22.5 C
Brisbane
Tuesday, April 16, 2024
Home Blog

📰 The Intricacies of Jury Selection in High-Profile Cases: A Closer Look with Michael Popok📰

0

🐷📰 The Intricacies of Jury Selection in High-Profile Cases: A Closer Look with Michael Popok📰🐷

Here at 🗣️ PigsFly Newspaper, where the threads of law and spectacle often intertwine, we’ve been keeping a close eye on the jury selection process currently unfolding in the New York Criminal Court for Donald Trump’s criminal trial. Unlike the fictional world of “Bull,” where Dr. Jason Bull dazzles us with his blend of psychology, high-tech data, and sheer charisma, reality offers us something entirely different: a serious, meticulous selection process involving real-life attorneys both defending and prosecuting.

In an effort to bring clarity to this complex procedure, we’ve selected Michael Popok, a seasoned trial lawyer who knows the ins and outs of the courtroom. In our latest short video, Michael breaks down the jury selection process, offering viewers an in-depth understanding of what goes on behind the scenes.

This is more than just selecting jurors; it’s about peering into the mechanics of justice and the critical role jurors play in our legal system. It’s about understanding the strategies employed by both sides to shape the final jury to their advantage. While the process lacks the TV drama’s flash, the stakes and the tension are very real.

Stay tuned to🗣️ PigsFly Newspaper as we continue to provide detailed coverage of this high-stakes trial. Watch our video with Michael Popok to get a real sense of what jury selection in such a high-profile case involves – far from the dramatized antics of television, yet crucial, fascinating, and intensely consequential.

🚨The Trial of Donald J. Trump: A Historic Day Met with Jury Selection Challenges🚨

At the outset, lawyers spent hours arguing about how much of Trump’s tabloid-fueled sex life should be described to the jury. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan made clear he wanted the lawyers to show restraint, and at one point when things started to get tense, the judge urged lawyers to “sit down, relax.”

Jury selection began by midafternoon. More than half of the first batch of 96 prospective jurors were promptly dismissed after they said — by a show of hands — they didn’t think they could be impartial when it came to judging Trump. Not a single juror was selected on Monday and the selection process will continue on Tuesday.

After an extensive period of investigation and subsequent delays, the historic criminal trial titled People of the State of New York vs. Donald J. Trump commenced this Monday. This trial marks a significant chapter in American history as Donald J. Trump becomes the first U.S. president to be prosecuted.

The initial phase of the trial, however, faced a sluggish start during the jury selection process. In an early demonstration of the complexities involved in forming an impartial jury, over half of the initial pool of 96 prospective jurors admitted their inability to remain unbiased towards Mr. Trump, reflecting the polarized opinions he inspires, particularly in New York City. These individuals were promptly excused by the presiding judge.

In the corridors of the courthouse, the tension was palpable. One prospective juror, a woman in her 30s, candidly expressed her discomfort with the possibility of serving on the jury, stating simply, “I just couldn’t do it.”

The diverse group of Manhattan residents summoned for jury duty encountered Mr. Trump firsthand as they entered the somewhat grim confines of the courtroom. Many craned their necks for a closer look at the former president, who acknowledged the room with a restrained smile after being introduced by Judge Juan M. Merchan.

Judge Merchan, overseeing this landmark case, laid out the charges against Mr. Trump, accused by the Manhattan district attorney’s office of falsifying records to conceal details of a sex scandal. Mr. Trump faces 34 felony counts, with a potential sentence of up to four years in prison if convicted.

The case against Mr. Trump has been a long time in the making, enduring through the tenure of two district attorneys and several grand juries over five years. It wasn’t until March of last year that the current district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, managed to secure an indictment.

Despite attempts by Mr. Trump to further delay proceedings, his efforts were thwarted by Justice Merchan who insisted on moving forward without further delay, underscoring the trial’s significance and the public’s keen interest in its outcome.

Stay tuned as we continue to cover this unprecedented trial, bringing you updates and insights directly from the heart of Manhattan’s legal landscape.

BVD Tesla Electric Vehicles

Elon Musk once scoffed at the notion that BYD could compete with his company. Now, the automaker run by billionaire Wang Chuanfu is poised to be the new No. 1 in electric vehicles.

Amidst the swirling chaos of the EV landscape, Tesla finds itself at a crossroads, its once-bright promises of an affordable electric vehicle dimming against a backdrop of canceled projects and fierce competition.

The saga unfolds with the abrupt cancellation of Tesla’s long-anticipated entry-level car, a move that has left investors reeling and consumers wondering what lies ahead. For years, Elon Musk has championed the vision of affordable electric cars for the masses, but now, those dreams seem dashed as Tesla pivots towards self-driving robotaxis on the same platform.

But the fallout doesn’t stop there. As news of the scrapped Model 2 spreads, so too does the tumult surrounding Tesla’s acquisition of Twitter, now rebranded as X. Under Musk’s volatile leadership, the social media giant has faltered, shedding value and struggling to retain advertisers.

Yet, amidst the turmoil, Musk remains undeterred, teasing investors with promises of a robotaxi unveil while Tesla’s shares hang in the balance, rising and falling with each cryptic tweet.

Meanwhile, in the shadow of Tesla’s missteps, Chinese electric vehicle makers surge ahead, flooding the market with affordable options that threaten to overshadow Musk’s grand ambitions. As BYD reports soaring sales and plans for exports, Tesla grapples with the consequences of its delayed entry into the low-cost segment.

But the road ahead remains uncertain. With Musk’s attention divided among his sprawling empire and Tesla’s image tarnished by controversies, the path to mass-market dominance grows ever more precarious. As competitors race ahead, Tesla finds itself running late to the party, grappling with manufacturing woes and missed opportunities.

In the midst of it all, one thing is clear: the once-promised future of affordable electric vehicles now hangs in the balance, leaving investors and consumers alike questioning what comes next for the pioneering automaker.

Explore
how BYD competes Tesla in this video

It’s a fairytale for the modern age: an orphan from one of China’s poorest regions rose to become the billionaire founder of the world’s leading producer of electric cars.

BYD’s vehicles are now sold in more than 60 countries and the company has just kicked Tesla off the top spot as the world’s biggest EV maker, selling 42,000 more cars than its US rival last year.

But the man at the center of the story, Wang Chuanfu, has often flown under the radar. Instead, the almost 30-year history of BYD gives us glimmers into his strategic thinking, adaptability, and vision.

Origin story

Born in 1966 in east China’s agricultural Anhui province, Chuanfu was raised by his older siblings after his parents, both rice farmers, died.

He got a scholarship to study chemistry at Central South University, known back then as Central South Industrial University, and later received a master’s degree in battery technology from the Beijing Non-Ferrous Metal General Research Institute, now known as the GRINM Group.

BYD Company Chairman and President Wang Chuanfu, visits the charging station during the trial operation ceremony of two BYD Company all-electric K9 e-bus at the Gaoxin District on November 16, 2011 in Xian of Shaanxi Province, China. The environmentally-friendly K9 is the first pure-electric bus designed by BYD and produced independently at BYD Company Changsha-based Bus manufacturing site.
Wang Chuanfu has a background in chemistry. China Photos / Getty

After a few years as a government researcher, Chuanfu moved south to Shenzhen, a growing innovation hub thanks to its designation as a Special Economic Zone.

There, 29-year-old Chuanfu and his cousin, Lu Xiangyang, founded a cellphone battery manufacturing company and named it BYD.

Chuanfu has said in interviews that the name didn’t stand for anything at the time. It’s since acquired two apt nicknames: “Build Your Dreams” and “Bring Your Dollars.”

Cellphone battery success

Within four months, they had an office building and a factory thanks to a $300,000 injection from his cousin, The Wall Street Journal reported.

From the start, BYD had a clear-cut strategy: emulate successful products and keep costs as low as possible.

The goal was to replicate products made by the likes of Toyota, Sanyo, and Sony, but make them cheaper than their Japanese suppliers.

Instead of expensive machinery, Chuanfu hired a huge workforce on short-term contracts, enabling him to avoid wage increases, per the Journal.

By 2002, BYD dominated the rechargeable battery market. Its customers included Motorola, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, and Samsung. Chuanfu had also made it onto the Forbes Chinese rich list.

Early disrupter

The following year Chuanfu purchased failing state car manufacturer Tsinchuan Automobile and renamed it BYD Auto.

Together with BYD electronics, which manufactures batteries and handset components, these two subsidiaries comprise the company’s main operations.

In 2005, BYD launched a sedan called the F3. It was far cheaper than the Toyota Corolla it resembled and topped sales charts in China by the end of the decade, the Journal reported.

Warren Buffett’s endorsement

Charlie Munger gives a thumbs-up with BYD founder Wang Chuanfu in 2010.
Charlie Munger with Wang Chuanfu in 2010. Visual China Group via Getty Images

In the late 2000s, Warren Buffett was looking to capitalize on the growing demand for cars in China and, on the recommendation of his partner Charlie Munger, turned his attention to BYD.

