Mediaboss Marketing

All it took for the left to give up their Im afraid for our democracy! charade was a single court ruling. Theyve gone from swearing only they can protect the rule of law to openly wondering what laws are even good for.

The New York Times on Monday published a column by Peter Coy bemoaning the erosion of public trust in our judicial system. Thats not a particularly offensive or even new concept, but what is new is this thing Coy and other liberals are doing now where they profess ignorance of how laws are executed.

All the Supreme Court really has to go on is the publics acceptance of its rulings as legitimate, he wrote. Coy also quoted Washington University law professor Daniel Epps saying, The Supreme Court has no power to enforce its decisions. It doesnt have an army. The only thing it has power to do is write PDFs and put them up on its website.

Maybe we need that nerdy little CNN fact check guy to come on and explain how our government and the separation of powers work. True, the Supreme Court doesnt have an army. Neither does Congress. But what they have is an executive branch charged with faithfully executing the laws they interpret and pass.

To suggest that the word of the Supreme Court has no real mechanism for enforcement is to suggest that the president and every governor are bound by nothing to execute that word.

But, as fate would have it, they are bound by something. The c-word. (Constitution.)

Article II, Section 3: The president shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Aside from making it clear that theyre ready to abandon American democracy because of the Supreme Courts decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, its somewhat of a mystery as to why liberals are even talking about this.

The Courts decision doesnt mandate anything. Theres nothing really to enforce, per se. Abortion remains legal, though all 50 states now reserve the right to regulate it any which way their legislatures see fit. If the threat is to ignore the Supreme Courts ruling, its not much of a threat. Regulate or dont. Its up to the states and yes, they do have ways to ensure that their laws are followed.

But the larger implication is noted. Democrats dont care about our democracy.

See the original post:
Democrats Signal Their Preparation For Abandoning Democracy - The Federalist

WASHINGTON Earlier this month, when Senator Bernie Sanders said he would not challenge President Biden in 2024, Mr. Biden was so relieved he invited his former rival to dinner at the White House the next night.

Mr. Biden has been eager for signs of loyalty and they have been few and far between. Facing intensifying skepticism about his capacity to run for re-election when he will be nearly 82, the president and his top aides have been stung by the questions about his plans, irritated at what they see as a lack of respect from their party and the press, and determined to tamp down suggestions that hes effectively a lame duck a year and a half into his administration.

Mr. Biden isnt just intending to run, his aides argue, but hes also laying the groundwork by building resources at the Democratic National Committee, restocking his operation in battleground states and looking to use his influence to shape the nomination process in his favor.

This account of Mr. Bidens preparation for re-election and his building frustration with his partys doubt is based on interviews with numerous people who talk regularly to the president. Most spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations. But several said the president and his inner circle were confounded by Democrats discussions about a Plan B when the one person who has defeated Donald J. Trump has made clear he intends to run again.

Mr. Biden has told advisers he sees a replay of the early days of his 2020 primary bid, when some Democrats dismissed him as too old or too moderate to win the nomination. He blames the same doubters for the current round of questioning.

Those skeptics grew louder over the weekend, after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, when Mr. Biden restated his opposition to expanding the ranks of the high court, the lefts preferred solution to the courts current conservative tilt. The remarks angered critics who argue that the president, who has never been comfortable elevating abortion rights and positions himself as a consensus builder, doesnt have the temperament for partisan combat.

Too many people in our party look at the glass as half-empty as opposed to the glass as half-full, said former Representative Cedric Richmond, whom Mr. Biden dispatched from the White House to shore up the Democratic National Committee. Accusing other Democrats of putting too much into these polling numbers, an allusion to Mr. Bidens standing below 40 percent in some surveys, Mr. Richmond said there was a wing in our party who wanted a different candidate and Im sure theyd love to have their candidate back in the mix again.

However, its hardly just the presidents progressive detractors who are nervous about soaring inflation, uneasy about Mr. Biden running again, and not convinced he even should.

Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, who some wealthy donors are hoping will consider a third-party presidential bid, declined to say whether he would consider such a run or if he planned to back Mr. Biden. Were just trying to do our daily thing, brother, Mr. Manchin said. Trying to do what we got to do thats good for the country.

Other interviews with Democratic lawmakers yield grave doubts about whether Mr. Biden ought to lead the party again with some concluding he should but only because theres no clearly viable alternative.

I have been surprised at the number of people who are openly expressing concerns about 2024 and whether or not Biden should run, said Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, recounting a recent dinner of Democrats in the capital where several speculated about who could succeed the president.

