Kasie Hunt: New Details About Secret, Emotional Joe Biden-Chuck Schumer Meeting

"In an interview with CNN's Kasie Hunt, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) discusses a new report in the New York Times about Chuck Schumer's meeting with President Joe Biden after Biden's disastrous performance at the CNN presidential debate." 

Source:CNN reporting on the meeting between then Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (Democrat, New York) & President Joe Biden (Democrat, Delaware)

From CNN

President Biden this week has been saying, or it's getting leaked by his own people, that he's convinced that had he stayed in the 2024 election race, he would've beaten Donald Trump. This is some of what Newsweek has on that story: 

"President Joe Biden is facing backlash just before leaving office after insisting that he "would have beaten" incoming President-elect Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election.

Biden withdrew as the 2024 Democratic presidential nominee in July after weeks of scrutiny and intense pressure following a disastrous televised debate with Trump during the previous month.

Some Democrats have been second-guessing the decision to replace Biden with Vice President Kamala Harris, who went on to lose every swing state to Trump, while others have suggested that the incumbent president would have fared worse.

During a news conference at the White House on Friday, a reporter asked Biden if he regretted his "decision to run for reelection" or thought that the candidate switch-up "made it easier" for Trump to win.

"I don't think so," Biden responded. "I think I would have beaten Trump, could have beaten Trump. And I think Kamala could have beaten Trump and would have beaten Trump. It wasn't about ... I thought it was important to unify the party."

"When the party was worried about whether or not I was gonna be able to move, even though I thought I could win again, I thought it was better to unify the party," he added.

Biden made similar remarks in an interview published by USA Today on Wednesday, saying "yes" when asked whether he thought he would have defeated Trump for a second time, although he also said he did not "know" if he would have had the energy to finish a second term... 

From Newsweek

From Business Inside talking about President Biden's reelection chances last year: 

"President Joe Biden already had a narrow path to reelection before his disastrous debate.

But if the bottom drops out, Democrats could be fighting to defend states like New Mexico or Virginia.

At that point, former President Donald Trump's victory would be almost a foregone conclusion.

President Joe Biden's already narrow path to reelection is getting even harder to navigate.

Biden's best-case scenario before last week's disastrous debate likely required him to run the table in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, while holding on to Nebraska's Omaha-based 2nd Congressional District. Former President Donald Trump, as the FiveThirtyEight founder Nate Silver pointed out, had much more flexibility in reaching 270 electoral votes and could even reach even higher.

Four years ago, Biden had the luxury of deciding whether to base his campaign on the Upper Midwest or bet on Sun Belt states like Arizona and Georgia, which hadn't gone for Democrats in decades. Trump has held a steady lead in both states, according to RealClearPolitics' polling averages.

Biden's underdog status can get much worse. In its latest update on Wednesday, Sabato's Crystal Ball moved Michigan and Minnesota closer to Trump. As Kyle Kondik, the managing editor of Crystal Ball, said, this isn't rock bottom.

"It does seem like from the polling that Biden has taken a small hit, but he needed to be catching up as opposed to falling back," Kondik told Business Insider.

The Crystal Ball moved Michigan from "Lean Democratic" to "Toss Up" and Minnesota from "Likely Democratic" to "Lean Democratic." Under the University of Virginia Center for Politics' projections, there are five true toss-up states: Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Nevada.

f Biden continues to decline, Virginia, New Mexico, and Maine (statewide) could all come into play.

A Republican hasn't carried Virginia or New Mexico in 20 years. Maine, which, like Nebraska, awards only two of its Electoral College votes to the statewide popular-vote winner, hasn't crowned a Republican as a winner since then-Vice President George H. W. Bush in 1988.

"There's the possibility that maybe Trump is able to win the popular vote that is a roughly 5-point improvement from 2020. And if that sort of thing happens, you would expect Trump to win the states where Biden won in 2020 but did worse than the national popular vote," Kondik said. "That is also the situation where you would start to see a Minnesota or a New Hampshire or maybe even a Virginia or Maine be closer, certainly like they were in 2016 and certainly even closer than that."

A post-debate poll in New Hampshire showed the race there was too close to call. A Saint Anselm College poll found Trump leading Biden 44% to 42%. The independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is at 4% in the state. Biden won the Granite State by just over 7 points four years ago." 

From Business Insider

If anyone is still awake, or hasn't found a bridge to jump off of after reading all this information: you read what I think about all of this as well.