Referring to Chuanfu, Munger said he told Buffett: “This guy is a combination of Thomas Edison and Jack Welch — something like Edison in solving technical problems, and something like Welch in getting done what he needs to do. I have never seen anything like it.”

During a tour of their operations, Chuanfu reportedly took a sip of battery fluid to impress investors and prove how clean his batteries were, according to the Journal.

Based on the search results provided, here is a summary of the key points regarding the race between Elon Musk’s Tesla and China’s BYD in the electric vehicle (EV) market:

BYD has surpassed Tesla as the world’s largest manufacturer of electric vehicles. In the fourth quarter of 2023, BYD reported sales of 526,409 EVs, while Tesla delivered 484,507 vehicles – making BYD the new global leader in EV sales[2][3]. This represents a symbolic turning point in the EV market, with China’s BYD overtaking the American Tesla[2].

BYD’s success is attributed to several factors. The company has benefited from strong government support and subsidies in China, which has helped boost domestic demand and strengthen its export capabilities[3]. BYD also has a “structural advantage” in that it controls its entire manufacturing process, allowing it to avoid supply chain issues during the pandemic[1].

In contrast, Tesla has faced challenges, including a slowdown in sales in its key China market and a general deceleration in EV demand[4][5]. However, Tesla remains the top annual EV seller, delivering over 1.8 million vehicles in 2023, compared to BYD’s just under 1.6 million[3].

While BYD has surpassed Tesla in quarterly sales, the American company regained its title as the world’s top EV seller in the first quarter of 2024, selling 386,810 BEVs compared to BYD’s 300,114[5]. This highlights the ongoing competition between the two automakers in the rapidly evolving global EV market.

In summary, China’s BYD has emerged as a formidable competitor to Elon Musk’s Tesla, overtaking the American company as the world’s largest EV manufacturer in the fourth quarter of 2023. However, the race remains close, with Tesla regaining its crown in the first quarter of 2024[1][2][3][4][5].

Citations:
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/byd-founder-wang-chuanfu-biggest-chinese-global-ev-automaker-2024-1
[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-12-27/elon-musk-s-tesla-is-losing-ev-race-to-china-s-byd
[3] https://www.trtworld.com/business/musks-tesla-falls-behind-in-ev-race-chinese-byd-claims-the-championship-16510305
[4] https://qz.com/tesla-elon-musk-ford-byd-gm-ev-hybrid-fisker-roundup-1851388760
[5] https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/03/cars/china-tesla-byd-competition-hnk-intl-dg/index.html

Bannon’s War Room: How One Man’s Podcast Fueled Unrest and Shaped a Nation’s Destiny

0

Pigsfly News Critique:

In a scathing critique of The Washington Post’s expose on Steve Bannon’s role in guiding the MAGA movement’s rebound from the January 6th Capitol riot, Pigsfly News presents a sobering analysis of the damage wrought by Bannon and his ilk. With incisive commentary and a keen eye for detail, Pigsfly News lays bare the true extent of Bannon’s manipulation and the dangers posed by his unholy alliance with Donald Trump.

Original Washington Post Article:

While we cannot directly access or quote from the original Washington Post article, we acknowledge the publication’s thorough investigative reporting on this matter. The Post’s in-depth analysis sheds light on Steve Bannon’s influence in reshaping the MAGA movement following the events of January 6th, providing valuable insight into the ongoing challenges facing American democracy.

Conclusion:

As we reflect on the dire implications of Bannon’s actions, it is incumbent upon all who cherish democracy to heed Pigsfly News’ call to action. The collusion between Bannon and Trump represents a grave threat to the very foundations of our society, and it is only through vigilant scrutiny and unwavering commitment to truth that we can hope to mitigate the damage inflicted by these nefarious actors. So let us not delay. Let us confront the harsh realities laid bare by Pigsfly News and The Washington Post, and let us resolve to stand firm in defense of democracy, no matter the cost.

Amidst the cacophony of political tumult that has defined the past few years, one figure stands out as both architect and agitator: Stephen K. Bannon. His journey from the shadowy corners of the far-right fringe to the highest echelons of power has been nothing short of remarkable. But it is his partnership with Donald Trump, and their shared descent into a disturbing echo of history’s darkest chapters, that demands our attention.

In the annals of American politics, few alliances have been as fraught with peril as that of Bannon and Trump. Together, they embarked on a crusade to reshape the very fabric of our democracy, wielding fear and division as their most potent weapons. Theirs was a Hitleresque quest for power, a brazen attempt to transform America into their own personal authoritarian playground.

At the heart of their agenda lay a chilling disregard for the norms and institutions that have long safeguarded our democracy. From the halls of power to the farthest reaches of cyberspace, Bannon and Trump sought to dismantle the very foundations of our republic, replacing them with a vision of America that bore more resemblance to a despotic regime than a beacon of freedom and democracy.

But their ambitions did not end there. Fuelled by a toxic blend of narcissism and megalomania, Bannon and Trump sought to entrench their power through fear and intimidation. From their bully pulpit in the White House to the fevered echo chambers of right-wing media, they peddled a narrative of grievance and victimhood, sowing the seeds of discord and distrust wherever they went.

Yet, amidst the chaos and madness of their reign, there were signs of resistance. From the streets of our nation’s cities to the corridors of power in Washington, ordinary Americans rose up to challenge the tyranny of Bannon and Trump. They refused to be cowed by their rhetoric of hate and division, standing firm in defense of the values that define us as a nation.

As we bear witness to the true madness of Bannon and Trump’s authoritarian ambitions, let us not forget the lessons of history. Let us remember the sacrifices of those who came before us, who fought and died to preserve the freedoms we hold dear. And let us stand together, united in our determination to ensure that the dark shadow of tyranny never again falls upon our land.

In the labyrinth of Stephen K. Bannon’s twisted political machinations, reality merges with the surreal, creating a chilling tableau of manipulation and deceit. From the confines of his “War Room” podcast, Bannon orchestrates a symphony of chaos, weaving together threads of conspiracy and grievance to fuel the flames of discontent. But behind the bombast and bluster lies a man driven not by ideology, but by a voracious hunger for power and influence.

With each episode, Bannon’s podcast becomes a breeding ground for paranoia and distrust, sowing the seeds of discord in an already fractured political landscape. Through a combination of half-truths and outright lies, he spins a narrative of victimhood and betrayal, painting himself as the lone crusader fighting against the forces of darkness.

But beneath the bravado lies a man consumed by his own demons, a failed entrepreneur desperate for redemption in the eyes of his erstwhile patron, Donald Trump. For Bannon, every word uttered on his podcast is a desperate bid for relevance, a last-ditch effort to claw his way back into the corridors of power.

As the days turn into weeks and the weeks into months, Bannon’s grip on reality becomes ever more tenuous, his descent into madness mirrored by the unraveling of the political order he once sought to exploit. But even as his dreams crumble around him, Bannon remains undeterred, a maniacal figure driven by a singular obsession: the pursuit of power at any cost.

Bannon's War Room: How One Man's Podcast Fueled Unrest and Shaped a Nation's Destiny

In the political theater of modern America, few figures have loomed as large or commanded as much attention as Stephen K. Bannon. A maverick strategist with a penchant for the provocative, Bannon’s journey from the corridors of power to the fringes of society is a testament to the turbulent currents shaping our nation’s politics. Inspired by the writings of Eric Hoffer, Bannon’s quest to harness the fervor of the masses and reshape the political landscape has been nothing short of audacious.

From his early days at Breitbart to his tumultuous tenure in the White House, Bannon’s trajectory has been marked by both triumph and controversy. But it is in the aftermath of the 2020 election that Bannon’s true mettle is tested. As he fervently promotes the Stolen Election myth and rallies Trump supporters to challenge the results, Bannon emerges as a central figure in the battle for the soul of America’s conservative movement.

Amidst the chaos and uncertainty of a nation divided, Bannon’s vision for a populist insurgency finds fertile ground. With the Republican Party at a crossroads and the specter of a fractured conservative movement looming large, Bannon’s unwavering commitment to the MAGA cause takes center stage. As he plots his next move from the confines of his podcast studio, Bannon stands as a stark reminder of the enduring power of political zeal and the relentless pursuit of change, no matter the cost.

In the wake of the 2020 election, Bannon’s “War Room” podcast emerged as a rallying cry for disenchanted Trump supporters. With each episode, Bannon meticulously laid the groundwork for a narrative of betrayal and injustice, weaving together threads of conspiracy and grievance to fuel the flames of discontent. Drawing on his deep understanding of media manipulation and psychological warfare, Bannon crafted a narrative that resonated deeply with his audience, tapping into their fears and frustrations with surgical precision.