More worrisome for Mr. Biden, some ambitious Democrats have found that calling for the president to retire is a sure way to win attention. Former Representative Joe Cunningham of South Carolina, whos hoping to unseat Gov. Henry McMaster, 75, said the president should cede the nomination to a new generation of leadership, as he put it on CNN last week.

In some respects, Mr. Biden invited this moment. Running in the 2020 primary, the president presented himself as a bridge, not as anything else as he sought to rally skeptical Democrats to his candidacy. Consumed with ejecting Mr. Trump from office, the partys voters answered that call but thought little of the implications of having an octogenarian in the Oval Office four years on.

Now, over half of Democrats say they dont want Mr. Biden to run again or arent sure he should, according to recent surveys.

Mr. Bidens top advisers reject the idea that an open primary would deliver Democrats a stronger standard-bearer. They fear his retirement would set off a sprint to the left. Whats more, while Vice President Kamala Harris would most likely garner substantial support, shes unlikely to clear the field, leading to a messy race that could widen the partys divisions on issues of race, gender and ideology.

Mr. Biden has told aides he is determined to run again, although he has also noted he will take his familys advice into account. Mr. Bidens advisers recognize the political risk of being perceived as a one-term president and are intent on signaling that he intends to run for re-election.

The president has made clear he wants a primary calendar that better reflects the partys racial diversity, all but assuring the demise of first-in-the-nation status for the Iowa, which was hostile to Mr. Biden in his last two presidential bids. Senior Democrats are considering moving up Michigan, a critical general election state where the president has a number of allies in labor and elected office.

The Democratic National Committee has been quietly preparing for the presidents re-election by pouring money and staff into eight battleground states that happen to have important midterm elections, an effort that began in the spring of last year. Mr. Biden has also accelerated his fund-raising, holding a pair of events for the committee in June that brought in $5 million, while also spending more time on Zoom sessions courting individual contributors.

The president has moved to consolidate his hold on the D.N.C., and not just by sending Mr. Richmond to the committee. Mr. Biden has also shifted both his social media assets and his lucrative fund-raising list to the party, which has made the committee largely reliant on those channels for their contributions.

Even more subtly, Mr. Biden has made personnel moves that indicate hes at least preparing to run, most notably summoning Anita Dunn, a longtime adviser, back to the White House from her public affairs firm. Ms. Dunn, who helped revive the presidents moribund primary campaign in 2020; Jennifer OMalley Dillon, Mr. Bidens top political aide; and senior adviser Mike Donilon are expected to help guide the re-election, though notably there has been no decision yet on who will formally manage the re-election outside the White House.

What Mr. Biden will not do, aides say, is quiet the critics by filing his paperwork to run in 2024 before this years midterm elections, a step being considered by Mr. Trump. Mr. Bidens advisers feel the move would suggest panic and create a significant fund-raising burden two years before the campaign. Should the midterms go poorly, however, the president may feel pressure to formalize his intentions sooner than what they see as the modern standard former President Barack Obamas April 2011 declaration.

For now, the president is relying on personal diplomacy, as he did with Mr. Sanders, the Vermont independent, and the power of the presidency, to ward off would-be competitors.

Even before Gov. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois arrived recently in New Hampshire, a traditional early voting state, Biden officials said that the governors office had given them a heads up about the eyebrow-raising travel and reassured them that the governor had no plan to mount a primary challenge against the president. The message was appreciated, a Biden official said, noting that Mr. Pritzker has been lobbying to get the Democrats 2024 convention to Chicago. Mr. Biden will make that decision later this year.

White House aides have noticed Gov. Gavin Newsoms repeated denunciations of his party leadership for not more robustly confronting Republicans. They dismissed the California governors critiques as those of a politician feeling his oats after easily thwarting a recall and said Mr. Newsom was in frequent contact with the West Wing. And one Biden adviser noted that Mr. Newsom feels enough affection for Mr. Biden to have posted pictures of his children with the president on social media during Mr. Bidens trip to California last week.

As for Hillary Clinton, few Biden advisers think she will mount a challenge against him, though her recent Financial Times interview made it clear shes eager to have her voice in the political conversation. Mrs. Clinton has made little secret of her frustration that she has not been consulted more by Mr. Biden. But White House aides believe they can direct Mrs. Clintons energy toward assisting with the public response to the Supreme Courts decision to overturn Roe.

When pressed about why Mr. Biden is so intent on running again, the presidents defenders point out he did what Mrs. Clinton did not, defeat Mr. Trump.