My whole point here is that President Biden still thinks that he could've won reelection in 2024. And perhaps now regrets dropping out of the race. But before the June debate last year, it already looked bad for the President. He was on pace to lose every swing state. And then the debate happens and now we're hearing and seeing things that suggest that now he could lose Virginia, Minnesota, and New Mexico. Those states were probably locks for the President before the debate. And to be completely fair: 

Vice President Kamala Harris: 

Only won New Jersey by by 6 points (which is a close race considering how blue NJ is) 

Only won Virginia by 5 points (which is a blue state at the state level) 

Only won Minnesota by 4 points (which is a very blue state at the state level) 

And only won New Mexico by 6 points (which is a very blue state at the state level) 

But the more important point here is that President Biden would've lost all those blue states, to go along with all the swing states, had he not had dropped out of the election, because it was obvious by then that he simply didn't have the physical and mental fitness to run for President full-time, to go along with being the sitting President and his numbers would've continued to drop as a result. 

From what I've heard and CNN reported on this back in July as well, is that it's his own pollsters telling President Biden that he was in danger of losing these blue states, to go along with all the swing states, which is what convinced him that he no longer had a path to reelection and that's why he dropped out back in July. How much do you want to bet that Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, being the brilliant political strategist and legislature that he is, already had all this information as well and shared that with President Biden to try to get him to drop out of the 2024 election?

You can follow me on Threads and Blue Sky.

Ben Meiselas: Donald Trump CANCELS Outdoor Inauguration Speech

"MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on the surprise announcement from Donald Trump that his inauguration will be canceled from the outside ceremonies and moved inside to the Capitol Building because of the cold weather." 

Source:Meidas Touch talking about the potential cold start (pun intended) to Donald J. Trump's 2nd presidency.

From the Meidas Touch

I just want to make 1 point about something that Ben Meiselas said here and then I'll get into Donald Trump's looming, small crowd size, that of course he'll probably lie about as soon as gets to The White House after his inaugural. 

Ben Meiselas seemed to suggest that Donald Trump was expressing some concern about how the arctic cold weather could affect his supporters at his inaugural in Washington this Monday, which is why this event will be moved indoors in the Capitol. The problem with that is that he Donald Trump had an outdoor rally in Las Vegas back in June where it was like 110 degrees that day and this is what he said about that: 

"We need every voter. I don't care about you, I just want your vote." 

From The Late Show With Stephen Colbert: 

"The former president spent his weekend making speeches on the campaign trail where he revealed his true feelings about his voters, and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene likened him to the son of God." 

Source:The Late Show With Stephen Colbert talking about Donald Trump in Las Vegas last June.

From The Late Show With Stephen Colbert

And this is what I said about that back in June: 

"And again, Donald Trump only cares about himself. I think even his MAGA voters actually believe that, at least when they're being honest with themselves. But he fights for the things that they believe in. Or that's what they think. Which is why they support him like he's the leader of their cult. 

The question here is, will Donald Trump now admitting live that he doesn't care about his voters, how that will affect the undecideds. Do they really want the next President of the United States whose only running for President, to stay out of jail. Or, do they want someone who actually loves his country, loves the people here, and will fight for them every chance that they get."

From The New Democrat

I have a little prediction about what President Donald Trump will do as soon as he gets to the Oval Office after being sworn in, or gets to the presidential residency at The White House, after his inaugural. 

Donald Trump will either claim this his 2025 inaugural was the biggest in American history. (Even though it will be indoors in an area that only seats maybe a few hundred people) 

Or, he'll claim that he has the biggest crowd at any indoor presidential inaugural in American history. And of course he'll also claim that his 25 inaugural was the most watched rally in inaugural history. Except to see garbage (to be kind) posts or tweets from him about this, around 3 or 4PM, this Monday. 

You can follow me on Threads, Blue Sky, and Twitter.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Meet The Press With Kristen Welker: Joe Biden Warns Americans to Fight Emerging ‘Oligarchy’ in Farewell Speech

"NBC News White House Correspondent Aaron Gilchrist and Deputy Tech Editor Ben Goggin join Meet the Press NOW to report on President Biden’s farewell address, including his warnings to Americans about an emerging “oligarchy” and social media companies abusing power." 

Source:NBC News with a look at President Joseph R. Biden's (Democrat, Delaware) farewell address.

From NBC News

From President Biden's remarks about a potential American oligarchy: 

"That’s why, in my farewell address tonight, I want to warn the country of some things that give me great concern. And this is the dangerous concer- — and that’s the dangerous concentration of power in the hands of very few ultra-wealthy people, and the dangerous consequences if their abuse of power is left unchecked.

Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power, and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedoms, and a fair shot for everyone to get ahead.

We see the consequences all across America. And we’ve seen it before, more than a century ago. But the American people stood up to the robber barons back then and busted the trusts.

They didn’t punish the wealthy. They just made the wealthy pay the by — play by the rules everybody else had to. Workers won rights to earn their fair share. You know, they were dealt into the deal, and it helped put us on the path to building the largest middle class and the most prosperous century any nation the world has ever seen, and we’ve got to do that again... 

From The White House

At risk of The New Democrat sounding like a TV that only gets 1 channel, that only plays 1 program: the American voters were warned about a potential American oligarchy all throughout the summer and fall of 2024. And either ignored it, didn't care, or if you talk to the MAGA voters, at least, that's exactly what they wanted. 

A lot voters apparently decided that the price of eggs and milk are so expensive, that we need to put at risk our great, liberal democratic system of checks and balances and individual rights, at risk, so we can bring down grocery prices. I'm being a little sarcastic here, but that's what this comes down too.

But American voters had a choice: a convicted felon, insurrectionist, and reality TV star, who's never made a dime or given a damn about anyone other than himself, or a career lawyer and law enforcement officer, before her brief term in the U.S. Senate and 1 term as Vice President of the United States.

Elections have consequences and now 1/2 of the country is going to to have to try live (or survive) with the choice that the other 1/2 of the country made. 

And no offense to President Biden, but the speech he made last night, would've been a lot more relevant had he given it 2 years ago, when he could've announced that he was going to keep 1 of his 2020 election promises and chose not to run for reelection. The fact that he couldn't finish a presidential campaign that he started and had to drop out, instead of getting crushed in November, is a big reason why we're going to have to live (and perhaps try to survive) with a President Donald Trump again. With Elon Musk essentially serving as the President's underboss.

You can follow me on Threads, Blue Sky, and Twitter.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Senator Markwayne Mullin Refuses To Say Who's Drunk In The Senate

"Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin refuses to elaborate on which Senators are allegedly regularly drunk in the Senate." 

Source:David Pakman Show talking about U.S. Senator Markwayne Mullin's appearance on CNN with Kaitlan Collins last night.

From the David Pakman Show

Senator Markwayne Mullin: 

"I'm just looking for qualifications. You didn't give me any qualifications.

Starts bringing up the fact that, what if you showed up drunk to your job? How many senators have showed up drunk to vote at night? (LAUGHTER)

Have any of you guys asked them to step down and resign from their job? And don't tell me you haven't seen it, because I know you have.

Kaitlan Collins: 

"I mean, first off, that's a pretty serious accusation there. Do you want to name any of the senators that you're saying-- are drinking on the job?

Senator Markwayne Mullin: 

No, and that's -- my whole point was, is that these senators, on the other side of the aisle, was trying to act like they were had more morals than Pete Hegseth. And they don't.

If you're going to hold someone accountable for their behavior, then hold everybody accountable. I'm not saying, I'm the most moral man or the perfect individual. I'm absolutely not. I wasn't the one calling him out. But if you're going to hold -- if you're going to hold someone at that standard, then hold everybody at that standard...

But I was in that room today. And when you said that, I guess, the thought that went through my head was, if what you're saying is true, and your colleagues do show up drinking, to come to work and vote, which I think would maybe be concerning to those taxpayers who pay them, how is the bad behavior of a sitting senator, a defense of someone who wants to run the Pentagon...

You can see the whole transcript of this interview at CNN

Senator Mullin's statement from Tuesday in the Senate Armed Services Committee about drunk U.S. Senators: 

“How many senators have showed up drunk to vote at night?” Mullin demanded after Democrat Sen. Tim Kaine’s fiery line of questioning. “Have any of you guys asked them to step down and resign from their jobs? And don’t tell me you haven’t seen it, because I know you have... 

The Oklahoma Republican went on to slam lawmakers for inquiring about whether infidelity in Hegseth’s marriages could be disqualifying for the Cabinet position, arguing that multiple politicians divorced spouses under similar circumstances.

How many senators do you know have got a divorce before cheating on their wives? Did you ask them to step down? No, but it’s for show,” Mullin said. “You guys make sure you make a big show and point out the hypocrisy, because a man’s made a mistake, and you want to sit there and say that he’s not qualified... 

