thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-28--Submitting to Government Doesn’t Mean Surrendering Constitutional Rights

By Sarah A. Morgan Smith and Brian A. Smith for RealClearReligion COVID-19 and the public health measures in response to it have transformed the religious life of the United States , and not for the better .
Until recently , many religious authorities have acquiesced to government mandates without acknowledging their right to dissent ; still others have adopted an overly deferential view of the biblical command to be subject to governing authorities .
For their part , the laity have mostly remained silent where they should voice their concerns to their church leadership , expressing the time-honored American tendency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like hired specialists who will mind the matters of the church while the rest of the faithful go about their lives .
Christians owe respect to both their civil and ecclesiastical governments , but our deference to authority has gone too far .
Recent acts of protest and civil disobedience offer hope that at least some Christians understand the threat .
These have varied widely : for months , many churches have continued to operate in defiance of orders against it .
RELATED : VA Gov .
Northam Announces New Restrictions : You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Church For God To Hear Your Prayers More recently , Sing It Louder USA has helped organize events where groups could come together to celebrate Christmas in song in defiance of restrictions .
With increasing success , a number of churches and synagogues have launched lawsuits against the restrictions ( two major examples include Capitol Hill Baptist and Agudath Israel of America ) , and the Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn ’ s suit resulted in the Supreme Court issuing an injunction against Governor Andrew Cuomo ’ s restrictions on religious services .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with all state restrictions .
One of the most prominent and outspoken opponents of government restrictions on worship is John MacArthur ’ s Grace Community Church , which has remained open in spite of fines and threats of arrest .
In July , the church published “ Christ , not Caesar , Is Head of the Church , ” which offered a scriptural defense of their uncompromising refusal to “ acquiesce to a government-imposed moratorium on … weekly congregational worship or other regular corporate gatherings , ” alongside an equally stark defense of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – in effect , they claim that apart from matters crucial to defending the liberty of the church , citizens do not have rights to civil disobedience .
In framing their objections in these terms , MacArthur and many other critics still cede too much ground to the government – and they do so by not appreciating the difference in context between Imperial Rome and the modern day .
The New Testament addressed subjects , not citizens , and this is a critical difference that is easy to miss .
If John Calvin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modern Europe , could hold governments accountable to “ the general purpose ” of the law , how much more can modern Americans have a legitimate expectation that the laws made by our representatives will be “ good and just ” in truth , not merely cloaked with facile claims about the public health risk .
First of all , Christians ought to realize that Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2 don ’ t require obedience to governmental authority in all cases whatsoever .
Rather than counseling obedience to all “ powers that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Romans 13 is better understood as freeing individual believers to resist what Calvin described as powers that “ are not ordained ” – that is , powers that are usurping the type of authority over individual conscience that belongs to God alone .
This clearly applies in the most extreme instances of executive orders restricting religious activity in 2020 , such as bans on corporate song , severe limits on the size of gatherings , or outright bans of in-person worship .
Calvin ’ s exposition of the proper relationship to civil authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to observe laws , ” he wrote in “ Institutes of the Christian Religion ” 4.10.5 , “ looks to the general purpose , but does not consist in the things enjoined.
” In other words , while we have a obligation to obey government because it is ordained by God , because the purpose of ordinances is our good , our specific duty depends on whether the government over us is “ good and just.
” The line here is very fine – a respect for the rule of law is necessary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but a respect for rights is necessary if the law is to fulfill its purpose in any meaningful way .
Second , and perhaps even more importantly because it applies more widely , nothing about Romans 13 prevents Christians in America from protecting their constitutional rights .
In its original context , Romans describes the believers ’ relationship to an absolute imperial power , not to a constitutionally limited one .
Reformed Christians have long held that to neglect to defend one ’ s civil liberties is the equivalent of political suicide and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the example of “ Loyalty Vindicated , ” a 1698 pamphlet which condemns “ the damn ’ d doctrines of passive obedience and nonresistance , ” and those false preachers who had told the people “ that we ought patiently to hold our protestant throats to be cut by the command of a popish king.
” Writing to justify Jacob Leisler ’ s overthrow of the royal governor of the colony of New York almost a decade earlier , the author argues that the colonial government ’ s failure to protect its citizens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to protect their lives .
The rights of representation and assembly – of a voice in one ’ s own government – were not understood as merely civil rights in the 17th century , but rather as part of a suite of protections against arbitrary power .
And this author – like most other Reformed thinkers in the period – saw arbitrary power as naturally unjust , ungodly , and most importantly .
Resistance to such governments was not only justifiable , it was a necessary measure of self-defense .
Leisler ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as others similarly motivated in Long Island , Boston , and Virginia during the period were proactive in their response to threats to liberty .
They did not wait until the governments under which they lived suspended their worship services to recognize the threat of tyranny .
The governments they opposed claimed , of course , that their actions were necessary and proper , and in fact , not a danger to the people at all .
Likewise , the United States today is a signatory to the COVID-19 and Religious Minorities Pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fundamental right to gather for worship ” – yet in practice , policies adopted by the states in response to the pandemic have not only failed to religious and other liberties , they have often intentionally threatened them .
Governments around the globe have imposed tighter restrictions on worship services than other types of public gatherings , and have , in some cases , attempted to interfere with religious observances directly .
California ’ s guidelines , for example , state that places of worship “ must … discontinue indoor singing and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that such activities are often central to the actual exercise of any given religion .
Many of the experts religious and political authorities consult , like Italian professor Massimo Marchiori , argue not from the perspective of fundamental rights , but entirely from that of safety : “ It ’ s our humanity that is actually bringing us toward the virus … You have to take away a bit of humanity , to become a bit antisocial , to protect humanity.
” RELATED : Surgeon General : ‘ Need To Be More Intelligent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Just Forces People Inside When reasoning such as this influences decisionmakers , life itself becomes an idol and the foundation for liberty collapses .
It is , perhaps , excusable that secular leaders are swayed by such arguments – they have , as it were , no official stake in the notion of transcendence , or the idea that life is given to human beings not simply for existence but for the purpose of reflecting and glorifying the Creator .
Yet few religious leaders or lay persons have offered much in the way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ either .
Despite the few examples of dissent we note above , the vast majority of American worshippers from all backgrounds have attempted to accommodate their religious practice to the state orders .
A report released by an ecumenical group convened by the Chandler School of Theology is indicative of the ways many have even gone above and beyond the government ’ s guidelines , calling for the creative use of silence in worship , abbreviated preaching , and the abandonment of traditional liturgies .
Likewise , the Central Conference of American Rabbis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minyan in times of “ emergency ” ( in contradiction of their earlier rejection of such technological presence ) is a display of risk-aversion that suggests temporal rather than spiritual priorities .
There is another way .
Drawing on the heritage of Reformed resistance theory , American Christians can and should cast a wary eye on public policies imposed by executive fiat .
After months of “ emergency powers ” rhetoric , we have a right to expect that any new public health measures will be laws passed by duly elected representatives , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ executives as if we were subjects of imperial authority .
This would be an important first step towards reclaiming our rights – but even then , all policies rooted in the rejection of transcendence ought to be publicly resisted .
Both religious leaders and the laity ought to make an even stronger stand in favor not only of religious liberty but of human flourishing and undertake a renewed assessment of COVID ’ s real risks to our faith and freedom alongside the virus ’ threat to our health .
is the Director of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ University .
is the Managing Editor of Law & Liberty .
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Political Insider .

