actions, which have consistently undermined democratic norms and institutions, and his clear intent to dismantle our government's foundational principles. His threat is not hypothetical but is evidenced by his statements and actions.

1. Subversion of Democratic Processes: Trump’s involvement in the events leading up to and including January 6, 2021, constitutes a direct attack on the democratic process. His efforts to overturn a legitimate election result, his incitement of violence, and his disregard for the rule of law are grounds for ineligibility. These actions are not just unbecoming of a presidential candidate; they are antithetical to the oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."
2. Threat to National Security: Trump’s handling of classified information, his willingness to engage with foreign adversaries for personal gain, and his erratic foreign policy decisions have compromised national security. A president must prioritize the nation’s safety above all else, and Trump’s past behavior indicates he cannot be trusted with such a responsibility.
3. Intent to Dismantle Government Institutions: Trump has explicitly stated his intention to dismantle the executive workforce and replace civil servants with loyalists. This plan is a direct assault on the independence and professionalism of our government institutions. It aims to erode the checks and balances essential for a functioning democracy.

The Role of President Biden

As the sitting president, Joe Biden must uphold the Constitution and protect the nation from foreign and domestic threats. In light of Trump’s clear and ongoing threat to democracy, Biden must take decisive action to prevent him from assuming office again.

1. Constitutional Authority: The president has the authority to act in the interest of national security and preserve democratic institutions. By declaring Trump ineligible, Biden would be exercising his constitutional duty to protect the nation from a candidate who has demonstrated a willingness to subvert democratic processes for personal gain.
2. Precedent and Principle: The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Colorado case should be viewed in the context of preserving democratic integrity. The court’s decision is wrong, not supported by precedent, and does not override the president’s responsibility to protect the Constitution. In this exceptional circumstance, Biden must prioritize the broader principles of democracy over a flawed judicial ruling.
3. Public Mandate: Americans have repeatedly desired a leader who respects democratic norms and values. Biden’s declaration of Trump’s ineligibility would align with the public’s demand for accountability and the preservation of democratic principles. It would send a strong message that the United States will not tolerate leaders who undermine the very foundation of our government.

Conclusion

The preservation of American democracy is the foremost responsibility of the President of the United States. President Joe Biden would be acting in the nation's best interest in declaring Donald Trump ineligible for the presidency. This decisive action is justified and necessary to ensure that our democratic institutions remain intact and that the United States continues to be a beacon of democracy for the world.

President Biden, by exercising his authority to protect the Constitution, can prevent a dangerous precedent and safeguard the future of American democracy. It is a bold step, but in these unprecedented times, boldness is required to defend the principles upon which our nation was founded.

William James Sprigga

 

 

DENY TRUMP'S OVERTHROW OF OUR GOVERNMENT

Proposal to Deny Trump the Presidency

As America stands at the precipice of the 2024 presidential election, we face a critical juncture that will determine the future of our democracy. Donald Trump's candidacy directly threatens the foundational principles that have upheld our nation for centuries. It is imperative that we, as a nation, consider the proposal to deny Trump access to the Presidency.

Preserving Democratic Integrity

The cornerstone of our democracy is the integrity of our electoral process. Donald Trump's repeated attempts to undermine this process, from his baseless claims of election fraud to his incitement of the January 6th insurrection, demonstrate a clear and present danger to our democratic institutions. Allowing him to assume the Presidency legitimizes his attempts to subvert the will of the people and erodes trust in our electoral system.

Upholding the Rule of Law

The rule of law is non-negotiable in a functioning democracy. Trump's actions have shown a blatant disregard for legal norms and constitutional principles. States can reaffirm their commitment to the rule of law by denying him access to the office. This move is not about silencing opposition but protecting our legal framework from those seeking to dismantle it.

Protecting National Security

Trump's erratic behavior and controversial policies have often put national security at risk. His mishandling of classified information, cozying up to authoritarian regimes and undermining alliances have compromised America's global standing. Ensuring that he does not return to the highest office is a matter of national security. We cannot afford to have a leader who prioritizes personal gain over the safety and security of the nation.

Safeguarding Civil Liberties

Trump's tenure was marked by numerous attempts to curtail civil liberties, from his attacks on the press to his discriminatory policies against minority groups. Denying him the office is a stand against the erosion of civil liberties. It sends a powerful message that America will not tolerate leaders who seek to divide and disenfranchise its citizens.

