Mediaboss Marketing

Marco Rubio (left), Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and John Kasich participate in a Republican primary debate in Detroit, March 3, 2016.(Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

On the homepage today, Phil argues that it would be better for the Republican Party if Donald Trump were to run for president in 2024 but lose in the primary. I profoundly dissent from this view.

My disagreement with Phil seems to be a matter of degree. He acknowledges that:

Trumps running would mean months of relitigating his grievances from the 2020 election in addition to generating new controversies. Given his track record of turning the base against anybody who challenges him even conservatives in previously good standing a Trump run could mean decapitating a whole new generation of Republican talent. Or, forcing many potential candidates to wait until 2028, when circumstances may not be as ripe for a Republican victory.

In my view, this is a concession that cannot be followed by a useful but. Indeed, to do so is akin to saying that it would be good, on balance, to have a bull in a china shop providing that it is ultimately captured. The potential consequences of Donald Trump taking part in a primary even if he were to lose that primary will be disastrous and irrevocable. Trump will undermine the process itself, arguing at every stage that it is rigged or has been corrupted. He will weaken his opponents without regard to the broader aim, which should be to get a Republican elected in 2024. He will use his platform to spread pernicious lies about the American electoral system, and about the riot that those lies engendered. And he will, as ever, totally dominate the media coverage of the race, and thereby distract voters from the many legitimate criticisms of the Biden administration that ought to be the GOPs focus going forward.

Phil is right to argue that there would be some upsides to Trump being vanquished by the primary electorate, but those upsides do not come close to making it worthwhile.

Read the original post:
Re: The Benefits of Donald Trump Running Again - National Review

In September 2015, Dawn carried my op-ed article, Pakistans Donald Trump. This was 16 months before Trump became president of the United States and about three years before Imran Khan became prime minister of Pakistan. It generated much commentary both ways. Days later, Washington-based analyst Michael Kugelman published his riposte, also in Dawn, dismissing my comparisons as merely superficial. He concluded that Naya Pakistan may be nave, but it is neither nasty nor nefarious.

Seven years is an eternity in the world of politics. What has Naya Pakistan come to mean? Since 2015, much has happened: Trump narrowly won the presidency but failed at re-election. Since then, he has not stopped trying to claw his way back to power. Khan was the winner in the controlled elections of 2018 and has had nearly four years for selling Naya Pakistan. His fate presently rests upon the no-confidence motion before parliament.

To redo the Trump-Khan comparison is timely. Certainly, some similarities I had alluded to earlier remain unaltered. Then, as now, the political toolkits of both men include abundant use of abusive language for firing up supportive mobs. So is making promises which, even if unfulfillable, help generate fantasies in their followers.

The first time around these tools, together with practised theatrics, worked well. Once installed in power, the orange-skinned president cultivated an ecosystem of sycophants, sellers of snake oil and white extremists. In a blizzard of disinformation, his political opponents were blamed for all failures of governance and economic mismanagement. The Washington Post says Trumps false or misleading claims total 30,573 over four years. Impressive!

But Americans soon realised that although Trump was brilliant before the cameras, on governance he was clueless. The economy, race matters and foreign relations headed south. Relations with European allies plummeted even as the Putin-Trump personal rapport grew stronger. When voters rejected Trump for a second term, this was incomprehensible to a man who adored himself beyond limit.

To reverse the election results he tried everything but, unfortunately for him, American democracy proved too robust. The Department of Justice and the military flatly rejected his proposal to seize voting machines and redo the elections. The siege of Capitol Hill in a country with 200 years of democracy shocked the world.

While places, times, and people are obviously different for Pakistan, many similarities are startlingly close and growing closer. Khan is already concocting an explanation for his possible ouster: he is being punished by the West for his independent foreign policy and jihad against Islamophobia. He threatens to unleash hell upon turncoat members of his own party and, of course, the opposition.

On March 27 D-Day at Islamabads D-Chowk PTI is mobilising party and state resources for holding what it says will be the biggest rally in Pakistans history. The goal: to message parliamentarians, both PTI and opposition, that they must not enter parliament to vote on the no-confidence motion.

One significant difference separates Capitol Hill from D-Chowk. Whereas Trump brought out his supporters with winks and nods, nothing has been left to the imagination here. Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry says all parliamentarians arriving to vote on that day would have to pass through a million Khan supporters on their way to the National Assembly and even more significantly on their way back as well. There they will face a lynch mob.