By Sarah A. Morgan Smith and Brian A. Smith for RealClearReligion
COVID-19 and the public health measures in response to it have transformed the religious life of the United States, and not for the better.
Until recently, many religious authorities have acquiesced to government mandates without acknowledging their right to dissent; still others have adopted an overly deferential view of the biblical command to be subject to governing authorities.
For their part, the laity have mostly remained silent where they should voice their concerns to their church leadership, expressing the time-honored American tendency to see pastors and elders as something like hired specialists who will mind the matters of the church while the rest of the faithful go about their lives.
Christians owe respect to both their civil and ecclesiastical governments, but our deference to authority has gone too far.
Recent acts of protest and civil disobedience offer hope that at least some Christians understand the threat.
These have varied widely: for months, many churches have continued to operate in defiance of orders against it.
RELATED: VA Gov. Northam Announces New Restrictions: You Don’t Have To Sit In Church For God To Hear Your Prayers
More recently, Sing It Louder USA has helped organize events where groups could come together to celebrate Christmas in song in defiance of restrictions.
With increasing success, a number of churches and synagogues have launched lawsuits against the restrictions (two major examples include Capitol Hill Baptist and Agudath Israel of America), and the Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn’s suit resulted in the Supreme Court issuing an injunction against Governor Andrew Cuomo’s restrictions on religious services.
But the majority of churches remain dutifully compliant with all state restrictions.
One of the most prominent and outspoken opponents of government restrictions on worship is John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church, which has remained open in spite of fines and threats of arrest.
In July, the church published “Christ, not Caesar, Is Head of the Church,” which offered a scriptural defense of their uncompromising refusal to “acquiesce to a government-imposed moratorium on … weekly congregational worship or other regular corporate gatherings,” alongside an equally stark defense of deference to governing authorities in all other matters – in effect, they claim that apart from matters crucial to defending the liberty of the church, citizens do not have any rights to civil disobedience.
In framing their objections in these terms, MacArthur and many other critics still cede too much ground to the government – and they do so by not appreciating the difference in context between Imperial Rome and the modern day.
The New Testament addressed subjects, not citizens, and this is a critical difference that is easy to miss.
RELATED: Group Of Black Ministers Slams Georgia Democrat Raphael Warnock For Supporting Abortion
If John Calvin, writing in the context of early modern Europe, could hold governments accountable to “the general purpose” of the law, how much more can modern Americans have a legitimate expectation that the laws made by our representatives will be “good and just” in truth, not merely cloaked with facile claims about the public health risk.
First of all, Christians ought to realize that Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2 don’t require obedience to governmental authority in all cases whatsoever.
Rather than counseling obedience to all “powers that be,” many Reformers argued that Romans 13 is better understood as freeing individual believers to resist what Calvin described as powers that “are not ordained” – that is, powers that are usurping the type of authority over individual conscience that belongs to God alone.
This clearly applies in the most extreme instances of executive orders restricting religious activity in 2020, such as bans on corporate song, severe limits on the size of gatherings, or outright bans of in-person worship.
RELATED: Democrat Tulsi Gabbard Praises Supreme Court Ruling Slapping Down Cuomo’s Religious Gatherings Edict
Calvin’s exposition of the proper relationship to civil authority goes even further: “all obligation to observe laws,” he wrote in “Institutes of the Christian Religion” 4.10.5, “looks to the general purpose, but does not consist in the things enjoined.”
In other words, while we have a general obligation to obey government because it is ordained by God, because the purpose of ordinances is our good, our specific duty depends on whether the government over us is “good and just.”
The line here is very fine – a respect for the rule of law is necessary if rights are to be protected, but a respect for rights is necessary if the law is to fulfill its purpose in any meaningful way.
Second, and perhaps even more importantly because it applies more widely, nothing about Romans 13 prevents Christians in America from protecting their constitutional rights.
In its original context, Romans describes the believers’ relationship to an absolute imperial power, not to a constitutionally limited one.
Reformed Christians have long held that to neglect to defend one’s civil liberties is the equivalent of political suicide and just as verboten to believers.