Stung about their perceived treatment, they also recall other recent Democrats President Bill Clinton and Mr. Obama who rebounded from low approval numbers and rough midterm elections to win second terms.

But Mr. Bidens age at 79, he is the oldest president in American history has fueled skepticism those presidents didnt face.

Trump is a senior citizen, too, shoots back Fletcher Smith, a former South Carolina legislator, reprising a line White House officials use, as well.

Democrats remain so alarmed by the threat that Mr. Trump, 76, represents that Mr. Bidens aides argue they will be insulated from a primary because such a race will be perceived as effectively aiding the former president, a life-or-death question for American democracy.

For the most part, senior Democrats would rather avoid the question for now.

Asked if he expected Mr. Biden to run again, Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, said: If he runs, Im for him. Pressed if he thought Mr. Biden would do so, Mr. Schumer repeated the same line.

One outside ally of the president and a regular White House visitor, the National Urban League president Marc Morial, played down questions about the presidents age, saying that he still has the old Joe Biden fire.

But Mr. Morial urged the president not to dwell on the criticism. I think sometimes if you overreact to it you give it air, he said.

See the original post here:
Biden Irked by Democrats Who Wont Take Yes for an Answer on 2024 - The New York Times

You are forgiven if you did not realize that New York state is holding primary elections on Tuesday. There are a few other things going on in the world, from bombshell Supreme Court rulings to January 6 hearings to raging inflation. And the lack of attention has been enhanced by Governor Kathy Hochul, who has run a strikingly understated campaign, with few rallies and retail events, a strategy that has drawn alarmed hand-wringing from prominent fellow Democrats. Polls give Hochul a wide lead over her Democratic primary rivals, Long Island congressman Tom Suozzi and city public advocate Jumaane Williams. But Tuesdays outcome isnt the only concern.

Risky and stupid would be my assessment, a senior state Democrat says of Hochuls approach to trying to win her first full four-year term. The Rose Garden strategy, the prevent defense, almost always results in failure. I think shell make it through Tuesday. But shes lost the chance to engage voters and make herself better known through the primary process. If shes planning to follow this same strategy in November, then Im really scared.

Such worries are overblown, says Hochuls campaign spokesman, Jerrel Harvey. We have a paid field program out there. Weve got very robust digital engagement, probably the largest in state history. Were also doing paid mail and TV ads. Hochul has spent nearly $16 million on TV, radio, and digital adsand preserved more than $12 million for the general election. Last weeks Supreme Court rulings, striking down New Yorks law concealed carry gun law and overturning Roe v. Wade, had the collateral effect of handing Hochul free publicity platforms, demonstrating the power of incumbency. Even with our resources, we have to make decisions on where we invest. It cant just be a summer full of having our canvassers out there knocking on doors. Thats incredibly cost-intensive, Harvey says. We know that people pay attention closer to election time. So you have to be strategic and rev up the engine.

Which makes sense, unless the engine has idled too low and too long. I think people underestimate the trouble in blue states like New York when its a bad environment for Democrats nationally, a veteran Democratic consultant says. And this year is a very bad environment. I think theres enough GOP money out there this cycle that if polls show the Republican nominee getting within five or 10 points of Hochul, you could see an avalanche of independent expenditure money on the Republican side.

Tuesdays voting will also determine Hochuls opponent. Conservative Long Island congressman Lee Zeldin is the favorite in the Republican primary, but Andrew Giuliani, son of Rudy, has a real shot. Zeldin had been endorsed by former vice president Mike Pence; former president Donald Trump has so far not backed Giuliani, avoiding a proxy fight he could lose.

Still, the most intriguing action on Tuesdayand the greater chance of embarrassment for Hochulwill come on the Democratic undercard. Her first choice of lieutenant governor, Brian Benjamin, resigned in April after being indicted on campaign-finance charges (Benjamin has pleaded not guilty). Her second choice, Antonio Delgado, quit an upstate congressional seat to take the job in May. Delgado, like the governor, has spent plenty on TV and digital adsmore than $4 million since becoming L.G.while doing roughly one campaign appearance per day, most of them fairly low-key, before ramping up the pace along with Hochul on the weekend before the primary. His strongest primary opponent, progressive activist Ana Mara Archila, is trying to exploit Tuesdays likely low turnoutplus an endorsement from Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezto pull off a major upset. Hes doing the same thing lieutenant governors have always donestay quiet, smile in pictures, and say nothing about the solutions that people desperately need, Archila tells me. I want the lieutenant governor to amplify the voices of people to create productive tension. I actually think we should invest in affordable housing instead of giving hundreds of millions of dollars for a football stadium.