SUPREME COURT ERROR

1. Historical Context and Original Intent:
• Historical Basis: Amendment 14, Section 3, was ratified in the aftermath of the Civil War to address the issue of former Confederates holding public office. The framers intended for this provision to be self-executing, meaning it would automatically apply without the need for additional legislation.
• Original Intent: By ruling that Congress must pass enabling legislation, the Supreme Court deviated from the original intent of the Fourteenth Amendment's framers. The framers likely did not anticipate that future enforcement of this provision would be contingent upon legislative action, especially considering the urgent need for its immediate application post-Civil War.
• Moreover, the decision wrongfully ignores the separation of powers and the mandate of the executive branch to enforce all laws, including the Constitution. The Department of Justice has an entire section devoted to Constitutional enforcement.
2. Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint:
• Judicial Overreach: The Supreme Court engaged in judicial activism by requiring Congressional action not explicitly stated in the Constitution. This is an overreach of judicial power.
• Judicial Restraint: The Court’s opinion restrains the immediate enforceability of constitutional provisions meant to address urgent national issues.
3. Precedent and Legal Consistency:
• Inconsistent Precedent: The decision is inconsistent with previous rulings where the Court has recognized self-executing constitutional provisions and enforcement is solely the executive branch's responsibility. This inconsistency could lead to legal uncertainty and confusion about the enforceability of other constitutional mandates without explicit legislative action. More importantly, the executive branch enforces all laws, including the Constitution. The opinion thus flies in the face of the separation of powers.
4. Section 5 Incorrectly Interpreted: Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment vests Congress with the authority to adopt “appropriate” legislation to enforce the other parts of the Amendment—most notably, the provisions of Section One. The section enables needed implementation if appropriate. It does not require legislation for Section 3. This is a fatal flaw in the Court's opinion. 

The future of American democracy hinges on our ability to make tough decisions in the face of unprecedented challenges. Denying Trump access to the office is necessary to ensure that our nation remains a beacon of freedom, justice, and equality for all.

 William James Spriggs

THE ART OF COMPROMISE

The Art of Compromise: The Pillar of American Democracy

America's foundation is rooted deeply in the principle of compromise. From the very inception of our nation, the framers of the Constitution understood that to build a robust and enduring democracy, embracing the art of compromise was essential. In an era where political polarization is driving us into silos and tribes, it's imperative to revisit and rekindle this foundational principle.

The Misguided Quest for Common Ground

In contemporary political discourse, there is a relentless pursuit of common ground. While this seems noble, it often leads to frustration and division. The reality is that true common ground, where all parties entirely agree on every issue, is a mirage. An unrealistic expectation sets the stage for gridlock and further polarization. Instead of seeking this elusive common ground, we should focus on creating a majority through the art of compromise.

The Necessity of Majority Rule

In a democratic society, the majority rules. However, forming a majority is not an automatic process; it requires the deliberate and thoughtful practice of negotiation and compromise. This means that individuals and political factions must be willing to come to the table to give something up. The expectation should not be to win entirely but to reach a solution that, while not perfect for any one party, is acceptable to all.

The Art of Compromise

Compromise is not a sign of weakness but a testament to the strength of our democratic principles. It requires a willingness to listen, understand different perspectives, and make concessions. Here are some key points to consider when approaching compromise:

1. Commitment to Give: Enter negotiations with a clear understanding that compromise means making concessions. This mindset shift is crucial to breaking the deadlock often paralyzing political processes.
2. Prioritize the Greater Good: Compromise should aim to benefit the broader society rather than catering to the interests of a select few. Focusing on the greater good can help unify different factions and create a more cohesive society.
3. Respect and Understanding: Effective compromise requires respect for differing viewpoints and a genuine effort to understand others' concerns and motivations. This mutual respect lays the groundwork for finding workable solutions.
4. Flexibility and Adaptability: Be prepared to adjust your positions. Stubbornness and rigidity are the enemies of compromise. Flexibility allows for creative solutions that might not have been initially apparent.

Historical Context of Compromise

The founding fathers exemplified the spirit of compromise. The Constitutional Convention of 1787 is a prime example where diverse interests and viewpoints were reconciled through negotiation and compromise. The Great Compromise, which led to the establishment of a bicameral legislature, and the Three-Fifths Compromise, though deeply flawed, illustrate how contentious issues were addressed through give-and-take.