Consider the example of “Loyalty Vindicated,” a 1698 pamphlet which condemns “the damn’d doctrines of passive obedience and nonresistance,” and those false preachers who had told the people “that we ought patiently to hold our protestant throats to be cut by the command of a popish king.”
Writing to justify Jacob Leisler’s overthrow of the royal governor of the colony of New York almost a decade earlier, the author argues that the colonial government’s failure to protect its citizens’ liberties was tantamount to a failure to protect their lives.
RELATED: A Quiet Totalitarian Revolution
The rights of representation and assembly – of a voice in one’s own government – were not understood as merely civil rights in the 17th century, but rather as part of a suite of protections against arbitrary power.
And this author – like most other Reformed thinkers in the period – saw arbitrary power as naturally unjust, ungodly, and most importantly unordained.
Resistance to such governments was not only justifiable, it was a necessary measure of self-defense.
Leisler’s group in New York, as well as others similarly motivated in Long Island, Boston, and Virginia during the period were proactive in their response to threats to liberty.
They did not wait until the governments under which they lived suspended their worship services to recognize the threat of tyranny.
The governments they opposed claimed, of course, that their actions were necessary and proper, and in fact, not a danger to the people at all.
Likewise, the United States today is a signatory to the COVID-19 and Religious Minorities Pandemic Statement and official CDC guidelines recognize “a fundamental right to gather for worship” – yet in practice, policies adopted by the states in response to the pandemic have not only failed to protect religious and other liberties, they have often intentionally threatened them.
Governments around the globe have imposed tighter restrictions on worship services than other types of public gatherings, and have, in some cases, attempted to interfere with religious observances directly.
California’s guidelines, for example, state that places of worship “must … discontinue indoor singing and chanting activities,” despite the fact that such activities are often central to the actual exercise of any given religion.
Many of the experts religious and political authorities consult, like Italian professor Massimo Marchiori, argue not from the perspective of fundamental rights, but entirely from that of safety: “It’s our humanity that is actually bringing us toward the virus … You have to take away a bit of humanity, to become a bit antisocial, to protect humanity.”
RELATED: Surgeon General: ‘Need To Be More Intelligent’ About Closures, Banning Outdoor Gatherings Just Forces People Inside
When reasoning such as this influences decisionmakers, life itself becomes an idol and the foundation for liberty collapses.
It is, perhaps, excusable that secular leaders are swayed by such arguments – they have, as it were, no official stake in the notion of transcendence, or the idea that life is given to human beings not simply for existence but for the purpose of reflecting and glorifying the Creator.
Yet few religious leaders or lay persons have offered much in the way of dissent from this line of thought either.
Despite the few examples of dissent we note above, the vast majority of American worshippers from all backgrounds have attempted to accommodate their religious practice to the state orders.
A report released by an ecumenical group convened by the Chandler School of Theology is indicative of the ways many have even gone above and beyond the government’s guidelines, calling for the creative use of silence in worship, abbreviated preaching, and the abandonment of traditional liturgies.
Likewise, the Central Conference of American Rabbis’ statement on the acceptability of virtual minyan in times of “emergency” (in contradiction of their earlier rejection of such technological presence) is a display of risk-aversion that suggests temporal rather than spiritual priorities.
There is another way. Drawing on the heritage of Reformed resistance theory, American Christians can and should cast a wary eye on public policies imposed by executive fiat.
RELATED: Church Creates ‘Black Lives Matter’ Nativity Scene For Christmas
After months of “emergency powers” rhetoric, we have a right to expect that any new public health measures will be laws passed by duly elected representatives, and not simply imposed by experts and executives as if we were subjects of imperial authority.
This would be an important first step towards reclaiming our rights – but even then, all policies rooted in the rejection of transcendence ought to be publicly resisted.
Both religious leaders and the laity ought to make an even stronger stand in favor not only of religious liberty but of human flourishing and undertake a renewed assessment of COVID’s real risks to our faith and freedom alongside the virus’ threat to our health.
Syndicated with permission from RealClearWire.
Sarah A. Morgan Smith is the Director of Faculty at the Ashbrook Center at Ashland University.
Brian A. Smith is the Managing Editor of Law & Liberty.
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Political Insider.