Only six weeks ago, Lieutenant Governor Delgado launched his campaign and the response has been tremendous, responds his campaign manager, Allyson Marcus. Antonio is the only candidate in the race who will work in tandem with the governor to deliver for New Yorkers and protect families.

Delgado has vastly more campaign money than Archila, and the backing of influential labor unions. She has the support of grassroots groups, like Make the Road Action, that are practiced at harnessing progressive energy. Archila has run a dogged and meticulous grassroots campaign, says Bruce Gyory, a Democratic New York consultant. And progressives do best in caucuses and low-turnout primaries. The numbers so far in early voting are very low. Do I think she gets to the 45 or so percent shed need? I dont think so. But I wouldnt bet the mortgage on it.

One reason for the likely low voter turnout is that this primary has been greatly overshadowed by the one happening in August. For decades all New York primaries took place in September, followed by general elections in November. Simple enough. In 2012 a court ruling split the federal and local race primaries; this year a different court moved the federal races to August. Its the August primary thats been provoking headlines, because the states congressional redistricting mess has created dramatic clashes between Manhattans two oldest incumbents, Carolyn Maloney and Jerry Nadler, and between a clown cars worth of candidates, including, very recently, former mayor Bill de Blasio, in a new district spanning Lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn.

The governor stands to have a complicated enough fall herself, whether the Republican nominee turns out to be Zeldin or Giuliani. Having an outspoken populist on the Democratic ticket with her, instead of her chosen lieutenant governor candidate, would make Hochuls general election more interesting than shed prefer.

Excerpt from:
People Underestimate the Trouble in Blue States: Are Democrats Sleeping on the New York Governors Race? - Vanity Fair

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski pleaded with viewers during "Morning Joe" on Monday to vote for Democrats as the midterm elections get closer, saying that they "just might save our country."

"This is devastating, and you know, they ask me what we can do and I've got two words: please vote," she said. "Democrats somehow manage to get the most votes and lose the most elections. So they need more."

The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on Friday in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization case.

She said that it can be argued that the Democrats are "too weak, too fragile, too woke, too elitist" and "too disconnected from the realities of working Americans."

REPUBLICANS REJOICE, DEMOCRATS RAGE AFTER SUPREME COURT OVERTURNS ROE V. WADE

Demonstrators outside the Supreme Court Tuesday morning ahead of possible announcement on Dobbs v. Jackson (Photo by Joshua Comins/Fox News)

However, she continued, "the Democratic Party is the world's last best hope against fascism."

The MSNBC host said fascists dominate the "Trump wing" of the Republican Party and claimed they were "anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-contraception" and "anti-freedom."

"Now they're claiming control over your bodies, your health, your life. And they've promised they're coming next to take away your birth control pills and even what you do with another consenting adult in the privacy of your own bedroom," she continued.

Security fencing is in place outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Saturday, May 14, 2022, ahead of expected abortion right rallies later in the day. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

"What does Donald Trump's America look like?" Brzezinski asked. "In reality it looks like a 13-year-old rape and incest victim, being ordered by the state to have a forced birth of her rapist's baby. That is where we are in 2022. For all the Democratic Partys flaws, they're the only party that can stem this continued rise of fascism. Register and vote, work toward an overwhelming majority that can protect your body, protect your freedoms, and just may save our country," she said.

MEDIA PUSHES NARRATIVE THAT LEAKED ROE V. WADE DRAFT COULD BE MIDTERM GAME-CHANGER

Reporters and journalists have weighed in on what impact the overturning of Roe v. Wade will have on either party in the November midterm elections.

Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile said on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday that it would be a "defining issue this fall."

First lady Jill Biden listens as President Biden talks to reporters before boarding Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House, Friday, June 17, 2022, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci) (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

President Biden slammed the decision after the opinion was released. He called on Americans to vote and Congress to act.

"Let me be very clear and unambiguous: the only way we can secure a womans right to choosethe balance that existedis for Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade as federal law," Biden said. "No executive action from the president can do that."

Hanna Panreck is an associate editor at Fox News.

Read more:
MSNBC's Brzezinski pleads with viewers to vote for Democrats: They 'just may save our country' - Fox News

Those who seek to destroy or delegitimize the Supreme Court for upholding the Constitution are no better than those who desire to overturn or delegitimize presidential elections. In fact, they probably pose a greater long-term threat to American democracy.