How violent it all gets on D-Day, and the final outcome, cannot be presently known. The siege of the Capitol left American democracy hanging by a thread. Nevertheless, the system was robust enough to blunt the worse. In Pakistan, what lies ahead may or may not end with Khans ouster. But what will be his legacy when he does finally go?

On democracy: depriving parliamentarians of their right to vote is a slap in the face to democracy and decency. That this violates the Constitution is clear as day. But, to be honest, worse has happened before. Four martial laws have trampled the Constitution under the boot. And, even without overt constitutional violations, crooked politicians and generals have stuffed their pockets for decades and parked their assets in unreachable places.

On the economy: todays galloping inflation, repeated returns to the IMF, more whitewashing of black money, dramatic fall of the rupee, and performance levels well below that of India and Bangladesh, are significant negatives. But dont blame PTI alone. Pakistans systemic economic weaknesses stem from overspending on defence, elite capture of national wealth, and a hopelessly under-skilled workforce. Thats why CPECs new infrastructure led to insignificant industrialisation. The same would have happened in a PML-N or PPP government.

On foreign relations: the world noticed PM Khan hailing Osama bin Laden a martyr; calling the Taliban liberators; shaking hands with Putin just before the Ukraine war; wantonly spiting the EU although it is one of Pakistans economic props; and sending relations with Saudi Arabia crashing down. Still, these are reversible. A new prime minister can set things right.

On education: Khans toxic legacy will be nearly irreversible. While madressahs do exactly today what they have done for decades and centuries, Punjabs regular schools now function more as madressahs and less as schools. Even the super-rich are only partly exempted. The kind of mixed-up, confused and ignorant generations that the so-called Single National Curriculum will produce is absolutely terrifying. On the higher education front, Khan has disembowelled the HEC and made it a hotbed of intrigue.

When Khan proclaimed Naya Pakistan would be Riyasat-i-Madina, most people thought it was a metaphor for a cleaner, more equitable Pakistan. Our friend from Washington can be forgiven for thinking this as neither nasty nor nefarious. Almost everyone failed to see the hidden text: the head of any religious state must claim divine sanction in some form. With near-daily fiery pontifications on his ideas of moral behaviour and proper dress, Khans high vision is fully before us. And, just in case you are unsure whether Naya Pakistans head should stay or go, please remember that only animals can be neutral.

The writer is an Islamabad-based physicist and author.

This article was first published in Dawn on 19 March 2022 and it has been republished here with permission.

Continue reading here:
Imran Khan is another Donald Trump. But real danger is that Pakistan isnt another US - ThePrint

The TAKE with Rick Klein

A party remade by former President Donald Trump is in the process of being remade again.

Republican officeholders and office seekers aren't keen to admit it, but for most of them Russia's invasion of Ukraine has them publicly agreeing more on the substance with President Joe Biden than with Trump.

That comes through in the raucous bipartisan reception Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy got in front of Congress and also in Biden's agreement with a unanimous Senate that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a "war criminal."

The crisis has been coursing through GOP primaries in unexpected ways. Ohio Senate candidate J.D. Vance -- among those pursuing Trump's endorsement in the May 3 primary -- labeled the invasion a "tragedy" after first saying on Steve Bannon's podcast last month that "I don't really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another."

Former President Donald Trump speaks to the crowd during a rally at the Florence Regional Airport, March 12, 2022, in Florence, S.C.

In North Carolina, Trump's favored candidate, Rep. Ted Budd, is on the receiving end of a harsh attack ad from a rival Republican featuring a clip with Budd calling Putin "a very intelligent actor." (Some quotes in the ad are taken out of context, though the issue only came up because Trump called Putin "pretty smart" for trying to overrun Ukraine.)

Even where Republicans are offering sharp critiques of Biden -- blasting the president for not moving enough lethal aid quickly enough to Ukrainians -- there are limits that speak to how the GOP is changing. Virtually no major Republican figures are calling for perhaps the most hawkish action Zelenskyy wants -- American enforcement of a no-fly zone.

It has fallen to some of the staunchest Trump loyalists to offer major differences of opinion. Rep. Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C., on Wednesday blasted "neocons both on the left and in my party who clamor for war at every chance they get" -- a week after calling Zelenskyy a "thug."

The RUNDOWN with Averi Harper

A couple of House progressives are taking the Biden administration to task for its treatment of Haitians who seek asylum in the United States.