The Current Political Landscape

Today, the lack of compromise is starkly evident. Political leaders and their followers are increasingly entrenched in their positions, driven by the belief that yielding is tantamount to defeat. This zero-sum mentality is detrimental to the health of our democracy. To move forward, we must embrace the ethos of our founders and recognize that the ability to compromise is a strength, not a weakness.

Conclusion

The essence of American democracy lies in the art of compromise. As we face today's challenges, it's imperative to remember that creating a majority and making progress requires a willingness to negotiate and make concessions. Only through a renewed commitment to compromise can we hope to bridge our divides and build a more united and prosperous nation.

By reframing our approach to political discourse and negotiations, we can foster a culture where compromise is valued and seen as the bedrock of a thriving democracy. Let us honor the legacy of our founding fathers by practicing the art of compromise in our pursuit of a better America.

The search for common ground is illusory, even delusional. Common ground is always my way, and it is superior to your way. No. Compromise. Give something up.

 

PROJECT 2025 SUMMARIZED

Project 2025: A Blueprint for Harm and Inequality

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 is a radical and dangerous blueprint that threatens to reshape America in ways that would harm millions of its citizens while favoring a wealthy few. This plan, endorsed by Donald Trump and his allies, promises sweeping changes that undermine the core values of democracy, equality, and justice. Here’s a closer look at how Project 2025 would inflict needless harm on our citizens and concentrate power and wealth in the hands of a select few, much like the oligarchs in Putin’s Russia.

1. Slashing Funding for DOJ, FBI, and Homeland Security

Project 2025 proposes significant cuts to the Department of Justice, the FBI, and Homeland Security. These agencies play crucial roles in maintaining law and order, protecting citizens, and ensuring national security. Reducing their funding would diminish their capacity to fight crime and terrorism and protect civil rights, putting ordinary Americans at greater risk.

2. Gutting Environmental Laws and Expanding Fossil Fuel Use

The plan advocates for dismantling environmental protections and a significant expansion of fossil fuel use. This would increase pollution, cause health problems, and accelerate climate change. The long-term environmental degradation would disproportionately affect marginalized communities, leading to higher rates of respiratory illnesses and other health issues.

3. Eliminating the Departments of Education and Commerce

Project 2025 calls for eliminating the Department of Education and the Department of Commerce. The Department of Education plays a vital role in ensuring access to quality education for all Americans, while the Department of Commerce supports economic growth and innovation. Abolishing these departments would undermine educational opportunities and economic development, exacerbating inequality and stifling progress.

4. Weaponizing the DOJ and FBI Against Trump’s Enemies

The plan envisions using the Department of Justice and the FBI to target and persecute political opponents of Donald Trump. This politicization of law enforcement agencies would erode the rule of law, foster an atmosphere of fear and repression, and undermine the principles of justice and fairness.

5. National Prohibition on Abortion and Restrictions on Contraception

A national ban on abortion and restrictions on contraception are central to Project 2025. These measures would strip women of their reproductive rights, forcing many into dangerous and illegal procedures. The lack of access to contraception would also lead to higher rates of unintended pregnancies and related health complications.

6. Citizenship-Only Census Count

By counting only citizens in the census, Project 2025 would skew representation and resources away from diverse and populous areas, particularly those with significant immigrant populations. This would lead to underfunding essential services and infrastructure in these communities, exacerbating social and economic disparities.

7. Making the U.S. a Christian Nation

The plan’s objective to establish the U.S. as a Christian nation violates the principle of separation of church and state. This move would marginalize non-Christian citizens, eroding religious freedom and promoting discrimination based on religious beliefs.

8. Flat Tax Rate Favoring the Wealthy

Project 2025 proposes a flat tax rate of 15% for individuals and 18% for corporations. This regressive tax policy would disproportionately benefit the wealthy while increasing the tax burden on middle and lower-income Americans. It would widen the wealth gap and reduce the government’s ability to fund essential public services.

9. Expanding Presidential Power

The plan seeks to expand Presidential power significantly, undermining the checks and balances fundamental to American democracy. This concentration of power would pave the way for authoritarian rule, eroding democratic institutions and freedoms.

