Mediaboss Marketing

Editor:

Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, you should be concerned about protecting our democracy. Based on what we are seeing so far in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, it appears the entire GOP (Gerrymandering Oligarchy Party) is out to turn our democracy into a monarchy.

Why else would they turn a blind eye to everything that has been exposed showing how corrupt this president is? Why would you not want to present witnesses and documents unless there is something to hide?

Why do Republicans push voter suppression, gerrymandering and purging of registered voters who are mainly Democrats? They push to eliminate environmental regulations that protect the people while doing the bidding of the energy and pharmaceutical industries. They provide subsidies and tax breaks to corporate interests that have funded their endeavor (corporate socialism) while taking from the poor to give to the rich (Republicans are looking to make cuts in Social Security and Medicare).

The GOP is interested in making America a one-party system the Trumpican party.

If this impeachment trial in the Senate turns out to be the sham it appears to be, we will have lost our democracy to a monarchy.

Escaping a monarch is why our nation was founded in the first place. And where is our Republican Sen. Pat Toomey on this? Voting right along party lines.

This is why I am no longer a Republican.

John J. Csaszar

Ruscombmanor Township

Originally posted here:
Letter: Republicans appear to be on path to one-party rule - Reading Eagle

Republican former members of Congress who were swept out of office in 2018 are trying to get back on the stage, including Darrell Issa of San Diego. Mr. Issa, who declined to seek re-election in 2018 in the face of a strong Democratic challenge, has decided to run this year for a different seat, the one held until recently by a fellow Republican, Duncan Hunter, who resigned after pleading guilty to using campaign funds for personal expenses.

In Mr. Hunters old district, Randy Birrenkott, 70, said he knows many neighbors who became disgusted with Californias liberal politics and moved to places like Texas or Montana. Right now its a strong conservative district, but its slowly going down, he said.

California is not the only state whose political complexity is often overlooked in the shorthand of a polarized era. New York as a whole is overwhelmingly Democratic, but upstate New York and the New York City borough of Staten Island are as Republican as parts of Central California are.

New York Democrats like Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, and Jerrold Nadler, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, have played important roles in the impeachment drama. But with Mr. Schiff, Ms. Pelosi, Mr. McCarthy and Mr. Nunes at the forefront of the daily battles in Washington, no other state has become quite as identified with the impeachment battle as California has.

The Republican Party is hobbled in California, and many moderate Republicans believe it will only become less influential in years ahead. The party has been on a steady decline for nearly 20 years in the state, where Richard M. Nixon was born and where Ronald Reagan was one of its most successful governors.

There are now more independent voters in California than registered Republicans. The G.O.P. does not hold a single statewide office, and is vastly outnumbered in the legislature. While the effort to recall Mr. Newsom has the support of Republican leaders, it is unlikely to gain enough signatures to qualify for the ballot. or enough support to win the approval of voters if it did.

Republican moderates who were once a major force in the party, particularly when Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, was governor have been marginalized.

Excerpt from:
In Impeachment Battle, California Stands on the Front Lines - The New York Times

President Trumps defenders will win acquittal of the president on the two charges of impeachment. We should hope they do not seek a larger win than that.

High-profile trials in America often become trials of something much bigger than the defendants guilt or innocence.

When a Missouri grand jury in 2014 considered the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, it seemed as though there was a lot more on the table than whether police officer Darren Wilson plausibly believed "that the use of deadly force was immediately necessary to effect the arrest of Brown. It became, in the media and for much of the public, a question of whether black Americans are mistreated by police and whether police are immune to consequences.

So when the grand jury decided to not charge Wilson, righteous indignation ensued.

When Ethel and Julius Rosenberg stood trial in 1951, it became a bigger question than the factual matter of whether Julius Rosenberg stole nuclear secrets and passed them on to the Soviet Union. In various corners of the popular imagination, it became a trial about communism vs. capitalism, about political dissent, and even about anti-Semitism.

It was the same with the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Conservatives tried to make it a trial about Clintons immorality and about the need to preserve virtue and outrage. While some of Clintons defenders (such as Joe Lieberman) made a narrow defense, others accepted much of the Republicans broader framing and fought on that turf. They helped turn Clintons impeachment into a culture war.

The Left happily accepted the help of pornographer Larry Flint. They brushed off an extramarital affair in the Oval Office with an intern as a minor personal matter one that only nosy prudes would care about. And feminists openly made the argument that Clintons policies excused any misdeeds.

Betty Friedan declared of Clintons affair with Monica Lewinsky, Enemies are attempting to bring him down through allegations about some dalliance with an intern ... Whether its a fantasy, a setup, or true, I simply dont care.

Democratic congressmen, meanwhile, made a might-makes-right argument. Congress has no right to overturn the considered judgment of the American people, regardless of the presidents misdeeds, argued Jerry Nadler. Other Democratic members called the impeachment a coup. These were the arguments in defense of Clinton. Then Clinton won. And so, in a sense, these immoral and destructive arguments won.