Day after day, Bannon stoked the fires of unrest, painting a picture of a nation under siege from shadowy forces intent on subverting democracy. From his makeshift studio, adorned with MAGA hats and memorabilia, Bannon issued his clarion call to action, urging his listeners to rise up against the perceived injustices perpetrated by the political establishment.

But Bannon’s influence extended far beyond the confines of his podcast studio. Through a network of like-minded influencers and activists, he orchestrated a campaign of misinformation and disinformation, spreading his message far and wide through social media channels and alternative news platforms. From Facebook groups to Telegram channels, Bannon’s disciples eagerly consumed his every word, eagerly awaiting their marching orders for the day.

As tensions mounted and tempers flared, Bannon’s role as the architect of chaos became increasingly apparent. With each passing day, his podcast became a battleground for competing visions of America’s future, with Bannon at the helm, guiding his followers towards a future defined by division and discord.

But amidst the chaos and uncertainty, Bannon remained steadfast in his mission. With each passing day, his resolve only grew stronger, fueled by a belief in the righteousness of his cause and the power of his message. And as the days turned into weeks, and the weeks into months, Bannon’s influence only continued to grow, casting a long shadow over the political landscape and shaping the course of American history in ways that few could have imagined.

Executive Summary:

  • Stephen Bannon’s political strategy was influenced by Eric Hoffer’s theories, particularly “The True Believer,” which analyzed mass movements and the psychology of followers.
  • Bannon leveraged disaffected young men from online subcultures to build Breitbart’s audience and support for Trump’s campaign.
  • Despite Bannon’s efforts, his tenure in the White House was short-lived, but he remained committed to their shared political project.
  • Bannon continued to explore various ventures, including global alliances and cryptocurrency offerings, while maintaining a significant presence in pro-Trump media.
  • Following the 2020 election, Bannon focused on promoting the Stolen Election myth and rallied Trump supporters to challenge the results.
  • Despite the failure of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot to overturn the election, Bannon persisted in promoting MAGA ideals through his “War Room” podcast.
  • Bannon rejected the idea of a third party and aimed to reshape the Republican Party into a vehicle for the MAGA movement, envisioning a showdown between establishment elites and populist conservatives.

How Steve Bannon guided the MAGA movement’s rebound from Jan. 6

An image of Stephen K. Bannon is seen as people attend CPAC at Gaylord Resort and Convention Center on Feb. 22 in National Harbor, Md. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)

A shroud of black mesh fence closed around the bright marble colonnades of the U.S. Capitol campus. The twelve‐foot barrier, topped with razor wire and guarded by troops in combat fatigues with flak vests and long rifles, had sprung up to secure the seat of government after it was overrun by a mob of Trump’s supporters trying to stop the formal certification of his electoral defeat. Whether the fortifications were too much or too little, they were clearly too late. Their effect now was to sever the federal office buildings from the adjacent neighborhood of Capitol Hill, a picturesque historic district of low, colorful row homes. In the basement of one of these townhouses, Stephen K. Bannon was about to take to the airwaves.

Seated in his podcast studio, Bannon looked, as usual, under-slept and over-caffeinated, but on this morning, the first Saturday in February 2021, his beady eyes were bright with excitement. He wore chunky black headphones that swept back his long gray mane until the tips grazed the epaulets of an olive‐green field jacket. This MAGA Che Guevara look was new for Bannon, a transformation from the preppy layered collars that he used to wear in 2017 to his West Wing office, which he’d called “the War Room.”

If White House strategist to podcast host sounded like a fall from grace, for Bannon it was more of a return to form. He was in his natural mode, playing a role that came easily to him: the outside agitator with a huge online following. This same basement, years earlier, had been the headquarters of Breitbart News, the rising voice of reactionary right‐wing nationalism, rebranded for an online generation as “the alt‐right.” Official Washington, Democrat or Republican, didn’t know what to do with Bannon when he showed up, with his scruffy neck and multiple shirts. Bannon relished that air of foreignness, dubbing this townhouse the “Breitbart Embassy.” Fittingly, the upstairs rooms were decorated as if for a state visit, with yellow brocade curtains, crystal chandeliers, filigree mirrors and white stars dotting a dark‐blue rug running up the stairs to a Lincoln‐themed bedroom. It was in those rooms, during a book party in November of 2013, that Bannon had once announced, “I’m a Leninist.”

“What do you mean?” asked his shocked interlocutor, a historian at a conservative think tank across town. The historian, Ronald Radosh, was all too familiar with Lenin’s contributions to the ledger of human suffering. Lenin’s most influential and enduring innovation, laid out in his 1902 treatise, “What Is To Be Done?,” was the revolutionary party: an institution for organizing society not according to competition or merit, but rather based on adherence to an ideology.

“Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too,” Bannon answered. “I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.”

Bannon’s Manichaean worldview started young. At a Catholic military school in Richmond, Virginia, he learned about the 1492 reconquest of Spain as the turning point in an ongoing clash of civilizations between the Christian West and the Muslim world. As an adult, he devoured books on Attila the Hun and great military campaigns. He was obsessed with history, specifically the concept of historical cycles — the idea that time was not, as Americans usually learned, a linear march of progress, but rather, more like the view of ancient traditions, a recurring pattern of distinct phases. Bannon especially liked the version of this theory in “The Fourth Turning,” a 1997 book by historians Neil Howe and William Strauss, which ordered American history into generation‐long periods of highs, awakenings, unravelings and crises. The book predicted a coming rise of nationalism and authoritarianism, across the world and in America.

Bannon was not merely a student or passive observer of this prophecy; he wanted to be an agent of it, and an architect of the era that came next. So when he watched Trump glide down a golden escalator to announce his campaign for president, in 2015, his first thought was, “That’s Hitler!” By that he meant someone who intuitively understood the aesthetics of power, as in Nazi propaganda films. He saw in Trump someone who could viscerally connect with the general angst that Bannon was roiling and make himself a vessel for Americans’ grievances and desires.

Presidential adviser Stephen K. Bannon during a panel discussion at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Feb. 23, 2017. (Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post)

Bannon’s thinking on building a mass movement was shaped by Eric Hoffer, “the longshoreman philosopher,” so called because he had worked as a stevedore on the San Francisco docks while writing his first book, “The True Believer.” The book caused a sensation when it was published in 1951, becoming a manual for comprehending the age of Hitler, Stalin and Mao. Hoffer argued that all mass movements — nationalist, communist, or religious — shared common characteristics and followed a discernible path. “The preliminary work of undermining existing institutions, of familiarizing the masses with the idea of change, and of creating a receptivity to a new faith, can be done only by men who are, first and foremost, talkers or writers and are recognized as such by all.” (How about a reality TV star?) But such leaders cannot alone create the conditions that give rise to mass movements. “He cannot conjure a movement out of the void,” Hoffer wrote. “There has to be an eagerness to follow and obey, and an intense dissatisfaction with things as they are, before the movement and leader can make their appearance.”

Rather than focusing on movement leaders, Hoffer’s inquiry concerned the followers — how ordinary people became fanatics. Successful, well‐adjusted people did not become zealots. Sometimes they glommed onto mass movements to serve their own ambitions, but that came later. The true believers were seeking not self‐advancement but rather “self‐renunciation” — swapping out their individual identities, with all their personal disappointments, for “a chance to acquire new elements of pride, confidence, hope, a sense of purpose and worth by an identification with a holy cause.” The kinds of people who were most susceptible to becoming true believers were, in Hoffer’s idiom, poor, struggling artists, misfits, unusually selfish, or just plain bored. “When our individual interests and prospects do not seem worth living for, we are in desperate need of something apart from us to live for,” Hoffer wrote. “All forms of dedication, devotion, loyalty and self‐surrender are in essence a desperate clinging to something which might give worth and meaning to our futile, spoiled lives.”

For Bannon, as he was building Breitbart’s audience, the ready supply of true believers came from disaffected young men. Bannon had first discovered this untapped resource in, of all places, Hong Kong, while working with a company that paid Chinese workers to play the video game World of Warcraft, earning virtual commodities that the company could flip to Western gamers for real money. The business collapsed, but not before introducing Bannon to an online subculture of young gamers and meme creators, whose energies he learned to draw out and redirect toward politics.

Breitbart’s traffic figures confirmed Bannon’s hunch that candidate Trump was catching fire in 2015, and Bannon positioned the site as the Trump campaign’s unofficial media partner in thrashing the Republican primary field. By the time Bannon officially took over Trump’s ragtag campaign, in the wake of a chaotic convention and spiraling Russia scandal, he supplied a closing message that, if not exactly lucid, did have a kind of coherence. The message was that Trump, the “blue‐collar billionaire,” was here to blow up the established political order that was plainly failing to serve the needs and interests of the common public, and would be a champion for the forgotten and left‐behind Americans. Bannon was not alone in seeing Hoffer’s influence on what he was doing: Trump’s opponent, Hillary Clinton, dusted off “The True Believer” and shared it with her campaign staff, recognizing in those pages the description of a destructive energy that she concluded she was powerless to subdue.