10. Rescinding LGBTQ+ Rights

Rescinding rights for LGBTQ+ individuals is a key component of Project 2025. This would strip away protections against discrimination, endanger lives, and deny basic human rights to millions of Americans, fostering a climate of intolerance and hate.

11. Mass Deportation of Immigrants

The plan includes mass deportations of immigrants, tearing families apart and devastating communities. This draconian measure would create widespread fear and instability, harming the social and economic fabric of the nation.

12. Criminalizing Pornography

Making pornography illegal is another authoritarian measure in Project 2025. This would infringe on personal freedoms and privacy, setting a dangerous precedent for government overreach into individuals’ private lives.

13. Loyalty Purges in Government

The plan proposes firing government employees suspected of disloyalty to Trump and requiring new hires to demonstrate loyalty. This would create a culture of fear and sycophancy within the government, undermining its effectiveness and integrity.

14. Gutting Environmental Protection Laws

Project 2025 aims to dismantle environmental protection laws further, exacerbating pollution, harming public health, and contributing to the global climate crisis. This move prioritizes short-term economic gains for the fossil fuel industry over the planet's and its inhabitants' long-term well-being.

Conclusion

Project 2025 is not just a political agenda but a roadmap to authoritarianism and oligarchy. Its implementation would inflict severe harm on ordinary Americans, undermine democratic principles, and concentrate power and wealth in the hands of a few. All citizens must recognize the dangers of this plan and stand up for the values of equality, justice, and democracy. The choice is clear: a future of inclusive progress or a descent into chaos and oppression. 

PROPOSAL TO DENY TRUMP

PROPOSAL TO DENY TRUMP

One of you has scoffed at our proposal that President Biden declares Trump's ineligibility to be sworn in as President because he incited an insurrection against the United States and its Constitution.

The executive branch enforces Constitutional provisions all day long. Congress is not required to pass legislation permitting or directing the executive branch to do its Constitutional duty. 

The Supreme Court, fearful of the repercussions of Colorado excluding candidate Trump, held that Congress had to grant that authority. That is the holding of the case. Where did that come from? Not law, not stare decisis, but fear.

The Supreme Court agreed that Trump incited an insurrection against the United States and its Constitution. Now that the facts have been adjudicated, what should we do about it?

Vote. But who will be President if Biden wins the popular vote and Trump the electoral vote? Trump, for the outdated notion that the popular vote should not be trusted. But he has been adjudicated an insurrection inciter. What of the Constitution's provision that he cannot be President?

The executive branch enforces the law. President Biden can legally declare Trump ineligible and prevent him from assuming office.

With what repercussions? MAGA violence. This is a challenge to proper planning but no worse than the violence Trump will incite if he also loses the electoral vote. Legal challenges. When the Supreme Court, again, out of fear, eschews sound legal reasoning and holds Biden acted illegally (your guess of how tormented that reasoning will be), Biden can ignore the ruling. Yes, just ignore it.

The political fallout is irrelevant. The question is Country or party, democracy or dictatorship. The Trump, MAGA, and Heritage Foundation conspiracy has projected its punch. The majority wants to keep the Constitution even as it tires fitfully to apply it to modern times. We Americans are on an upward trajectory and will not fall back. We will continue to make America even greater.

From our prior article:

Assumption: Trump wins the Electoral vote.

Does Biden have the authority to make Trump ineligible to hold office as president? The Constitution says so. That is the law. Who enforces the law? The Executive branch of government. Who is in charge of that? Biden. What about the Supreme Court? Did they not say Congress has to act to enforce the Constitution? Yes, but they were making a political decision and are worthy of being ignored as political partisans, and Biden certainly has the power to ignore them, if not the guts. Does Biden subvert the rule of law? No, not at all. The Executive branch enforces the law, which is what he does. Also, extraordinary times demand extraordinary measures to support the Constitution and save democracy. The oath of office is explicit and implicit in the Constitution, which is the obligation to keep democracy sacrosanct. So why doesn't Biden do what you say? Intestinal fortitude, my friends, intestinal fortitude.

This is simple and straightforward. The Constitution is clear, and the facts are indisputable. We all saw and heard Trump's violations of the Constitution. 

When the Supreme Court decided Colorado could not disqualify Trump, it adjudicated Trump a President who incited an insurrection against the United States. Trump is guilty, as a matter of fact. Now, what to do about it.

Biden and the Executive branch enforce the law. The preservation of democracy demands that Biden ignore the Supreme Court precedent. That opinion was vitiated by the grossest abuse of judicial restraint. 