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-28--CNN’s Jim Acosta Whines Trump Supporters Took Up President’s ‘Hostility’ Towards Media – ‘Made Us Fe

CNN’s Jim Acosta Whines Trump Supporters Took Up President’s ‘Hostility’ Towards Media – ‘Made Us Feel Endangered’

CNN reporter Jim Acosta spoke out on Sunday to whine about the way Donald Trump has treated the media during his presidency , saying that supporters of the president have made reporters “ feel endangered ” with “ death threats ” after absorbing his “ hostility ” for the media .
Acosta Whines About Trump ’ s Treatment Of The Media “ There were Trump supporters all over the country absorbing this hostility that the president was directing at the press and then lashing out at us , as well , and in ways that made us feel endangered , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I am not the only reporter who covered this White House who has had death threats .
There have been a number of us who have experienced death threats , ” he added .
“ We can ’ t be at a place in this country , Brian , where political reporters , White House correspondents , and so on need bodyguards to go cover political campaigns and so on.
” “ And so , it ’ s more than just pulling a press pass or yelling at a reporter at a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we heard President Trump do … from time to time , ” Acosta said .
“ It is just a pervasive hostility towards the president — anti-democratic hostility towards the press that I just hope we never see the likes of ever again , ” he continued .
“ It is just so damaging and destructive for our democracy.
” Related : Kayleigh McEnany Walks Away as Jim Acosta Blasts Her For ‘ Disinformation ’ Acosta has effectively made a career for himself by relentlessly bashing President Trump and anyone who supports him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump of shamelessly chasing after a “ fever dream ” that he could still overturn the results of the presidential election .
“ One would think if he ’ s thinking about running in 2024 that he would want to go out there and lead the charge on the coronavirus pandemic , lead the charge in challenging Vladimir Putin on this cybersecurity hack , ” Acosta said .
“ He ’ s not doing it .
I suspect , John because he ’ s wrapped up in grief with this election and chasing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can still over overturn the election results when it ’ s just not going to happen , ” he added .
Related : Jim Acosta Accuses Trump Of Chasing After ‘ Fever Dream ’ That He Can Overturn Election Results Ironically , Acosta should be the one hoping that Trump overturns the election results more than anyone because once this president is gone , this CNN reporter will no longer be relevant in any way .
This piece was written by James Samson on December 28 , 2020 .
It originally appeared in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Read more at LifeZette : Trump Livid That Melania Hasn ’ t Been On Any Magazine Covers While Michelle Obama Was On 12 Ted Nugent Eviscerates Black Lives Matter – Rips Protests As ‘ Soulless ’ And ‘ Stupid ’ Maxine Waters Outrageously Claims Trump Has Been ‘ Compromised ’ By Putin – Calls On Us To ‘ Rely On Biden ’ To Take On Russia And China The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Political Insider .