In a letter, Reps. Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y., and Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., have called on the Department of Homeland Security to halt deportations and expulsions of people to Haiti. The Biden administration has continued to invoke Title 42, a policy started under the Trump administration, which allows migrants to be turned away without a chance to have their asylum claims heard.

Rep. Ayanna Pressley addresses demonstrators participating in the "Stand with Ukraine" march in Boston, March 6, 2022.

The pair of lawmakers cited the July 2021 assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Mose and the aftermath of the 7.2 magnitude earthquake that rocked the island nation in August as reasons they believe returning migrants to Haiti is dangerous. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has previously claimed it is safe enough for asylum-seekers to return.

The lawmakers contrasted the ongoing expulsions to policy changes intended to welcome Ukrainian refugees.

"Recently, on March 3, Immigration and Customs Enforcement suspended deportation flights to Ukraine in response to the 'ongoing humanitarian crisis' there a justified and important exercise of your enforcement discretion," wrote the lawmakers. "There is every reason to extend that same level of compassion and exercise that same discretion to suspend deportations to Haiti."

The Biden administration has deported or expelled more than 20,000 migrants to Haiti since Biden was inaugurated, according to the advocacy group Washington Office on Latin America.

The TIP with Hannah Demissie

The idea of disgraced former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo making a political comeback is starting to look like a real possibility.

After he resigned last year amid multiple allegations of sexual harassment, Cuomo is now considering a run for his former job against the very woman who replaced him, Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul, according to reporting by CNBC published Wednesday.

Aides of Cuomo have been conducting internal polling on how he would perform against Hochul in the New York primary.

Governor Andrew Cuomo holds press briefing and makes announcement to combat COVID-19 Delta variant in New York, Aug. 2, 2021.

Cuomo entered 2022 with a $16 million campaign war chest. But even though his supporters are encouraging him to run for office, many leaders in his own party do not support the idea.

New York Democratic Party Chair Jay Jacobs told CNBC he thinks "it would be a bad mistake."

Talk of a Cuomo bid comes as an audit released Tuesday shows the Cuomo administration did not publicly account for the deaths of nearly 4,100 nursing home residents during the pandemic.

NUMBER OF THE DAY, powered by FiveThirtyEight

18. That's the number of districts where Latinos constitute a majority of the voting-age population in California, which marks an increase of five districts since the 2010 redistricting cycle. This makes California by far the biggest source of new Latino seats in the country. More broadly, it underscores the growing political clout of Latino voters in this redistricting cycle, accounting for more than 51% of the country's growth from 2010 to 2020. But as FiveThirtyEights Nathaniel Rakich writes, thats essentially the extent of this redistricting cycle's gains when it comes to the representation of people of color. In fact, there are many districts where nonwhite voters' power -- particularly Black voters' power -- has been eroded.

THE PLAYLIST

ABC News' "Start Here" Podcast. Start Here begins Thursday morning with ABCs Mary Bruce on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyys emotional address to Congress. Then, ABCs Elizabeth Schulze breaks down what to expect from the first interest rate hike in more than three years. And, ABCs Christine Theodorou details the aftermath of the strong earthquake that hit Japan. http://apple.co/2HPocUL

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW TODAY

Download the ABC News app and select "The Note" as an item of interest to receive the day's sharpest political analysis.

The Note is a daily ABC News feature that highlights the day's top stories in politics. Please check back tomorrow for the latest.

Originally posted here:
Ukraine revealing GOPs drift from Trump: The Note - ABC News

Some members of City Council want to punish former President Donald Trump, and we get it.

Trump is a playground bully with a big ego and a cult-like following, despite being voted out of office. His ongoing attempts to perpetuate the Big Lie that he won the 2020 election are not just indefensible and a threat to democracy, they are tiresome.

But he thrives on attention. Dont give it to him.

Which is why that proposed City Council ordinance intended to stop Trump from doing any future business with the city because of his role in the Jan. 6, 2021 attempted insurrection at the Capitol seems a waste of time and energy.

City Council should move on, to the many far more important matters facing our city.

The ordinance, sponsored by Ald. Gilbert Villegas (36th) and approved by the Committee on Contracting Oversight and Equity, says the permit for that Trump sign downtown which must be renewed annually shall be denied, or such permit shall be revoked, if the applicant or any controlling person of the applicant has been convicted of a crime of treason, sedition or subversive activities.

Dont hold your breath for that conviction, despite the ongoing investigation by the House select committee on Jan. 6.