If you thought cheating on your wife was a grave sin, you lost. If you thought an oath to tell the whole truth was morally and legally binding, you lost. If you thought winning an election didnt give you license to do whatever you wished, you lost.

America Moved On (that group was also created in the process) from those old-fashioned ideas. America moved on steadily for 18 years, and the destination of this journey was Trumps election. Evangelical leaders, having been set straight by the verdict of 1999, moved on from their old-fashioned moralism until they ultimately made excuses for Trumps dishonesty, infidelity, and predations.

Trumps defenders today ought to remember the societal costs of Clintons broad win. Accordingly, they shouldnt assert more than they need to, and certainly not more than is true.

Conservatives should not want a victory for executive privilege or the power of the presidency. That would harm the country, which has already seen the executive take too much power from Congress.

America needs Congress to act constantly as a check on the power of the executive. Senators shouldnt hold their role as Republicans in higher regard than their roles as senators. If senators become the minions of the president simply because he is of their party and under attack, then Americas constitutional system is weakened.

Republican senators may be jurors or judges, depending on how you think of impeachment. Certainly, they shouldnt act as defense counsel. That will lead to them speaking falsehoods that paper over abuses of power.

Pat Cipollone actually is Trumps defense counsel. Thats why he said on the Senate floor Tuesday, The president has done nothing wrong. That is a false claim, but its what lawyers are generally supposed to say about their clients.

Conservative senators should not repeat that line because it normalizes a misdeed. Trump tried to leverage the presidents foreign-policy prerogatives in order to inflict political pain on a rival for the presidency. At best, Trump intervened where he should have recused himself. And along the way, he placed U.S. foreign policy in the hands of shady figures such as Rudy Giuliani and Lev Parnas.

The presidents actions were wrong. He violated the public trust by putting his public office to work for his political ends. Republican senators may not agree that these are high crimes meriting impeachment, but they mustn't call bad things good.

Impeachment can fail without falsehoods winning. But its up to Republican senators to ensure they narrow this case to the articles of impeachment instead of making it about the character of Trump and his actions.

Go here to see the original:
What sort of victory will Republican senators win? - Washington Examiner

In a column for the New York Times, former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal, former Rep. Mickey Edwards (R-OK) and Georgetown law professor Joshua A. Geltzer urged Supreme Court Justice John Roberts to intercede and demand Senate Republicans allow witnesses in light of the latest John Bolton bombshell.

Following a New Times report that stated President Trump directly tied the withholding of almost $400 million in American security aid to investigations that he sought from Ukrainian officials,according to an unpublished manuscriptof a book that John R. Bolton, Mr. Trumps former national security adviser, wrote about his time in the White House, the three took to the Times editorial page to implore Roberts to step in.

TheSenate rules for impeachmentdate back to 1868 and have been in effect since that time. They specifically provide for the subpoenas of witnesses, going so far in Rule XXIV as to outline the specific language a subpoena must use the form of subpoena to be issued on the application of the managers of the impeachment, or of the party impeached, or of his counsel,' the three wrote. As you can see, there is no Senate vote requirement whatsoever in the subpoena rule. A manager can seek it on his own.

Quoting the rules, they added, The presiding officer shall have power to make and issue, by himself or by the Secretary of the Senate,all orders, mandates, writs, and precepts authorized by these rules, or by the Senate, and to make and enforce such other regulations and orders in the premises as the Senate may authorize or provide. The presiding officer, under our Constitution, is the chief justice. As such, the chief justice, as presiding officer, has the power to make and issue, by himself, subpoenas.

With that in mind, they claimed that the door is open for Roberts to jump in by stating, The framers wisdom in giving this responsibility to a member of the judiciary expected to be apolitical and impartial has never been clearer.

With key Republican senators having told the American people that they prejudged the case against President Trump before it began and even working with Mr. Trumps lawyers to build the very defense for which theyre supposed to be the audience, the notion that theyre doing the impartial justice theyve sworn to do is very much in question, they reminded the Supreme Court jurist.

Mr. McConnells rules separately say that the Senate shall debate whether it shall be in order to consider and debate under the impeachment rules any motion to subpoena witnesses or documents. they continued. That language cannot restrict Rule Vs pre-existing empowerment of the chief justice to issue subpoenas. To amend Rule Vrequires a two-thirds vote of the Senate, something Mr. McConnell didnt get. That is presumably why the rules speak only to whether theSenateshould subpoena witnesses or documents but do not restrict the chief justices ability to issue subpoenas under his Rule V authority. And thats precisely what the Democrats must ask him to do now.

then let us make a small request. Like you, we here at Raw Story believe in the power of progressive journalism. Raw Story readers power David Cay Johnstons DCReport, which we've expanded to keep watch in Washington. Weve exposed billionaire tax evasion and uncovered White House efforts to poison our water. Weve revealed financial scams that prey on veterans, and legal efforts to harm workers exploited by abusive bosses. And unlike other news outlets, weve decided to make our original content free. But we need your support to do what we do.

Raw Story is independent. You wont find mainstream media bias here. Unhinged from billionaires and corporate overlords, we fight to ensure no one is forgotten.