From The New Democrat

First of all, I'm, going to push back on something that David Pakman said and risk sounding like I'm defending career politicians, especially members of Congress, who could definitely be the worst of our career politicians. Never forget the phrase: "Elections have consequences" 

David Pakman said: "It may very well be true that senators are showing up to vote drunk... If that were the case, we would already know about that. There might be a 1,000 or more Congressional reporters on Capitol Hill. And with all the smartphones, the internet, the 24 hour news networks, the national, as well as local Congressional reporters on Capitol Hill covering both the Senate and the House, (for that mater) if you have alcoholic senators up there, we would already know about that. 

As someone who's pushing 50 now, I actually remember hearing about former U.S. Senator John Tower, who was President George H.W. Bush's original choice for Secretary of Defense back in 1989, as that story was going on. He was considered to be a lock for Secretary of Defense, even in a Democratic Senate that had 55 Democratic seats. 

Senator Tower was Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, before that he was the Ranking Member of that Committee, as well as the Ranking Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence from 1975-76. 

And then stories about Senator Tower's alcoholism broke when he was a senator, before he left Congress in 1985. And his confirmation was all but dead. 

Forget about smartphones or social media. This was 1989. There wasn't even an internet back then. We barley had 24 news networks at this point. And yet the Tower alcoholism story still broke. 

My 1st point here and this is where I sort of agree with David Pakman: Senator Markwayne Mullin doesn't have any "receipts" to bring. He's just pulling a "we all do it" play and basically saying that Pete Hegseth shouldn't be held to any higher standard than some Joe Jones on the street, who lives a life that's completely obscure, who just goes about his own business everyday. That's basically how Senator Mullin sees the Secretary of Defense, as well as U.S. Senators: they're just a bunch of Joe and Sally Jones's on the street and therefor shouldn't be treated as important people, held to higher standards. Or, that's what he wants the mainstream media to think.

Had Kamala Harris won the election and she's appointing the new Secretary of Defense and that person has a history of heavy alcohol use, how much would you want to be bet me that Senator Mullin would be acting like the Secretary of Defense is 1 of the most responsible and powerful positions in the whole world. And therefor we must hold that person to the highest standards possible. 

But Donald Trump won and according to Senator Mullin, what The Donald wants, is what The Donald gets. This Republican Congress should just be there to protect his back. Not do their jobs as members of Congress. 

My 2nd and final point here is, Senator Mullin is just playing partisan politics and serving as another 1 of Donald J. Trump's political pets. Nothing more, or less. 

You can follow me on Threads, Blue Sky, and Twitter.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

The Washington Examiner: Donald Trump Pushing Vivek Ramaswamy to Fill JD Vance’s Senate Seat in Ohio

"Sources told the Washington Examiner, President-elect Donald Trump is quietly pushing entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy to fill the Senate seat vacated by Vice President-elect J.D. Vance.

Ramaswamy took himself out of the running for the position last year after Trump and Vance won the November election, instead accepting a position from the president-elect to co-lead the newly created Department of Government Efficiency." 

Source:The Washington Examiner with a look at who might replace Vice President-Elect J.D. Vance in the U.S. Senate, for the 119th Congress.

From The Washington Examiner

As the narrator of this video said, it's up to Governor Mike DeWine who will decide who the next U.S. Senator from Ohio is. And he's not a MAGA Republican. He's a mainstream, establishment Republican, the people that MAGA calls RINOS. And I would have to assume that Governor DeWine is going to appoint someone he believes can win statewide in Ohio, instead of a MAGA Republican, who could make Ohio competitive in 2026 and 2028. 

So Donald Trump could wish for Santa Clause to be the next U.S. Senator from Ohio. But if you look at all of Mr. Trump's recent legal cases, Santa Clause has been very generous to him already. And so have Santa's helpers by making him President again. 

I think what we might see is Governor DeWine appointing a fill-in to the Senate. Someone who doesn't have much of a political resume or philosophy, who has no interest in being a U.S. Senator long-term. And then let the Ohio Republican Party decide who will be the next U.S. Senator. Or at least the next Republican nominee for U.S. Senate from Ohio. 

You can follow me on Threads, Blue Sky, and Twitter.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Joe Biden: The Liberal Democrat

Now that we are in the last 5 full days of the Joseph R. Biden presidency and administration and as President Biden is about to give his farewell address as President of the United States tonight, I thought this would be a good time to talk about the man's politics and philosophy. Last week, I wrote about Jimmy Carter's character as President, instead of his political philosophy. But this week, I'm going to talk about Joe Biden's hardcore politics: what he believes, his political philosophy and why. 