In the White House, as Trump’s chief strategist, Bannon heralded the dawn of a “new political order,” but he lasted only seven months. Trump threw him out after white supremacists and neo‐Nazis marched in Charlottesville, Virginia, against removing a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee, and one of them drove a car into a crowd of counterprotesters, killing a young woman. Trump was the one who defended the torch‐carrying mob as including “very fine people,” but Bannon, as the face of right‐wing nationalism inside the White House (and what a face it was), made a fitting scapegoat. Though the dismissal set Bannon, temporarily, at odds with Trump, it did not shake his commitment to their shared political project. Bannon moved back into the Breitbart Embassy to plot his comeback.

White House Chief Strategist Stephen K. Bannon walks in during a listening session with cybersecurity experts at the White House on Jan. 31, 2017. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

Bannon was constantly testing things out. With so many bombastic schemes in motion, it could be hard to tell when Bannon was onto something or when he was just blowing smoke. He looked overseas, finding common cause with rising right‐wing authoritarians around the world, from Hungary to Brazil. He went to court against the Italian government over a medieval monastery near Rome where he unsuccessfully tried to start a training academy for European nationalists. He found a new patron, the fugitive Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui, who cast himself as the shadow‐boxing action hero in music videos about taking down the Chinese Communist Party. Together, Bannon and Guo landed in the SEC’s crosshairs for a cryptocurrency offering, called G‐Coins or G‐Dollars. (Guo was arrested in 2023 and charged with wire fraud, securities fraud, bank fraud and money laundering amounting to more than $1 billion.) Bannon started a podcast, calling it “War Room,” and playing Guo’s music video as the interlude for commercial breaks. And he reunited with some old friends in a bid to crowdsource money for Trump’s border wall. More than 250,000 people donated, many saying they could only afford a few bucks but desperately wanted to help fulfill the president’s signature campaign promise (never mind that Mexico was originally supposed to foot the bill). Bannon and his buddies dutifully assured the donors, publicly and privately, that they were all volunteers and all the money was for the wall.

By the summer of 2020, it might have been easy to laugh Bannon off as a has‐been and a sideshow. There he was, reading a book, having a coffee, relaxing on the deck of Guo’s 150‐foot superyacht in Long Island Sound, when who showed up but the Coast Guard with federal agents to arrest him. Prosecutors accused Bannon and his friends of misusing the millions they’d raised from Trump supporters, spending the money on their own salary, travel, hotels and credit‐card debts. Trump shrugged to reporters in the Oval Office, “I haven’t been dealing with him for a very long period of time.”

In truth, they had started talking again. Trump was by then running for reelection, and though he’d entered 2020 in a formidable position, the COVID‐19 pandemic had paralyzed the economy and showcased a president in ineffectual denial, refusing to wear a mask, demanding to suppress case counts by slowing down testing and musing about injecting bleach. By June, Joe Biden had put up a double‐digit lead in national surveys, and Trump was longing to replace his campaign manager (digital strategist Brad Parscale, who was about to have a mental‐health crisis) and recapture his 2016 magic. But Bannon turned down the job. Based on how badly the White House was squandering the covid emergency, leaving the response to Jared Kushner, Mike Pence and Dr. Fauci, Bannon thought the race was already over. The Trump campaign was beyond saving. Undermining a Biden presidency, however, was something Bannon said he knew how to do, and he could start laying the groundwork in advance.

On his “War Room” podcast and in speeches to Republican groups around the country, Bannon addressed audiences who were feeling sure that Trump would win, because they’d seen massive boat parades of Trump supporters, and they didn’t personally know anyone who was voting for Biden. Bannon warned them to stay focused, pay attention. Trump had been saying since the summer that the Democrats would use mail ballots to steal the election, using covid as an excuse to change the rules. Bannon explained how it would all play out. The Election Day votes would show Trump ahead, and he would declare victory that night. But the Democrats and the media would cry, No, you have to wait for the mail ballots. The electoral college results would be disputed, and it would be up to Congress to settle the outcome when it met to formally certify the results on Jan. 6, 2021. At that point, Bannon promised, Congress would either return the election to Republican‐ controlled state legislatures or decide it in the U.S. House of Representatives, where Republicans controlled a majority of state delegations.

Could they really pull it off? Didn’t matter. “I had no downside,” Bannon would later say. His aim was to use the occasion to stage such a spectacle that it would undermine Biden’s legitimacy with millions of Americans — “shred that f—er on national TV,” permanently hobble his ability to govern, “kill the Biden presidency in the crib.” All that mattered was for Trump supporters to believe it was possible for Congress to block the election results that day.

So while Trump was busy calling Republican officials in Georgia, Arizona and Michigan to pressure them to declare him the winner; and while Trump’s lawyers were filing far‐fetched lawsuits seeking to invalidate Biden’s victory, and rounding up Republicans to put themselves forward to the electoral college, and lobbying Vice President Pence to accept them as the rightful electors; and while Republican activists around the country organized Stop the Steal rallies to protest the results; and while militia groups bought weapons and drew up attack plans for the biggest rally of all, Bannon kept hyping Jan. 6 to his hundreds of thousands of podcast listeners. “This is more important than November 3, this is more important than even Trump’s presidency,” he’d say on the show. “This is more important than this fight between the nationalists and the globalists. This is more important than the fight between progressives and conservatives. It’s more important than this fight between Republicans and Democrats. This gets to the heart — you go read Roman history, this is like toward how the republic fell, right, and became a totalitarian or authoritarian empire. We’re at that moment.”

He didn’t say exactly what everyone was supposed to do once they got to Washington on Jan. 6. His point was that his listeners, the “War Room posse,” needed to show up, they didn’t want to miss this. They had to be there. Their success depended on it. “I know people have work, family, kids, school, everything like that — however, these types of days happen very rarely in the history of our country. This is something you can participate in. This is something they’re gonna be able to tell their kids and their grandkids about, ’cause this is gonna be history. Living history.”

When the day finally dawned, as the crowd he’d conjured took shape, Bannon marveled at how his plan was materializing, like the invisible sound waves of his podcast finding physical, human form. “This is a massive turnout, I think it overwhelms everybody’s — every anticipation of what was going to happen,” he said on the show that cold morning. “Because of this audience. You have brought this to the cusp. We are right on the cusp of victory.”

Supporters of President Trump storm the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021. (Evelyn Hockstein/For The Washington Post)

Behind him in the studio, on a white fireplace mantel lined with MAGA hats, a TV was streaming CNN. The chyron read, SOON: TRUMP TO SPEAK TO SUPPORTERS IN DESPERATE COUP ATTEMPT. Bannon was saying, “This is not a day for fantasy. This is the day for maniacal focus. Focus, focus, focus. We’re coming in right over the target, OK? Exactly. This is the point of attack we always wanted. OK? … I said from day one, for months and months and months and months — because they’re trying to steal it, they’re gonna be caught trying to steal it — President Trump’s massive victory is going to be affirmed in a contingent election in the House of Representatives … Today, the trigger can get pulled on that. We are on, and when everybody out there, people getting fired up — we are on the cusp of victory because of you. Don’t ever forget that.”

Soon the lawmakers in the Capitol could hear the crowd roaring outside. The mob broke in and the lawmakers fled. For hours the counting and certification of the electoral votes was stopped. Once police and National Guardsmen secured the Capitol and the lawmakers reconvened, Pence refused to do what Trump demanded, and not enough Republicans objected to the votes to force a contingent election in the House. The massive victory Bannon had promised did not come to pass.

Whose fault was that? Not Bannon’s. Not the “War Room” posse’s. Bannon knew his listeners were angry, he knew they were disappointed. He wanted them to understand: “These were not Democrats that were thwarting us,” he said on the next day’s show. “These were Republicans.”

In the weeks that followed, Bannon’s show got booted from YouTube, Trump was banned from Twitter, rioters started getting arrested, Trump got impeached, Biden got inaugurated, and at the last possible minute before Trump left office, he pardoned Bannon. The pardon did more than rescue Bannon from criminal jeopardy (his co-defendants in the fraud case, by the way, were still on the hook); it also restored Trump’s imprimatur. Whatever their disagreements over the years (“Stephen K. Bannon has nothing to do with me or my presidency,” Trump said in 2018, “he lost his mind”), Bannon must have done something worth rewarding or retained some value to Trump. As Trump skulked off to Mar‐a‐Lago, Bannon kept rising as the essential voice of the MAGA universe.

The pro‐Trump media ecosystem splintered into alternative platforms and fringe websites such as Rumble, Telegram and BitChute. MyPillow sponsorships for all. But Bannon stood out from the pack by any measure: he reached more listeners, had the most in‐demand guests, churned out more content, set the agenda. He kept distributing through Apple’s podcast app, repeatedly topping the charts. He also streamed his episodes as videos, and his “War Room” became like a far‐right “Meet the Press,” the go‐to interview for Trumpworld celebrities and aspiring candidates.