We need your support to deepen our investigative reporting. Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Invest with us. Make a one-time contribution to Raw Story Investigates, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click to donate by check.

then let us make a small request. Like you, we here at Raw Story believe in the power of progressive journalism and were investing in investigative reporting as other publications give it the ax. Raw Story readers power David Cay Johnstons DCReport, which we've expanded to keep watch in Washington. Weve exposed billionaire tax evasion and uncovered White House efforts to poison our water. Weve revealed financial scams that prey on veterans, and efforts to harm workers exploited by abusive bosses. We need your support to do what we do.

Raw Story is independent. You wont find mainstream media bias here. Unhinged from corporate overlords, we fight to ensure no one is forgotten.

We need your support to keep producing quality journalism and deepen our investigative reporting. Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Invest with us in the future. Make a one-time contribution to Raw Story Investigates, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you.

Continue reading here:
GOP ex-congressman calls on Justice Roberts to override Republican effort to block witnesses - Raw Story

Leaked contents from former national security adviser John Boltons upcoming book sent shock waves through Washington, D.C. on Sunday and raised the possibility that Senate Republicans will be seen as engaging in a blatant coverup if they dont agree to have him testify.

In the wake of the Bolton bombshell, several former Republicans took to Twitter to explain why they left the party by using the hashtag #ILeftTheGOP.

Among the former Republicans to tell their stories is economist Bruce Bartlett, who left the GOP 14 years ago and who says the party has only gotten worse ever since.

#ILeftTheGOP in 2006 because I was appalled by George W. Bushs stupidity and voted in the Democratic primary that year to mark the occasion, he writes. I have been happily independent since then.

#ILeftTheGOP in 2006 because I was appalled by George W. Bushs stupidity and voted in the Democratic primary that year to mark the occasion. I have been happily independent since then.

Bruce Bartlett (@BruceBartlett) January 27, 2020

Bartlett was far from the only Republican to post their stories check out some more below.

#ILeftTheGOP in May 2016, after 30+ years, and Im NEVER going back! It was like leaving an abusive spouse and the divorce was messy AF.

cc: @deaconcruise @jamient1776 @TexasBeard1

JB Je Suis #NeverTrump #HumanScum (@JaybeeStewee) January 27, 2020

#ILeftTheGOP after Trump became the Nominee. Reminding GOP senators theyve lost a lot of moderates these past 4 years.

Holly Tetreault (@hjeantetreault) January 27, 2020

Raised in a republican by default home, I followed suit but #ilefttheGOP during the Dubya / WMD days.

Bucky Cash (@buckycash) January 27, 2020

#ILeftTheGOP in 2008, when 20 to 30 eighteen to twenty-five-year-olds were dying every week in Iraq. They ran their names, ranks, and ages every Sunday on ABC. Who knows how many Iraquis died, some bad guys and some lovely, everyday people. I dont know. It sucked.

Bob (@Bob51235923) January 27, 2020

#ILeftTheGOP the day I watched our spineless party leaders stand by while Trump rode a wave of populist lies and crass bullshit to the candidacy.

In 18, I voted Dem for the very first time.

In 20, its Blue No Matter Who.

I dont see that changing for the rest of my life.

HarryM (@Ch3002May) January 27, 2020

#ILefttheGOP right after Trump sewed up nomination by winning Indiana. I had voted for every GOP Prez candidate Ford to Romney. My father was the last Majority Leader of the NY Assembly. Local issues played a part too. This free trader globalist cant ever imagine going back. pic.twitter.com/4AjCtqseOk

John Kingston (@JohnHKingston) January 27, 2020

#ILeftTheGOP in July 2016 when the party went Trumplican. https://t.co/TL1f87uYQU

Nancy Estes (@AmBeachy) January 27, 2020

#ILeftTheGOP mentally in July 2016 when it became unbelievably clear that Trump was going to get the nomination. I voted for @HillaryClinton and officially re-registered as an Independent in Sept 2017 when my drivers license came up for renewal. I will never vote @GOP again. https://t.co/pmVheCI86K

Kylie Heintz (@kmheintz) January 27, 2020

#ILeftTheGOP in March 2017 after the outrageous wiretap tweet from Mar-A-Lago

Used To Be GOP (@Used_To_Be_GOP) January 27, 2020

then let us make a small request. AlterNets journalists work tirelessly to counter the traditional corporate media narrative. Were here seven days a week, 365 days a year. And were proud to say that weve been bringing you the real, unfiltered news for 20 yearslonger than any other progressive news site on the Internet.

Its through the generosity of our supporters that were able to share with you all the underreported news you need to know. Independent journalism is increasingly imperiled; ads alone cant pay our bills. AlterNet counts on readers like you to support our coverage. Did you enjoy content from David Cay Johnston, Common Dreams, Raw Story and Robert Reich? Opinion from Salon and Jim Hightower? Analysis by The Conversation? Then join the hundreds of readers who have supported AlterNet this year.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure AlterNet remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to AlterNet, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

Read the rest here:
Former Republicans reveal why they fled the GOP in wake of Trumps latest coverup - AlterNet