The only issues here are not integrity, propriety, adherence to the rule of law, or the efficacy of the electoral process. Democracy is at stake (see Trump's public statements and Project2025). The survival of our way of life depends on Biden's actions.

The only issue is whether Biden has the strength of character to act. He does. Will he?

 

The Supreme Court said Congress had to pass legislation. Not so. Not regarding every other Constitutional provision. The executive branch enforces the law. The Supreme Court writes wrong opinions often, and President Biden stands atop a powerful and equal branch of government. He can be our hero.  

Myopic is too kind. Think this through. Study the Heritage Foundation's history, purpose, positions, and promotions. Read Project2025. Understand Trump. I swore to defend the Constitution against all enemies, including domestic ones. Did you? Trump and the Heritage Foundation will rewrite the Constitution. They want an oligarchy to theocracy. The branches are separate and equal. We ignore bad laws in defense of liberty. Under the exigent circumstances, the political court needs to be ignored. A bold leader, a Lincoln, FDR, or JFK, would not hesitate to do what is right.

The Supreme Court made a law from whole cloth for political reasons to support Trump. The Executive Branch enforces the law. The Constitution is a law. In no other case must Congress act before the executive enforces the Constitution. The court again ignores stare decisis, the bedrock of the rule of law. That aside, the Executive Branch is free to ignore bad legal precedent from the Supreme Court. 

Prior Post: 

https://wspriggs2.blogspot.com/2024/04/what-to-do-if-trump-wins-revisited.html

WHAT TO DO IF TRUMP WINS REVISITED

No one has deigned to discuss our proposal to preserve democracy in the face of a Trump/Heritage Foundation victory. If it is because you do not think he can win, look at the battleground states where he is ahead and could win. If it is because we can live with a Trump victory, listen to him and read Project2025 and the plan to dismantle the federal government and turn the country into a theocracy. Think that can't happen? Nazi Germany happened.

Section three of the 14th Amendment provides:

No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and VicePresident, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. 

Who executes and enforces this mandate? Under our system of three co-equal branches of government, which branch executes and enforces the laws? Not Congress. Not the Judiciary, which, by the way, erroneously said Congress enforces Section three. No, President Biden can enforce the provision. We can discuss it. But keep in mind, we are talking in the context of a Trump victory and his plan to flout the Constitution and make this country a theocracy. The issue is how to stop him.

We propose that if Trump wins, President Biden declares him ineligible as one who engaged in insurrection and rebellion and gave aid and comfort to enemies of the Constitution. Biden deploys whatever is necessary to maintain law and order and undertakes any lawful means to protect the American people from domestic terrorists. If the Supreme Court eventually says Biden acted illegally, so what? That court has demeaned itself and has become, by the majority, a group of political hacks.

You say it's radical. Crazy. We are talking about democracy, where everyone has a vote, and the majority wins, like in kindergarten. We are talking about the freedoms we enjoy and our everyday lives. All of that goes up in smoke. Listen to him. Read about Project2025. Read Heritage Foundation Propaganda. 

Call it radical, but admit that changing to a dictatorship and theocracy is also radical. Extraordinary problems demand extraordinary solutions.

President Biden can do this for us. Just as Lincoln, FDR, Truman, and  JFK would have done it.

Posted by Spriggs Law Group at 4:07 AM  

1 comment:

1.         

Spriggs Law GroupApril 8, 2024 at 9:17 PM

Does Biden have the authority to make Trump ineligible to hold office as president? The Constitution says so. That is the law. Who enforces the law? The Executive branch of government. Who is in charge of that? Biden. What about the Supreme Court? Did they not say Congress has to act to enforce the Constitution? Yes, but they were making a political decision and are worthy of being ignored as political partisans, and Biden certainly has the power to ignore them, if not the guts. Does Biden subvert the rule of law? No, not at all. The Executive branch enforces the law, which is what he does. Also, extraordinary times demand extraordinary measures to support the Constitution and save democracy. The oath of office is explicit and implicit in the Constitution, which is the obligation to keep democracy sacrosanct. So why doesn't Biden do what you say? Intestinal fortitude, my friends, intestinal fortitude.