The so-called mainstream media (that some people call legacy media) like to say that Joe Biden is a moderate or centrist Democrat. Anyone to the right of lets say a Never-Trumper Republican, like to describe President Biden as Bernie Sanders ideological twin brother. But this is an example of where two sides can be wrong about the same thing and person. 

You have to remember, or even know (I guess you have to know something before you can remember it) that Joe Biden was born just after the start of World War II: November 20, 1942. He came of age in the 1960s, growing up for the most part in the 1950s, where probably most of his early childhood memories started, graduated high school in the early 1960s. He's what we would call an early Baby Boomer, which was someone who was born during World War II, instead of just after it, and grew up during the early days of the Cold War. 

So when you are lets say Baby Boomer, growing up in a small, blue-collar town like Scranton, Pennsylvania, (which is right between Philadelphia and New York) and you are growing up during the start of the civil rights movement, as well as the Cold War, and you are going to college in the 1960s, that has to have an effect on one's politics. Perhaps especially since they're studying to become a lawyer, which is what Joe Biden was before he became a politician. 

So you have Joe Biden's background, who comes from a Irish-Catholic, blue-collar, Pennsylvania, Democratic family, where his father worked really hard just to take his care of his wife and kids, and John F. Kennedy becomes President of the United States right when you are finishing high school, that has to affect your politics and what you believe. And Joe Biden was interested in politics very early in life. 

You can'r really call Joe Biden a Cold War Liberal Democrat today. But only because the Cold War has been over for over 30 years now. But the John F. Kennedy's, the Henry Jackson's, the Ed Muskie's, I would put Jimmy Carter in this ideological camp as well... this is the type of Democrat that Joe Biden is ideologically. Someone who is very hawkish not just against communism, but authoritarianism in general, including Anglo-Saxon-American nationalism, and Islamism as well. He doesn't oppose these authoritarian philosophies because he's not a Liberal and he's really just a moderate or even a Conservative. He opposes these authoritarian philosophies because he is a Liberal. I would describe Joe Biden as a Henry Jackson Liberal Democrat, ideologically.

Source:The White House- Joseph R. Biden (Democrat, Delaware) 46th President of the United States of America.

To give you more of an idea about what Cold War Liberalism is: 

"Cold War liberal is a term that was used in the United States during the Cold War, which began after the end of World War II.[1] The term was used to describe liberal politicians and labor union leaders who supported democracy and equality. They supported the growth of labor unions, the civil rights movement, and the war on poverty and simultaneously opposing totalitarianism commonly seen under Communist rule at the time. Cold War liberals supported efforts of containment, such as diplomat George F. Kennan and U.S. president Harry S. Truman during the post-World War II era, towards Soviet Communism." 

From Wikipedia

Liberal Hawk would be a great way to describe Joe Biden's foreign and national security philosophy: 

"The term liberal hawk refers to a politically liberal person (generally, in the American sense of the term) who supports a hawkish, interventionist foreign policy.

Past U.S. presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson have been described as liberal hawks for their roles in bringing about America's status as the world's premier military power. The Clinton Doctrine can also be considered as consistent with this vision. Today the term is most frequently used to describe liberals who supported or still support the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, which was authorized by the United States Congress and ordered by president George W. Bush. The invasion was controversial among all political sides. In December 2002, American liberals were conflicted over whether or not going to war in Iraq was the correct decision; some felt that they should support the war, in accordance with their philosophy of liberal internationalism, i.e. support of military intervention.[1]

One document cited as promoting a liberal hawkish point of view is Progressive Internationalism: A Democratic National Security Strategy, published by the Progressive Policy Institute in October 2003.[2] Another document related to the stance is a letter to President Bush sent by Social Democrats USA in February 2003, which urged the military overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime." 

From Wikipedia

And you are interested in straight up, hardcore liberalism, where Joe Biden also fits in very well ideologically: Britannica has an excellent definition of liberalism: 

"Liberalism, political doctrine that takes protecting and enhancing the freedom of the individual to be the central problem of politics. Liberals typically believe that government is necessary to protect individuals from being harmed by others, but they also recognize that government itself can pose a threat to liberty. As the American Revolutionary pamphleteer Thomas Paine expressed it in Common Sense (1776), government is at best “a necessary evil.” Laws, judges, and police are needed to secure the individual’s life and liberty, but their coercive power may also be turned against the individual. The problem, then, is to devise a system that gives government the power necessary to protect individual liberty but also prevents those who govern from abusing that power... 