Nigel Farage, former Brexit Party leader, speaks with Stephen K. Bannon on the second day of the Conservative Political Action Conference on March 3, 2023. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

For three hours every weekday, and two on Saturdays, Bannon and his guests developed a canon of the Stolen Election myth. The fraud was just the first part. The Democrats always tried that; it was a given. The second part, the crucial step, was the stab in the back — the Republican election officials and state legislators who knew the election was stolen and let the Democrats get away with it. All the tumult of 2020 had, as Hoffer foretold, done the preliminary work of undermining institutions and creating a receptivity to a new faith. Now it was up to Bannon to transform the defeat of January 6 into the galvanizing moment for the next phase of the MAGA movement.

“OK, live from the nation’s capital, you’re in the War Room,” your host began today’s show. “It’s still an occupied capital. The question still needs to be asked, why are seven thousand National Guard, up‐armored National Guard, still in the nation’s capital?” The answer, according to Bannon, was that the show of force was a “psyop” — a form of psychological warfare meant to cow the MAGA movement, to break Trump supporters’ will to resist. That was also the purpose, he would say, of the Democrats’ vote to impeach Trump for inciting the insurrection, and the Senate trial that was about to begin.

Bannon announced the date, as he usually did at the top of the show, in a grandiose way: “Saturday, the sixth of February, the year of our Lord 2021. The podcast,” he went on, assuring his listeners that they were not alone and that he was not speaking into a void, was “closing in on 34 million downloads.”

Bannon wasn’t messing around with basement kids anymore. The MAGA movement had matured. His audience now was grayer — people in their 50s, 60s and beyond, a lot of empty nesters and retirees — but with a similar need for connection, and perhaps even memories of a gentler time. He was speaking to people who didn’t look like radicals, and certainly didn’t think of themselves as extremists; it was the world around them that had lost its mind. The social critic Christopher Lasch, another Bannon influence, had written about this beginning in the 60s: how liberalism was a failure because people looked at the world that “freedom” got them and decided they didn’t want it. It sucked. Modern life was so fragmented, so disembodied, so alienating. Dealing with that alienation was what War Room was all about. “Action, action, action,” Bannon would say. “This is all about your agency.” He was offering his listeners a path to self‐empowerment, and in the dark days that followed Jan. 6, Trump supporters were starving for a sense of direction, a suggestion of where to go next, an idea of what to do with their feelings of shock and disaffection.

One idea that was now generating buzz with Trump supporters was starting a third party, a Patriot Party, to fight for Trump in all the ways the Republican Party had so clearly failed. The source of this proposal was Trump himself, who meant it as a threat to the Republican senators about to try his impeachment. But Trump’s rank‐and‐file supporters were getting carried away with the third‐party idea, and Bannon needed to put a stop to it. He knew a third party would be a fool’s errand, a waste of everyone’s time and money. Even Teddy Roosevelt couldn’t win back the White House on a third‐party ticket. All third parties did was help elect someone from the two major parties. George Wallace helped give you Richard M. Nixon. Ross Perot got you Bill Clinton. Bannon had a better idea.

The way Bannon saw it, there already was a third party: that was the establishment he hungered to destroy. The neocons, neoliberals, big donors, globalists, Wall Street, corporatists, elites. He sometimes called them “the uniparty,” because they were the only ones who ever got power, no matter whether Democrats or Republicans won elections. This formulation was not entirely wrong‐headed, to the extent that the structure of having two pluralistic, big‐tent parties pushed them both toward the center, producing a measure of stability and continuity. Nor was Bannon baseless in believing that this stasis could produce bad outcomes, particularly in foreign affairs, the domain of the so‐called Washington Blob. Outside the uniparty, as Bannon saw it, there was the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, which he considered a relatively small slice of the electorate. And the rest, the vast majority of the country, was MAGA. Bannon believed the MAGA movement, if it could break out of being suppressed and marginalized by the establishment, represented a dominant coalition that could rule for a hundred years.

In his confidence that there were secretly millions of Democrats who were yearning to be MAGA followers and just didn’t know it yet, Bannon was again taking inspiration from Hoffer, who observed that true believers were prone to conversion from one cause to another since they were driven more by their need to identify with a mass movement than by any particular ideology. Bannon was not, like a typical political strategist, trying to tinker around the edges of the existing party coalitions in the hope of eking out 50 percent plus one. Bannon already told you: he wanted to bring everything crashing down. He wanted to completely dismantle and redefine the parties. He wanted a showdown between a globalist, elite party, called the Democrats, and a populist, MAGA party, called the Republicans. In that matchup, he was sure, the Republicans would win every time.

How to put the Patriot Party idea in its place, and harness the MAGA movement through the Republican Party where it belonged? Bannon had just the man for the job, someone he’d known for years, someone who used to blog for him back at Breitbart. His name was Dan Schultz, and his time had come.

During a break, before bringing Dan Schultz on the air, Bannon asked him, “How should I introduce you?” This was a standard question for any of his guests; usually everyone had a website or a podcast or a book or a PAC or a 501(c)(4) — some hustle to promote. “What organization are you representing?”

But this guest had a different sort of answer. “The Republican Party,” Dan Schultz said.

There was a long pause. Then Bannon chuckled. “The Republican Party.”

An image of Stephen K. Bannon is seen as people attend CPAC at Gaylord Resort and Convention Center on Feb. 22 in National Harbor, Md. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)

I am text block. Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

I am text block. Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon threw a curveball- Jack Smith strikes back

0

In his fiery response, Smith didn't mince words

🚨📰 **Breaking News: Judge Juan Merchan Denies Trump’s Motion to Delay Trial!** 📰🚨

In a stunning turn of events, Judge Juan Merchan has firmly shut down former President Donald Trump’s attempt to delay his upcoming New York criminal trial. 😲 Despite Trump’s desperate plea to postpone proceedings until after the US Supreme Court weighs in on his presidential immunity claim, Judge Merchan swiftly rejected the motion, labeling it untimely and highlighting Trump’s ample opportunities to address the issue earlier. 💥💼

“This Court finds that Defendant had myriad opportunities to raise the claim of presidential immunity well before March 7, 2024,” declared the order, leaving no room for doubt about the gravity of the decision. “The circumstances, viewed as a whole, test this Court’s credulity.”

🔗 **Related article:** Trump is trying everything he can to delay this month’s hush money criminal trial

Scheduled to commence with jury selection on April 15, the trial revolves around hush money payments made during the 2016 presidential campaign, particularly to adult film star Stormy Daniels. Trump, maintaining his innocence, has pleaded not guilty to all charges, setting the stage for what promises to be a riveting legal showdown. 🎬⚖️

While Merchan has permitted Trump’s legal team to object to evidence linked to presidential acts during the trial, Wednesday’s ruling notably sidestepped the broader issue of presidential immunity. “The Court declines to consider whether the doctrine of presidential immunity precludes the introduction of evidence of purported official presidential acts in criminal proceeding,” the order clarified.

Trump’s maneuver to delay the trial backfired spectacularly, especially considering that when the motion was filed on March 7, the trial was initially slated to kick off on March 25. However, a subsequent delay until mid-April ensued due to a cache of documents disclosed by federal prosecutors, throwing another wrench into Trump’s legal strategy. 🛑📄

Stay tuned to Pigsfly News for the latest updates on this high-profile trial! 🐷✈️ #JusticePrevails #TrumpTrial #LegalDrama Article appeared herehttps://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/03/politics/judge-deny-motion-delay-hush-money-trump/index.html?utm_term=17121859097087703d548759a&bt_ts=1712185909711&utm_medium=email&utm_source=cnn_In+Case+You+Missed+It+-+ICYMI&bt_ee=YLA6PmgHBFIGsRfcAAGUDLtntOjbHN2p7pXaYbrpOCzx2SFT9NgBbFgsDjaHA%2Fhn&bt_alias=eyJ1c2VySWQiOiAiNDlhZmMzY2ItY2Y3MS00MDZlLWE3NjYtMTQwMTZkYjJmN2Q5In0%3D

🚨 NEWS UPDATE🚨

🔍 Harry Litman, former U.S. Attorney, dives deep into the latest legal drama surrounding Donald Trump’s alleged favoritism on Deadline White House with Nicolle Wallace! 📺 Check out the intense discussion as they dissect Jack Smith’s latest filing that’s shaking up the courtroom dynamics. 📑💼

Remember when U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon threw a curveball, suggesting a fringe legal theory that could potentially tilt the scales in favor of Donald Trump in the classified documents case? 😱

Well, special counsel Jack Smith isn’t holding back in his response, firing back at Cannon’s delay tactics with a scathing retort. 🔥 Smith’s message is crystal clear: unless Cannon straightens out her legal stance, he’s ready to take the fight to the next level.