CNN reporter Jim Acosta spoke out on Sunday to whine about the way Donald Trump has treated the media during his presidency, saying that supporters of the president have made reporters “feel endangered” with “death threats” after absorbing his “hostility” for the media.
Acosta Whines About Trump’s Treatment Of The Media
“There were Trump supporters all over the country absorbing this hostility that the president was directing at the press and then lashing out at us, as well, and in ways that made us feel endangered,” Acosta lamented.
“You know, I am not the only reporter who covered this White House who has had death threats. There have been a number of us who have experienced death threats,” he added. “We can’t be at a place in this country, Brian, where political reporters, White House correspondents, and so on need bodyguards to go cover political campaigns and so on.”
“And so, it’s more than just pulling a press pass or yelling at a reporter at a press conference or calling somebody names like we heard President Trump do … from time to time,” Acosta said.
“It is just a pervasive hostility towards the president — anti-democratic hostility towards the press that I just hope we never see the likes of ever again,” he continued. “It is just so damaging and destructive for our democracy.”
Related: Kayleigh McEnany Walks Away as Jim Acosta Blasts Her For ‘Disinformation’
Acosta Loves Bashing Trump And His Supporters
Acosta has effectively made a career for himself by relentlessly bashing President Trump and anyone who supports him. Just last week, he accused Trump of shamelessly chasing after a “fever dream” that he could still overturn the results of the presidential election.
“One would think if he’s thinking about running in 2024 that he would want to go out there and lead the charge on the coronavirus pandemic, lead the charge in challenging Vladimir Putin on this cybersecurity hack,” Acosta said.
“He’s not doing it. I suspect, John because he’s wrapped up in grief with this election and chasing after this fever dream that he somehow can still over overturn the election results when it’s just not going to happen,” he added.
Related: Jim Acosta Accuses Trump Of Chasing After ‘Fever Dream’ That He Can Overturn Election Results
Ironically, Acosta should be the one hoping that Trump overturns the election results more than anyone because once this president is gone, this CNN reporter will no longer be relevant in any way.
This piece was written by James Samson on December 28, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.
Read more at LifeZette:
Trump Livid That Melania Hasn’t Been On Any Magazine Covers While Michelle Obama Was On 12
Ted Nugent Eviscerates Black Lives Matter – Rips Protests As ‘Soulless’ And ‘Stupid’
Maxine Waters Outrageously Claims Trump Has Been ‘Compromised’ By Putin – Calls On Us To ‘Rely On Biden’ To Take On Russia And China
Read this Next on ThePoliticalInsider.com Will AOC Take On Chuck Schumer?
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Political Insider.


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-28--Will AOC Take On Chuck Schumer?

Will AOC Take On Chuck Schumer?

Will Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , Democrat of New York , take on Senator Chuck Schumer , Senate Minority Leader and Democrat of New York , in the 2022 Democrat Senate primary in New York state ?
Probably not .
But enough Democrats are worried about it in New York that some are urging her not to do it .
Which means she ’ s a threat .
Which could also mean she recognizes the backhanded compliment and is encouraged to run by it .
For Republicans it means a whole lot of schadenfreude .
Even the party boss is telling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hack doth protest too much .
“ That ’ s a warning New York ’ s Democratic party boss has for the sophomore congresswoman , who is rumored to be mulling a primary challenge to US Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer .
‘ I think it would be a primary driven by ambition more than by need , ’ Jay Jacobs told The New York Post .
‘ Chuck Schumer has been a progressive force in the state for decades , ’ added Jacobs , the chairman of the state Democratic committee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ admires her and supports her , and they ’ re in her community , and I think it would be a loss for them if she were to do that .
And he would beat her ’ , he said .
‘ We ’ ve never met .
I would look forward to doing that , ’ Jacobs said of AOC .
“ I am open to that at any time.
’ “ He ’ s never met a party star in his home state and in the national sense ?
That speaks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ death of her .
Asked about challenging Schumer , AOC responded “ I don ’ t know , ” according to Politico .
In October , Ocasio-Cortez told Vanity Fair , “ I don ’ t know if I ’ m really going to be staying in the House forever , or if I do stay in the House , what that would look like .
I don ’ t see myself really staying where I ’ m at for the rest of my life…I don ’ t want to aspire to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of that title or just for the sake of having a different or higher position .
I truly make an assessment to see if I can be more effective.
” Why all the kerfuffle ?
Because AOC recently said this .
“ Rep .
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez argued in a new interview that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer should no longer lead Democrats in Congress , and complained that the party had failed at grooming a ‘ next generation ’ of younger lawmakers to succeed them .
‘ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Democratic Party , ’ Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) told The Intercept in an interview published Wednesday .
She went on to say , ‘ The hesitancy that I have is that I want to make sure that if we ’ re pointing people in a direction , that we have a plan .
And my concern — and this I acknowledge as a failing , as something that we need to sort out — is that there isn ’ t a plan .
How do we fill that vacuum ?
Because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are so many nefarious forces at play to fill that vacuum with something even worse.
” President Trump has even commented on a possible Ocasio-Cortez-Schumer battle , saying AOC would “ kick his ass , ” in a primary .
Read Next : AOC Slams Joe Biden , Complains Dem Party Has No Standards : ‘ They ’ ll Take Anybody ’ This piece was written by David Kamioner on December 28 , 2020 .
It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission .
Read more at LifeZette : Trump Livid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Any Magazine Covers While Michelle Obama Was On 12 Maxine Waters Outrageously Claims Trump Has Been ‘ Compromised ’ By Putin – Calls On Us To ‘ Rely On Biden ’ To Take On Russia And China Ted Nugent Eviscerates Black Lives Matter – Rips Protests As ‘ Soulless ’ And ‘ Stupid ’ The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Political Insider .