From Britanica

At least before Joe Biden became President of the United States, the so-called mainstream media had him down as a centrist Democrat. Not a soft Democrat like a Joe Manchin, or someone like that. But way to the right of the Bernie Sanders's of the worlds and other leftist Democrats in Congress. Anyone who to the right of the Never-Trumper Republicans, again they see him as Senator Sanders twin brother, ideologically. 

The left-wing of the Democratic Party, before Biden became President, saw him as a moderate Republican ideologically, because of his hawkish views on foreign policy, national security, and criminal justice. 

But this is what happens in a country that's so illiterate and ignorant when it comes to political philosophy, where liberal and progressive is automatically seen as everything that is politically left. Because of how words like socialist are automatically viewed as insults or curse words, where almost no one in their right mind wants to be associated with Socialists, even if they are Socialists. 

But if political labels are going to matter, they have to be used correctly. Otherwise Libertarians could get called Communists and vice-versa, because political labels no longer matter. But the fact is Joe Biden grew up and came to age as a Cold War, Henry Jacksonian Democrat, who loved John F. Kennedy, who was also a Cold War Liberal Democrat. And that's who Mr. Biden has always been ideologically. If political labels still mean anything in America, Mr. Biden is a Liberal Democrat who believes in and defends American liberal democracy whenever he can. 

You can follow me on Threads and Blue Sky.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Kasie Hunt: Special Counsel Report Says Donald Trump Would’ve Been Convicted in Election Case

"Attorney General Merrick Garland has publicly released special counsel Jack Smith’s report on his investigation into Donald Trump and efforts to overturn the 2020 election, detailing the president-elect’s “criminal efforts to retain power” and projecting confidence in the investigation." 

Source:CNN with a look at the first and only insurrectionist and convicted felon, to ever be elected President of the United States of America.

From CNN

"The Justice Department releases special counsel Jack Smith's volume one report on the Jan. 6 case." 

Source:Harry Litman with a look at the Jack Smith Report.

From Harry Litman

"The evidence was there to convict Donald Trump.

That’s the simple and powerful conclusion from former special counsel Jack Smith in his final report on Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election culminating in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.

Smith’s 137-page report, released overnight less than one week before Trump is sworn in for a second term as president, is a full-throated justification of his investigation and defense against his myriad critics.

And while he faced substantial political and legal headwinds — especially from the Supreme Court — Smith said his ultimate defeat was at the ballot box when Trump was reelected. With Trump about to be shielded from prosecution as the sitting president, per Justice Department policy, Smith wrote, it was all over.

A second volume, summing up the other half of Smith’s work, on what’s been assessed to be a strong but now-closed case against Trump over the retention of classified records after his presidency and obstruction of justice, is still not public.

As with all of the legal battles Trump won over the past couple of years, it’s part of the ultimate “what if?” question of the 2024 election...

From CNN

Kate Bedingfield made the key point here: 

"He will be president for four years. He will have access to the levers of power that could potentially allow him to do something like this again. So it is it is important that this information be out in the public record, be laid out and detailed in this way when we're potentially looking at the possibility of Trump, you know, committing these kinds of acts again."

No offense to any Republican who wants to play the Jack Smith Report off as "deranged Jack Smith going off again", or whatever... Donald Trump won't be on the ballot for anything 3-4 years from now, but his potential Republican successor will be. (Unless the Supreme Court carves out a special, unconstitutional exception for Donald J. Trump to run for President again) Which means as Kate Bedingfield said, he will have the same governmental powers to do in 2028-29, that he did 8 years earlier by then. 

And if the Republican nominee for President in 2028 loses to the Democrat, we could be going through this again 4 years from now, as Donald Trump leaves The White House and Republicans are once again out-of-power, at least at the executive level, in the Federal Government.

So the American people (and what the do with the Jack Smith Report is completely up to them) will now not only have memories of 2020-21 (unless Democrats fall asleep and let everyone forget about it) but will have this report and be able to use it, to hold President Trump and his allies accountable. And that means making sure there's a Democratic Congress in 2027-28, 29, as well as doing what they can from preventing the Republican Party from nominating another presidential nominee, who doesn't believe in American democracy and wants to be a dictator himself. 

You can follow me on Threads and Blue Sky.

You can also see this post on WordPress.