Now, if you believe the above contention is hyperbole, consider that many leftists arent merely advocating for court-packing or nullification of the Dobbs decision; they justify those attacks with a litany of other grievances about the constitutional order.

Even as the Supreme Court relinquished its power, and threw the abortion issueunmentioned anywhere in the Constitutionback to the voters, a horde of j-school graduates and politicians, either ignorant of basic civics or contemptuous of them, descended with panic-stricken warnings about the demise of democracy. Almost none of their objections were grounded in any sort of legal arguments about the alleged constitutionality of terminating unwanted human beings. Instead, their case centered around the specious idea that the court had undermined the will of voters by no longer dictating abortion policy by judicial fiat.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who, at this point, sounds virtually indistinguishable from Senate leadership or the authoritarians writing at The Washington Post, points out that seven of the nine justices on the court were appointed by a party that hasnt won a popular vote more than once in 30 years, that one of their seats was stolen, and that several lied to Congress to secure their appointment

None of those contentions are true. Every single justice on the court, including the ones Democrats preemptively smeared as deviants to undermine the legitimacy of the court, was nominated using the prescribed constitutional method that is used by every party. And every senator who voted to confirm those justices did so using the only legal process available to them. The popular vote is not a real thing.

When Democrats win both the Senate and the White House, they have the power to nominate and confirm any justice they desire. But they also seem to be under the impression that when they win only the White House, theyre still authorized to dictate whom Republicans are allowed to confirm (as was the case with Merrick Garland). And when they are completely out of national power, they simply reject the legitimacy of justices who do not meet their invented, evolving, extraconstitutional standards. Democrats treat every victory of the opposition as dubiously attained.

The Founding Fathers wrote a constitution designed to prevent a tyranny of the majority, says former Barack Obama adviser David Axelrod. But what happens when you have a tyranny of the minority, gaming the system to promote a radical agenda that flouts the will of the majority under the guise of constitutionalism? Similar assertions were repeated across the left-wing punditsphere this weekend.

Axelrod, in true Obama fashion, begs the question. But the fact that the Electoral College doesnt align with the popular vote isnt a disqualifying aspect of American politics, it is the very point. If the Electoral College always synchronized with the outcome of the nonexistent direct democratic national tallies, it wouldnt need to exist. It isnt a loophole; it is a deliberately created mechanism that stops a handful of states from dominating policy. (Not only is the national vote immaterial, but we really have no idea what one would look like because (winning) candidates do not run up scores in big states, they campaign nationally.)

Though I do wonder what remedy Axelrod or Ocasio-Cortez have in mind for this supposed problem? Should the GOP abdicate the presidency to a Democrat every time it fails to win the nonexistent popular vote? Should Republican senators from smaller states ignore their constituents and ask Elizabeth Warren for permission to support judicial nominees? Sounds like one-party rule.

None of this is to even mention that a lack of national legislation on an issue isnt a tyranny of the minority. Its federalism. There is no other way to keep a sprawling, geographically, ethnically, culturally, religiously diverse nation free and self-governing. Thats why enumerated powers exist. And thats also why the increasingly radical progressive left is obsessed with getting rid of the filibuster, the only thing preserving some semblance of legislative limitation on federal power. The only people who refer to federalism as minority rule are people who believe that Americans need to be ruled over in the first place. Indeed, the court did not stop Illinois from making its own abortion policies. Its Axelrod who wants the court to compel, by edict, abortion policy in states like Mississippi.

Democrats want the Supreme Court, created to adjudicate the constitutionality of laws free from political pressures, to follow public opinion polls. The only way we can truly know how voters feel about abortion is by subjecting the issue to the democratic process. Whether Roe, a legal decision, is popular is irrelevantthough its unsurprising the majority of Americans, after decades of media championing abortion, know little about it. Because, at some point, voters will decide if the Democratic Partys new position, government-funded abortion on demand until crowning, or the position of states like Mississippi, 15 weeks bans, are more radical.

When the Supreme Court concocted the constitutional right to abortion in 1973, the pro-life movement didnt promise to dismantle the system; rather it spent 50 years creating an intellectual and political movement that would begin to restore proper constitutional limits. They voted for presidents who promised to put textualists on the bench and elected senators who would confirm them. If youre unhappy with those rules, you are free to amend the Constitution. But, for the contemporary left, democracy isnt just a euphemism for policies we support anymore, its a pernicious belief that Republicans have a responsibility to live in a political system that exists outside of the Constitution. And a system with two sets of rules is untenable.

See the original post here:
Democrats Have Become A Serious Threat To The Republic - The Federalist