Will Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, take on Senator Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader and Democrat of New York, in the 2022 Democrat Senate primary in New York state? Probably not. But enough Democrats are worried about it in New York that some are urging her not to do it. Which means she’s a threat.
Which could also mean she recognizes the backhanded compliment and is encouraged to run by it. For Republicans it means a whole lot of schadenfreude. Even the party boss is telling her not to jump in. Methinks the hack doth protest too much.
Top NY Democrat Issues Warning To AOC
FNC:
“That’s a warning New York’s Democratic party boss has for the sophomore congresswoman, who is rumored to be mulling a primary challenge to US Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer. ‘I think it would be a primary driven by ambition more than by need,’ Jay Jacobs told The New York Post. ‘Chuck Schumer has been a progressive force in the state for decades,’ added Jacobs, the chairman of the state Democratic committee. ‘She has a constituency that admires her and supports her, and they’re in her community, and I think it would be a loss for them if she were to do that. And he would beat her’, he said. ‘We’ve never met. I would look forward to doing that,’ Jacobs said of AOC. “I am open to that at any time.’ “
He’s never met a party star in his home state and in the national sense? That speaks volumes. He’s scared to death of her.
Related: AOC Admits Her Supporters Don’t Like Biden
“I think it would be a primary driven by ambition more than by need.” The head of #NewYork’s Democratic Party said Rep. @AOC should not challenge @SenSchumer, saying that Schumer would “absolutely” defeat her. https://t.co/5TnGlE1KvO — The Epoch Times (@EpochTimes) December 27, 2020
Will AOC Challenge Schumer?
Asked about challenging Schumer, AOC responded “I don’t know,” according to Politico.
In October, Ocasio-Cortez told Vanity Fair, “I don’t know if I’m really going to be staying in the House forever, or if I do stay in the House, what that would look like. I don’t see myself really staying where I’m at for the rest of my life…I don’t want to aspire to a quote-unquote higher position just for the sake of that title or just for the sake of having a different or higher position. I truly make an assessment to see if I can be more effective.”
Why all the kerfuffle? Because AOC recently said this.
Politico:
“Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez argued in a new interview that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer should no longer lead Democrats in Congress, and complained that the party had failed at grooming a ‘next generation’ of younger lawmakers to succeed them. ‘I do think that we need new leadership in the Democratic Party,’ Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told The Intercept in an interview published Wednesday. She went on to say, ‘The hesitancy that I have is that I want to make sure that if we’re pointing people in a direction, that we have a plan. And my concern — and this I acknowledge as a failing, as something that we need to sort out — is that there isn’t a plan. How do we fill that vacuum? Because if you create that vacuum, there are so many nefarious forces at play to fill that vacuum with something even worse.”
President Trump has even commented on a possible Ocasio-Cortez-Schumer battle, saying AOC would “kick his ass,” in a primary.
Read Next: AOC Slams Joe Biden, Complains Dem Party Has No Standards: ‘They’ll Take Anybody’
This piece was written by David Kamioner on December 28, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.
Read more at LifeZette:
Trump Livid That Melania Hasn’t Been On Any Magazine Covers While Michelle Obama Was On 12
Maxine Waters Outrageously Claims Trump Has Been ‘Compromised’ By Putin – Calls On Us To ‘Rely On Biden’ To Take On Russia And China
Ted Nugent Eviscerates Black Lives Matter – Rips Protests As ‘Soulless’ And ‘Stupid’
Read this Next on ThePoliticalInsider.com Nancy Pelosi: Georgia Senate Victories Would Give Democrats Voting Majority
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Political Insider.