Cannon’s recent move to ask for proposed jury instructions has raised eyebrows, especially since it seems to blur the lines between the Presidential Records Act and the criminal charges against Trump. 🤔 Smith wasted no time pointing out the flaws in this approach, emphasizing that such confusion could lead to a miscarriage of justice.

In his fiery response, Smith didn’t mince words, highlighting that Cannon’s delay tactics could not only prolong the trial but also jeopardize the integrity of the legal process. ⏳ Trump’s strategy of delay is evident, but what’s more alarming is the potential for a botched trial due to erroneous instructions.

Now, all eyes are on Cannon’s next move. Will she stick to her guns and risk an appeal, or will she course-correct before it’s too late? ⚖️ The ball is in her court, but the implications of her decisions extend far beyond this trial. The power wielded by a trial judge is immense, and Cannon’s actions could shape the course of this case for better or for worse.

As we await Cannon’s response, one thing is clear: the battle for justice is far from over. ⚔️ Whether Trump’s trial proceeds smoothly or hits another roadblock remains to be seen. But one thing’s for sure: the stakes have never been higher.

Stay tuned for more updates as this legal saga unfolds! 📢 #TrumpTrial #LegalDrama #DeadlineWhiteHouse

🐷📰 Prosecutors Slam Judge’s Order in Trump’s Classified Documents Case**

In a dramatic turn of events, federal prosecutors have delivered a scathing rebuke to the judge overseeing the classified documents case involving former President Donald Trump. The prosecutors have sharply criticized Judge Aileen Cannon’s recent order, labeling it as “fundamentally flawed” and expressing deep concern over its potential impact on the trial.

The controversy stems from Judge Cannon’s decision to request proposed jury instructions from both the prosecution and defense teams, despite the uncertain timeline for the trial. Of particular concern to the prosecutors is the judge’s apparent willingness to entertain interpretations of the law that could bolster Trump’s argument regarding the Presidential Records Act (PRA).

According to prosecutors, Trump’s assertion that he was entitled to retain sensitive documents under the PRA is based on a “fundamentally flawed legal premise.” They argue that the law, which allows presidents to keep personal records while requiring them to return presidential records to the government, has no relevance to a case involving highly classified documents.

Prosecutors vehemently contest Trump’s claim that the documents in question were designated as personal, asserting that there is no evidence to support this assertion. They emphasize that none of the witnesses interviewed during the investigation reported hearing Trump make such a designation.

Furthermore, prosecutors express frustration over Judge Cannon’s handling of the case, citing delays in ruling on defense motions and disagreements between the parties. They warn that the trial date remains uncertain, raising the possibility that the case may linger unresolved until the November presidential election.

In response to the judge’s order, prosecutors urge her to swiftly reject the defense motion to dismiss the case and to refrain from citing the PRA in her jury instructions. They emphasize that the distinction between personal and presidential records under the PRA has no bearing on the charges Trump faces under the Espionage Act.

As the legal battle intensifies, Trump finds himself facing dozens of felony counts related to the mishandling of classified documents. Despite the mounting pressure, the former president maintains his innocence, insisting that he did nothing wrong.

Stay tuned to Pigsfly News for further updates on this developing story. 🐷📰 #Trump #LegalBattle #ClassifiedDocuments #PigsflyNews

🔥Project 2025: The Descent into Authoritarianism 🔥

0

The Descent into Authoritarianism

🔥🇺🇸 Check out this eye-opening video exposing the alarming Project 2025! 🚨 Fueled by a fervent sense of victimhood and a thirst for revenge against perceived “woke” forces, it aims to tear down America’s democratic foundations. Don’t miss this important insight – watch and listen now! 👀🎥 #Project2025 #AmericaUnderThreat #WakeUpCall

Bettina Krause’s exposé in Liberty magazine delves into the troubling implications of Project 2025, a mammoth conservative initiative poised to reshape America’s democratic landscape. Backed by an extensive coalition of conservative organizations and boasting substantial financial resources, Project 2025 purports to prepare for the transition to a conservative administration in 2025.

However, beneath its innocuous facade lies a more sinister agenda. Krause draws parallels to historical efforts to impose religious dogma through legislation, citing the example of Sunday “blue laws” and their oppressive enforcement. She highlights a chilling proposal buried deep within Project 2025: the amendment of labor laws to enforce Sunday Sabbath observance, effectively privileging a specific strain of Christianity and relegating others to second-class status.

Krause argues that such proposals not only violate the core principles of religious freedom enshrined in the Constitution but also undermine the inclusive fabric of American society. By seeking to enshrine religious doctrine into law, Project 2025 risks eroding the very foundations of democracy and alienating vast segments of the population.

Furthermore, Krause underscores the importance of nuance in evaluating policy proposals, acknowledging the validity of diverse perspectives in the political arena. However, she emphasizes that any proposal must adhere to constitutional constraints and refrain from imposing religious orthodoxy.

In conclusion, Krause’s analysis paints a sobering picture of Project 2025 as a harbinger of authoritarian drift, threatening the fundamental principles upon which America was founded. It serves as a clarion call to safeguard democracy against encroachments on religious freedom and uphold the principles of pluralism and equality for all citizens.

Summary: The Descent into Authoritarianism: Unveiling "Project 2025"

The American Right, spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, has unveiled “Project 2025,” a meticulously crafted plan aimed at consolidating power and transforming the nation into a white Christian patriarchal regime. This initiative, propelled by a fervent sense of victimhood and a desire for revenge against perceived “woke” forces, represents a concerted effort to reshape America’s democratic foundations.

“Project 2025” encompasses four pillars: a comprehensive policy agenda outlined in the “Mandate for Leadership” report, a personnel database to recruit loyalists, a training program to indoctrinate political appointees, and a vague promise of swift actions in the first 180 days of a new administration. These pillars converge to facilitate an authoritarian takeover of the government, characterized by expanded presidential powers, the dismantling of regulatory agencies, and the purging of dissenting voices.

The policy agenda of “Project 2025” seeks to entrench white Christian patriarchy by dismantling public education, empowering private schools, and undermining environmental protections. Through the guise of “parent’s rights” and “school choice,” the Right aims to privatize education, indoctrinate students with conservative ideology, and erase progressive influence. Similarly, plans for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) prioritize deregulation and dismiss climate change as a tool of fear-mongering, neglecting environmental concerns for the sake of economic interests.

While the implementation of “Project 2025” remains uncertain, a second Trump presidency could provide fertile ground for its realization. Learning from past mistakes, the American Right is poised to overcome previous obstacles and execute their authoritarian agenda with greater efficiency and ruthlessness. The implications of “Project 2025” extend beyond partisan politics, posing a significant threat to democracy, individual rights, and societal progress.

**Government Department Restructure Plans:**

**Dismantle Government:**

**Mobilize and Weaponize Government:**

– **Department of Education:**

– Limit federal education policy and ultimately eliminate the Department of Education.
– Replace public education with a system of private schools under the guise of strengthening parental rights and school choice.

**Department of Defense (DoD)**

– Combat progressive social policies within the military.
– Expel transgender individuals from military service.
– Eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.

**Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)**

– Disempower the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and split it into separate entities.
– Use the CDC to enforce anti-abortion measures and collect abortion data.
– Promote traditionalist family structures and eliminate rights for LGBTQ+ individuals.

**Department of Labor**

– Reverse diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in labor policy.
– Eliminate racial classifications and critical race theory trainings.
– Rescind regulations prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

**Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)**

– Use the CDC to enforce anti-abortion measures and collect abortion data.
– Promote traditionalist family structures and eliminate rights for LGBTQ+ individuals.

**Department of Defense (DoD)**

– Combat progressive social policies within the military.
– Expel transgender individuals from military service.
– Eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.

**Department of Labor**

– Reverse diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in labor policy.
– Eliminate racial classifications and critical race theory trainings.
– Rescind regulations prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

**Department of Justice (DoJ)**

– Use the DoJ to pursue the president’s agenda.
– Eliminate perceived biases and focus on targeting left-wing groups like Antifa.

**The Great Purge: Installing an Army of Loyalists:**

- **Implementation of Schedule F:**

– Convert career civil service positions into political appointments to enable mass firings.
**Presidential Personnel Database:**

– Conduct an unprecedented headhunting operation to ensure ideological conformity.
– Vet thousands of applicants based on their political and philosophical beliefs, prioritizing ideological purity over expertise.

In the face of the tumultuous storm brewing on the right, it is imperative that we shed light on the darkness of their designs and recognize the urgent need to act. What is unfolding is not merely another political maneuver but a meticulously planned assault on the very foundations of our democracy.

“Project 2025” is not an isolated scheme; it is emblematic of a broader reactionary movement seeking to reshape America in its image. While skepticism may linger regarding the erratic nature of Trump and the divisions within the right, we must not be blinded to the unified goal driving them: the restoration of a white Christian patriarchal order, enforced through authoritarian means.