2.         One problem is that Biden would have to ignore the Supreme Court's ruling that his action was illegal. Welcome to the high stakes. Are the branches coequal? What does it mean? Is it self-help? Who enforces laws, and who has no enforcement power? Hint to MAGAs: Biden enforces laws like the Constitution, and the Supreme Court merely opines on the meaning. The Court has no enforcement power, and its public persona is in the toilet. Another problem is that Biden would nullify the Electoral College vote. That is political suicide, but it is also the highest achievement of statesmanship (saving democracy). We are on the brink of civil war or its kin. If Trump loses both votes, it is easy to put down the insurrection. If he wins the electoral vote, Biden, by default, will cause a civil war. He lacks the guts. Where is Truman when you need to put down the enemy?

 

 

KEEP YOUR FREEDOMS, RIGHTS AND VALUES

Freedoms, Rights, and Values: The November Presidential Election and Project 2025

The upcoming November Presidential election is more than a political contest; it is a pivotal moment for preserving our freedoms, rights, and values. The Trump-backed Project 2025 threatens these core principles of American democracy, posing severe risks to our nation’s stability and prosperity.

The Threat of Project 2025

Project 2025, championed by Trump and his allies, is a blueprint for radical transformation that seeks to dismantle the foundational elements of our democratic system. Despite Trump's attempts to distance himself from this project, his involvement and support are evident in the project's formulation and promotion. Here are some of the most alarming aspects of Project 2025:

1. Dismantling the Civil Service:
• Proposal: Replace nonpartisan civil servants with Trump loyalists.
• Impact: This would undermine the professionalism and impartiality of government agencies, leading to a politicized bureaucracy that serves the interests of a single leader rather than the American people.
2. Erosion of Individual Rights:
• Proposal: Restrict freedoms under the guise of national security and public order.
• Impact: Measures such as increased surveillance, curtailing freedom of speech, and limiting the right to protest would infringe upon civil liberties and stifle dissent.
3. Undermining Democratic Institutions:
• Proposal: Weaken checks and balances by exerting undue influence over the judiciary and Congress.
• Impact: This would erode the separation of powers, concentrating authority in the executive branch and paving the way for authoritarian rule.
4. Economic Mismanagement:
• Proposal: Implement policies that favor the wealthy, such as flat taxes and deregulation.
• Impact: These measures would exacerbate income inequality, destabilize the economy, and undermine social safety nets.

The Strength of Our Current System

Our current democratic system, though imperfect, is designed to protect and uphold our freedoms, rights, and values through a balance of power, the rule of law, and a commitment to individual liberties. Here’s why our existing framework is superior to the radical proposals of Project 2025:

1. Professional Civil Service:
• Ensures that government functions are carried out by qualified, nonpartisan professionals who serve the public interest, not political agendas.
2. Protection of Civil Liberties:
• Guarantees freedoms such as speech, assembly, and privacy, fostering an environment where diverse voices and opinions can thrive.
3. Robust Checks and Balances:
• Maintains a balance of power among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, preventing any one branch from becoming too powerful.
4. Economic Stability:
• Promotes policies that aim for sustainable growth, economic equity, and the welfare of all citizens, rather than catering to the interests of the elite.

The Economic Doom of Project 2025

Beyond the immediate threats to democracy, Project 2025 is economically doomed. The proposals within this project would lead to:

1. Skyrocketing Inflation:
• Radical economic policies would likely cause inflation to surge, eroding the purchasing power of ordinary Americans.
2. Increased Deficit:
• Tax cuts for the wealthy and increased military spending without corresponding revenue would balloon the national deficit, placing an unsustainable burden on future generations.
3. Potential Great Depression:
• Mismanagement and destabilization of the economy could lead to a severe economic downturn akin to the Great Depression of the 1930s. The consequences could be even more catastrophic, given the interconnectedness of today’s global economy.

Conclusion

As we approach the November Presidential election, we must recognize that our choice is between two candidates and two fundamentally different visions for America. Project 2025, with its radical and destructive proposals, threatens to subvert our freedoms, rights, and values. Despite its flaws, our current system remains the best framework for ensuring liberty, justice, and prosperity for all.

The economic and societal costs of implementing Project 2025 would be disastrous, likely leading to inflation, increased deficits, and a potential depression that could surpass the hardships of the 1930s. It is imperative that we stand united in defense of our democratic principles and reject any attempts to undermine our nation's very foundation. The future of American democracy depends on it.