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-28--Nancy Pelosi: Georgia Senate Victories Would Give Democrats Voting Majority

Pelosi made her comments during a virtual appearance for the Sojourner Truth Project on December 22 .
You can watch the interview below .
RELATED : Youngest Member Of Congress Madison Cawthorn Says He Will Contest Electoral College Votes On January 6th Via Zoom , Pelosi discussed how Georgia Senate Democrat candidates Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock winning would give Democrats significant power , comparing it to Democrats essentially having 60 votes in the Senate .
“ One more thing , because you know how I ’ m about numbers , when we win these two seats , plus Kamala @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll be like getting 60 votes because once we have even the simple majority , we can vote for reconciliation , which means that you only need 51 votes to pass certain legislation.
” Typically , the Senate needs 60 votes to pass legislation , but some legislation can pass with a simple majority through a process known as budget reconciliation .
Pelosi said that an Ossoff and Warnock win on January 5 would make the vice president-elect , Sen. Kamala Harris , the Senate ’ s tie-breaking vote .
This means congressional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far-left legislation through Congress with only a simple majority .
Similarly , Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have pointed out that gaining control of the Senate majority through a Georgia win would allow Democrats to pursue a radical left agenda .
“ Now we take Georgia , then we change America , ” Schumer has said .
Republican David Perdue used that line from Schumer as the basis for an ad : RELATED : Trump Livid That Melania Hasn ’ t Been On Any Magazine Covers While Michelle Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also highlights perhaps what is Democrats ’ true wish .
In the ad , AOC says that a Georgia win is a must for Democrats because they need “ to make sure that we don ’ t have a Republican Senate majority , that we win these races in Georgia , that we secure a Democratic Senate majority so that we don ’ t have to negotiate.
” Far-left Democrats want zero compromise in pushing their agenda .
A Democrat majority with help ensure that .

Pelosi made her comments during a virtual appearance for the Sojourner Truth Project on December 22.
You can watch the interview below.
RELATED: Youngest Member Of Congress Madison Cawthorn Says He Will Contest Electoral College Votes On January 6th
Pelosi: Georgia Wins Give Democrats Supermajority Power
Via Zoom, Pelosi discussed how Georgia Senate Democrat candidates Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock winning would give Democrats significant power, comparing it to Democrats essentially having 60 votes in the Senate.
Pelosi said:
“One more thing, because you know how I’m about numbers, when we win these two seats, plus Kamala Harris breaking the tie, it’ll be like getting 60 votes because once we have even the simple majority, we can vote for reconciliation, which means that you only need 51 votes to pass certain legislation.”
Raphael Warnock dodges questions about video of ex-wife accusing him of assault https://t.co/HigtSbfgTa — Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) December 27, 2020
;
Typically, the Senate needs 60 votes to pass legislation, but some legislation can pass with a simple majority through a process known as budget reconciliation.
Pelosi said that an Ossoff and Warnock win on January 5 would make the vice president-elect, Sen. Kamala Harris, the Senate’s tie-breaking vote.
This means congressional Democrats would potentially be able to pass far-left legislation through Congress with only a simple majority.
Similarly, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have pointed out that gaining control of the Senate majority through a Georgia win would allow Democrats to pursue a radical left agenda.
“Now we take Georgia, then we change America,” Schumer has said.
Republican David Perdue used that line from Schumer as the basis for an ad:
RELATED: Trump Livid That Melania Hasn’t Been On Any Magazine Covers While Michelle Obama Was On 12
AOC: Georgia Win A Must For Democrats
Perdue’s ad also highlights perhaps what is Democrats’ true wish.
In the ad, AOC says that a Georgia win is a must for Democrats because they need “to make sure that we don’t have a Republican Senate majority, that we win these races in Georgia, that we secure a Democratic Senate majority so that we don’t have to negotiate.”
Far-left Democrats want zero compromise in pushing their agenda. A Democrat majority with help ensure that.
Watch Pelosi’s interview here:


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-28--Kayleigh McEnany Rips ‘Lazy’ Jake Tapper After CNN Anchor Claims He Won’t Book Her Because She ‘Lies

Kayleigh McEnany Rips ‘Lazy’ Jake Tapper After CNN Anchor Claims He Won’t Book Her Because She ‘Lies All The Time’