The plans laid out by “Project 2025” are chilling in their scope and ambition. They seek to consolidate power, purge dissent, and dismantle the institutions that safeguard our freedoms. But this is not mere grandstanding; it is a calculated strategy to impose a vision of America that is antithetical to our values of equality and justice.

Trump, despite his unpredictable nature, is the perfect figurehead for this crusade. His vengeful spirit and disdain for norms align perfectly with the extremist agenda of “Project 2025.” While he may not pore over policy memos, his willingness to wield power ruthlessly makes him a dangerous instrument for those seeking to impose their will on our nation.

But the threat goes beyond Trump. “Project 2025” is just one facet of a broader realignment on the right towards authoritarianism. It seeks to exploit divisions within conservatism, uniting factions behind the shared goal of preserving privilege and hierarchy.

The tension between dismantling the state and weaponizing it underscores the radicalism of this movement. It is a rejection of traditional conservatism in favor of a reactionary agenda that sees moderation as weakness and compromise as surrender.

As we confront the specter of a second Trump presidency, we must recognize that the landscape has shifted. The right is emboldened, armed with a reactionary supermajority on the Supreme Court and a fully Trumpified GOP.

Resistance will not be easy, but it is essential if we are to prevent the entrenchment of white Christian patriarchy.

In the face of this existential threat, we cannot afford complacency or resignation.

We must heed the warning signs and mobilize to defend our democracy.

The time for action is now, before it is too late.

🔴🎙️ Former Attorney General Eric Holder candid interview with Ari Melber 🎙️🔴

0

🔴🎙️ Former Attorney General Eric Holder Unveils Candid Insights on MSNBC with Ari Melber 🎙️🔴

Pigsfly News immerses itself in a labyrinth of literature, consumes an ocean of media, and traverses a myriad of online platforms. Yet, scarcely do we relinquish the reins and bear witness to a maestro at work, guiding the discourse with finesse and expertise.

In a riveting interview that has set tongues wagging across the nation, Former Attorney General Eric Holder took center stage on MSNBC’s prestigious platform, engaging in a wide-ranging conversation with the renowned Ari Melber. 📺

Holder, the esteemed legal luminary who once navigated the corridors of power alongside President Obama, delved deep into the annals of his unparalleled experience, shedding light on the inner workings of the Oval Office and his monumental role in shaping America’s legal landscape. 💼

But it wasn’t just a stroll down memory lane; Holder, with his trademark gravitas, passionately championed the sacred duty of voting, echoing the clarion call for civic engagement in today’s turbulent times. 🗳️

Drawing upon his own upbringing amidst the crucible of the civil rights movement, Holder eloquently articulated the enduring struggle for justice and equality that continues to resonate across generations. 🌟

And in a moment of unvarnished candor, Holder didn’t shy away from confronting the thorny issue of the Supreme Court’s “legitimacy problem,” a hot-button topic that has sparked fierce debate and divided the nation. 🏛️

Watch the electrifying Summit Series installment now to witness Eric Holder’s masterful articulation of the pressing issues facing America today. 📢

Pigsfly News immerses itself in a labyrinth of literature, consumes an ocean of media, and traverses a myriad of online platforms. Yet, scarcely do we relinquish the reins and bear witness to a maestro at work, guiding the discourse with finesse and expertise.

🎉📢🔥 Big News Alert: John Eastman Disbarred! 🚫💼

0

🎉📢🔥 Big News Alert: John Eastman Disbarred! 🚫💼

Yet another Trump lawyer bites the dust! 🤣 John Eastman, the mastermind behind that infamous memo advising Mike Pence on how to flip the 2020 election, is kissing his law license goodbye in just 72 hours! 🕒 Sayonara, shady shyster! 🙌

At the disbarment hearing, Eastman tried to defend himself, but boy, did he get grilled! 🔥 They called him out on his lack of fact-checking, his selective ignorance of election security evidence, and his blatant disregard for court rulings. Talk about a hot seat! 🔥

And guess what? This ain’t Eastman’s first rodeo! 🐂 He’s already been booted from his gigs at Chapman University and the University of Colorado. Plus, he’s got a criminal RICO indictment waiting for him down in Georgia! ⚖️

The cherry on top? Even Mike Pence’s own legal team threw him under the bus, testifying that he straight-up told Pence to reject those electors. 🚌 Ouch!

So there you have it, folks! The curtain’s closing on Eastman’s legal career, and frankly, it’s long overdue! 🎬 Let’s raise a glass to justice served! 🥂 #Disbarred #TrumpLawyerDown #KarmaIsReal

A judge has just rejected former President Donald J. Trump’s attempt to dismiss criminal charges in the hush-money case involving a porn star. This paves the way for the first-ever prosecution of a former American president.

Judge Juan M. Merchan announced the decision today in a Lower Manhattan courtroom, setting a trial date for next month, March 25. Trump’s lawyers objected, calling the schedule “unfathomable” and arguing it would conflict with his potential presidential campaign. However, Justice Merchan dismissed their objections, instructing them to “stop interrupting.”

The Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, filed charges last year, accusing Trump of covering up a potential sex scandal with Stormy Daniels during and after the 2016 presidential campaign. This trial is the first among Trump’s 91 felony counts across multiple indictments.

In a dramatic courtroom scene, Trump’s lawyers argued that the case is politically motivated, but Justice Merchan stood firm. The trial will focus on Trump’s alleged illegal payoff to Stormy Daniels and the subsequent attempt to hide it from voters.

This is a pivotal moment for Trump, facing legal challenges on multiple fronts. Besides the hush-money case, he confronts civil fraud charges with a final ruling expected in a separate New York case seeking to penalize him nearly $370 million. Additionally, there are federal charges in Florida over handling classified documents and a Georgia case accusing him of subverting the 2020 election.

Stay tuned for updates on this historic trial as it unfolds. The hearing coincides with a significant moment in the Georgia case, involving revelations about a romantic relationship between the prosecutors leading the charge. The legal challenges are intensifying, and this week is a crucial one for Donald J. Trump.

💰 Let’s unite with the world to coin a new, unambiguous phrase that encapsulates the odious, malevolent greed embodied by Donald Trump

0

🔥🚨 Disappointed and Furious!

As Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez famously stated on MSNBC, Donald Trump would sell his country for a dollar.

Can you believe the audacity of former President Donald Trump? 🤬 This man, who once occupied the highest office in the land, is now shamelessly using his name and image to line his pockets! 💸 It’s a slap in the face to decency and integrity.

Before he infested politics, Trump peddled everything from steaks to vodka, but now he’s stooped even lower! 😡 Instead of serving the American people, he’s serving his insatiable greed. 🤯

Just look at this laundry list of cash-grab schemes: $99 cologne for “movers, shakers, and history makers,” $399 sneakers to preach “Never Surrender” (how ironic!), and now he’s even hawking $59.99 Bibles! 📖 Can you believe the nerve?

And don’t get me started on his despicable mug shot merchandise! 🤬 Selling T-shirts, mugs, and posters featuring his mug shot with slogans like “NEVER SURRENDER” and “NOT GUILTY” is beyond the pale! 😤

But it doesn’t stop there! Trump’s also peddling perfume named “Victory 47,” hoping for a return to the White House! 🙄 The audacity knows no bounds!

And let’s not forget his digital trading cards! 🃏 Promoting NFTs with his face plastered on them, including a “MugShot edition” with a piece of his actual suit! 🤯 It’s like he’s turning his legal troubles into a sick game for profit!

Enough is enough! 🛑 America deserves better than this shameless grifter! It’s time to hold him accountable and reject his blatant exploitation of our trust and goodwill! 💔 #Disappointed #Furious #TrumpGreed 🤬💸

Let’s not forget about Trump University, the ultimate symbol of Donald Trump’s insatiable greed and complete disregard for the well-being of others. 🎓 This so-called “university” was nothing more than a greed machine, preying on the vulnerable and gullible in society. Its sole purpose? To fleece unsuspecting individuals of their hard-earned money, promising education but delivering nothing but exploitation.

Trump University wasn’t about education; it was about enriching Trump and his enablers while leaving its students high and dry, with nothing to show for their investments except for a bitter lesson in deception. Instead of imparting knowledge, Trump University educated its victims on how Trump and his cronies could exploit the law to their advantage, repeatedly and shamelessly.

As Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez famously stated on MSNBC, Donald Trump would sell his country for a dollar. 💰 Let’s unite with the world to coin a new, unambiguous phrase that encapsulates the odious, malevolent greed embodied by Donald Trump. That phrase is $Trump$ – a symbol of deceit, connivance, and the abuse of law, ethics, morality, and decency all in the pursuit of greed and power.

This moment, largely overlooked at the time, set off a series of events that led to a recent court order demanding Trump to pay nearly half a billion dollars to the state of New York. This financial reckoning, Ocasio-Cortez argues, represents a turning point in the ongoing battle against corruption and financial crimes committed by the wealthy.