... [W]hether you are Donald Trump, or one of the many traitors who stormed the United States Capitol on Jan. 6th, the City of Chicago is not interested in doing business with traitors or those who perpetrate hate crimes, Ald. Brendan Reilly (42nd), co-sponsor of the ordinance, said. Will the ordinance have a sweeping effect? No. But I think it sends a clear and important message to two groups that are doing great harm to our country today.

Sending a moral message is a fine idea. But as a mayoral spokesman confirmed to us, the citys Law Department says convicted felons already cannot do business with the city.

Besides, anything that keeps Trump in the news or gives him the chance to puff out his chest and play the victim is counterproductive.

Fight the Big Lie, not just the liar.

Send letters toletters@suntimes.com.

Read more:
Dont feed the bully Donald Trump - Chicago Sun-Times

Weeks after the 2020 election, at least one Trump White House aide was named as secretly producing a report that alleged Donald Trump lost to Joe Biden because of Dominion Voting Systems research that formed the basis of the former presidents wider efforts to overturn the election.

The Dominion report, subtitled OVERVIEW 12/2/20 History, Executives, Vote Manipulation Ability and Design, Foreign Ties, was initially prepared so that it could be sent to legislatures in states where the Trump White House was trying to have Bidens win reversed.

But top Trump officials would also use the research that stemmed from the White House aide-produced report to weigh other options to return Trump to the presidency, including having the former president sign off on executive orders to authorize sweeping emergency powers.

The previously unreported involvement of the Trump White House aide in the preparation of the Dominion report raises the extraordinary situation of at least one administration official being among the original sources of Trumps efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

The publicly available version of the Dominion report, which first surfaced in early December 2020 on the conservative outlet the Gateway Pundit, names on the cover and in metadata as its author Katherine Friess, a volunteer on the Trump post-election legal team.

But the Dominion report was in fact produced by the senior Trump White House policy aide Joanna Miller, according to the original version of the document reviewed by the Guardian and a source familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The original version of the Dominion report named Miller - who worked for the senior Trump adviser Peter Navarro as the author on the cover page, until her name was abruptly replaced with that of Friess before the document was to be released publicly, the source said.

The involvement of a number of other Trump White House aides who worked in Navarros office was also scrubbed around that time, the source said. Friess has told the Daily Beast that she had nothing to do with the report and did not know how her name came to be on the document.

It was not clear why Millers name was removed from the report, which was sent to Trumps former attorney Rudy Giuliani on 29 November 2020, or why the White House aides involvement was obfuscated in the final 2 December version.

Miller did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Dominion report made a number of unsubstantiated allegations that claimed Dominion Voting Systems corruptly ensured there could be technology glitches which resulted in thousands of votes being added to Joe Bidens total ballot count.

Citing unnamed Venezuelan officials, the report also pushed the conspiracy theory that Dominion Voting Systems used software from the election company Smartmatic and had ties to state-run Venezuelan software and telecommunications companies.

After the Dominion report became public, Navarro incorporated the claims into his own three-part report, produced with assistance from his aides at the White House, including Miller and another policy aide, Garrett Ziegler, the source said.

Ziegler has also said on a rightwing podcast that he and others in Navarros office seemingly referring to Trump White House aides Christopher Abbott and Hannah Robertson started working on Navarros report about two weeks before the 2020 election took place.

Two weeks before the election, we were doing those reports hoping that we would pepper the swing states with those, Ziegler said of the three-part Navarro report in an appearance last July on The Professors Record with David K Clements.

The research in the Dominion report also formed the backbone of foreign election interference claims by the former Trump lawyer and conspiracy theorist Sidney Powell, who argued Trump could, as a result, assume emergency presidential powers and suspend normal law.

That included Trumps executive order 13848, which authorized sweeping powers in the event of foreign election interference, as well as a draft executive order that would have authorized the seizure of voting machines, the Guardian has previously reported.

The claims about Venezuela in the Dominion report appear to have spurred Powell to ask Trump at a 18 December 2020 meeting at the White House coincidentally facilitated by Ziegler that she be appointed special counsel to investigate election fraud.

Millers authorship of the Dominion report was not the last time the Trump White House, or individuals in the administration, prepared materials to advance the former presidents claims about a stolen election and efforts to return himself to office.

The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack revealed last year it had found evidence the White House Communications Agency produced a letter for the Trump justice department official Jeffrey Clark to use to pressure states to decertify Bidens election win.

Read the original:
Trump White House aide was secret author of report used to push big lie - The Guardian