It’s time to shine a light on the truth and hold Trump accountable for his actions. Let’s reject his toxic influence and work towards a future where integrity and compassion prevail over greed and exploitation. 💪 #TrumpGreed #Accountability #JusticeForAll 🚫💰

🐷📰 Pigsfly News Inspires Action with Eye-Opening Analysis from Politico's Politically Charged Piece📰🐷

Pigsfly News raises a poignant alarm after combing through the politically charged piece in Politico, an article that claims to provide a 🤐 balanced and informative analysis.

Yet, amidst the rhetoric of self-indulgence, there is a glaring omission⚖️ —a refusal to acknowledge the factual impetus behind the recent revolt among MSNBC journalists against management’s decision to hire a contentious figure. Ronna McDaniel’s entanglements with the Republican apparatus, coupled with her implicit alignment with Trump’s discredited allegations of electoral malfeasance, have sparked both concern and ire within the journalistic community. The specter of the Capitol siege, a dark chapter fueled by misinformation, only serves to intensify the sensitivity surrounding her hiring.

At the heart of the tumult surrounding Ronna McDaniel’s hiring lies a fundamental question of journalistic integrity and responsibility: Should a figure with a documented history of promoting falsehoods 💰and misinformation💔 be granted a platform in the media? In the case of McDaniel, her close alignment with Donald Trump and her role as a vocal proponent of his debunked claims of electoral fraud raise profound ethical concerns.

Throughout Trump’s tumultuous presidency and beyond, McDaniel served as a steadfast defender and amplifier of his narratives, even as they veered into the realm of conspiracy and falsehood. From echoing Trump’s baseless allegations of widespread voter fraud to downplaying the severity of the Capitol insurrection, McDaniel has consistently prioritized partisan loyalty over factual accuracy.

The ramifications of McDaniel’s actions extend far beyond the realm of partisan politics. By perpetuating falsehoods about the integrity of the electoral process, she undermines the very foundation of democracy and erodes public trust in institutions.

💵🚫 Moreover, her continued presence in the media landscape risks legitimizing and amplifying disinformation, further polarizing an already divided society.

The decision to hire McDaniel is not merely a matter of editorial discretion; it is a reflection of broader systemic challenges within the media industry. In an era marked by the proliferation of misinformation and the erosion of trust in traditional media outlets, news organizations face a daunting task in navigating the delicate balance between impartiality and accountability.

The uproar surrounding McDaniel’s hiring underscores the 💪 growing power of journalists to hold media organizations accountable for their editorial decisions. As newsrooms grapple with the complexities of a rapidly evolving media landscape, they must confront difficult questions about journalistic ethics, transparency, and the role of media in shaping public discourse.

Ultimately, the McDaniel controversy serves as a stark reminder of the critical importance of upholding journalistic standards in the face of political pressure and partisan influence.

In an age where misinformation spreads like wildfire across social media platforms, the role of professional journalists as gatekeepers of truth and accountability has never been more vital. The decision to grant figures like McDaniel a platform must be weighed carefully, with due consideration given to the broader implications for democracy, public trust, and the integrity of the media ecosystem.

In this interview, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez reveals how her line of inquiry in a congressional hearing five years ago paved the way for the recent legal troubles facing former President Donald Trump. The revelation came during an exchange with Michael Cohen, Trump’s former fixer, where she honed in on an obscure aspect of Trump’s business dealings—his alleged inflation of assets to insurance companies.

This moment, largely overlooked at the time, set off a series of events that led to a recent court order demanding Trump to pay nearly half a billion dollars to the state of New York. This financial reckoning, Ocasio-Cortez argues, represents a turning point in the ongoing battle against corruption and financial crimes committed by the wealthy.

The congresswoman, who represents the 14th District of New York, sees this as a significant moment for accountability. She emphasizes the importance of sending a message that the justice system will not tolerate corruption and that the wealthy can no longer buy their way out of legal consequences.

Has Trump abandoned Alina Hubba to face the music alone

0

Has Trump abandoned Alina Hubba to face the music alone

In the latest legal debacle, Alina Hubba finds herself embroiled once more.
The question looms: Has Trump abandoned Alina Hubba to face the music alone? Remarkably, the inaugural case she undertook for Trump may prove to be her undoing, with potential repercussions extending to her legal standing.

Michael Popok brings insight into a recent settlement, one conspicuously absent of Hubba, allowing the plaintiff to pursue charges of fraud against her.

Allegations surface of her fraudulent cultivation of a relationship with the plaintiff to dissuade her from litigating against Trump—an act of ignominy that the New Jersey Bar may seize upon to censure Hubba and revoke her legal credentials.

Tell MSNBC: Stop Broadcasting Trump’s Speeches

0

Tell MSNBC: Stop Broadcasting Trump’s Speeches

1. Pigsfly News, a dedicated follower of MSNBC’s more balanced reporting, is echoing Rachel Maddow’s recent call for the network to cease the live broadcasting of Donald Trump’s speeches. The initiative, outlined in an article titled “Tell MSNBC: Stop Broadcasting Trump’s Speeches” on CivicShout, underscores the imperative to halt the dissemination of hate, lies, and deliberate misinformation perpetuated by the former president during his campaign rallies.

2. Contrary to the practices of Fox News and CNN, MSNBC has traditionally refrained from airing Trump’s speeches in real-time. Rachel Maddow elucidated this stance in 2023, citing the ethical dilemma of knowingly amplifying falsehoods. However, MSNBC has deviated from this principled approach by airing extensive segments of Trump’s live speeches in recent times – a shift that Maddow deems irresponsible and detrimental to the network’s integrity.

3. Advocates argue that MSNBC’s viewership deserves more discerning and responsible coverage. The petition urges the network to return to its previous policy of not broadcasting Trump’s speeches live. Maddow’s rationale from 2023 is reaffirmed, emphasizing that Trump’s repetitive diatribes against perceived adversaries lack substantive newsworthiness and entail a journalistic cost in propagating falsehoods.

4. Rachel Maddow’s assertion that Donald Trump’s campaign speeches are devoid of genuine news value resonates strongly amidst the ongoing debate over media ethics and responsibility. By refraining from live coverage of such events, MSNBC can uphold its commitment to journalistic integrity and shield its audience from the dissemination of dishonest and hateful rhetoric.

Trump at his campagain rallies: Tell MSNBC: Stop Broadcasting Trump’s Speeches
Unlike Fox News and CNN, MSNBC typically refrains from carrying Donald Trump’s speeches live as they happen.

As Rachel Maddow explained in 2023, they made that decision because “there’s a cost to us as a news organization of knowingly broadcasting untrue things.”

But now, the cable network has reversed course, airing extended portions of his live speeches in recent weeks – a decision Rachel Maddow is calling irresponsible.

MSNBC viewers deserve better. Sign the petition urging MSNBC to stop broadcasting Trump’s speeches live.

Here’s Rachel Maddow described MSNBC’s thinking in 2023:

“Right now the former President himself is making remarks tonight from his home in Florida. As far as we can tell, and what we are prepared for here is, this is basically a campaign speech in which he is repeating his same lies and allegations against his perceived enemies. It is just getting started. So far, he is just giving his normal list of grievances. We don’t consider that necessarily newsworthy and there’s a cost to us as a news organization of knowingly broadcasting untrue things. So, our deal with you is that we will monitor these remarks. If he does say anything newsworthy, we will turn them around and report on that right away. But for now, just know that it is happening and we’re not taking it.”

Rachel Maddow is right: Donald Trump’s dishonest and hateful campaign speeches aren’t newsworthy.

In this interview, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez reveals how her line of inquiry in a congressional hearing five years ago paved the way for the recent legal troubles facing former President Donald Trump. The revelation came during an exchange with Michael Cohen, Trump’s former fixer, where she honed in on an obscure aspect of Trump’s business dealings—his alleged inflation of assets to insurance companies.

This moment, largely overlooked at the time, set off a series of events that led to a recent court order demanding Trump to pay nearly half a billion dollars to the state of New York. This financial reckoning, Ocasio-Cortez argues, represents a turning point in the ongoing battle against corruption and financial crimes committed by the wealthy.

The congresswoman, who represents the 14th District of New York, sees this as a significant moment for accountability. She emphasizes the importance of sending a message that the justice system will not tolerate corruption and that the wealthy can no longer buy their way out of legal consequences.

However, Ocasio-Cortez expresses concern about the broader implications of Trump’s legal troubles. She fears that without swift and clear consequences for the crimes committed on January 6th, there will be a dangerous precedent set for the future of American democracy.

As Trump faces mounting legal challenges, including investigations into his financial dealings and his role in the events of January 6th, Ocasio-Cortez’s role in initiating these inquiries serves as a reminder of the power of congressional oversight and the importance of holding the powerful accountable to the rule of law.

newsworthy.