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany blasted Jake Tapper after the CNN anchor claimed he refuses to have her on his show because she “ lies all the time.
” McEnany ’ s comments were prompted by a segment in which Tapper found a safe space with his intellectually stunted colleague , Brian Stelter , on the show “ Reliable Sources , ” a misnomer if ever there was one .
Stelter being the friendly purveyor of false information in a network for false information allowed the opportunity for Tapper to open up .
There “ were some people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t put them on air , ” the CNN anchor said , naming particularly McEnany and Trump campaign adviser Jason Miller .
“ These are people that tell lies the way that most people breathe , ” Tapper claimed .
RELATED : Biden Tells Reporter He Still Believes Hunter Scandal is ‘ Russian Misinformation ’ Jake Tapper went on to claim that Kayleigh McEnany “ tells lies all the time.
” “ She can ’ t acknowledge reality , ” Tapper , who seemingly can ’ t acknowledge the reality that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ honesty and ethics , on a network that excels in lies , said .
“ I ’ m just not going to put somebody like that on air.
” McEnany took to Twitter to flatten Jacob , posting a video segment of Stelter and Tapper ’ s conversation and labeling it “ is lazy enough to participate by lobbing baseless personal attacks , with ZERO evidence , ” she added before calling out his network for peddling years ’ worth of a Russia collusion hoax to the American people .
“ Jake ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I do not leak .
I do not lie .
But I DO call out the lies of the media ( i.e .
CNN Russia collusion hoax ! )
” Senior legal adviser to the President ’ s campaign , Jenna Ellis , responded to McEnany ’ s tweet by mocking both Stelter and Tapper .
“ ( There ’ s ) nothing more than two pathetic figures trying to convince themselves they ’ re relevant , ” tweeted Ellis .
The reality is , Tapper and CNN avoid women like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ run circles around the fake news narratives they ’ re trying to push out on behalf of the DNC .
McEnany has done it time and again .
This past spring she took down CNN anchor Chris Cuomo after he mocked President Donald Trump for taking hydroxychloroquine as a preventative measure against coronavirus .
It turned out Cuomo actually took a form of the drug during his own treatment for the virus .
And she obliterated the media when they tried to call her out for downplaying coronavirus concerns early on in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of peddling misinformation regarding COVID .
CNN actually declared that “ racist assaults and ignorant attacks against Asians ” were spreading faster than the pandemic .
Here ’ s a video of Anderson Cooper downplaying the severity of the coronavirus … Will Tapper be leaving the network now that he knows his fellow journalists “ lie the way that most people breathe ” ?
It should also be noted that Tapper was too much of a coward to call out Senator Bernie Sanders for telling a blatant lie during a recent interview with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nobody I know who ’ s running for office talks about defunding the police , ” Sanders lied .
“ What we talk about is making police officers accountable .
That is not defund the police.
” Many Democrats made it clear they were talking about defunding the police , and since then , every member of the ‘ Squad ’ has made it quite clear that they are pushing the idea .
Is Tapper going to keep Sanders off the air because he “ lies all the time ” ?
Of course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a left-wing propagandist working for a B-list , DNC-approved ‘ fake news ’ network .

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany blasted Jake Tapper after the CNN anchor claimed he refuses to have her on his show because she “lies all the time.”
McEnany’s comments were prompted by a segment in which Tapper found a safe space with his intellectually stunted colleague, Brian Stelter, on the show “Reliable Sources,” a misnomer if ever there was one.
Stelter being the friendly purveyor of false information in a network known for false information allowed the opportunity for Tapper to open up.
There “were some people who were just so mendacious I just wouldn’t put them on air,” the CNN anchor said, naming particularly McEnany and Trump campaign adviser Jason Miller.
“These are people that tell lies the way that most people breathe,” Tapper claimed.
.@jaketapper tells @brianstelter why he does not have @kayleighmcenany on his show: She tells “lies the way that, you know, most people breathe. There was no value in that…She can’t acknowledge reality. So I am just not going to put somebody like that on air.” pic.twitter.com/c4kFvRFPYo — Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) December 27, 2020
RELATED: Biden Tells Reporter He Still Believes Hunter Scandal is ‘Russian Misinformation’
Kayleigh McEnany Responds To CNN’s Jake Tapper
Jake Tapper went on to claim that Kayleigh McEnany “tells lies all the time.”
“She can’t acknowledge reality,” Tapper, who seemingly can’t acknowledge the reality that he works in a field known for lacking honesty and ethics, on a network that excels in lies, said.
“I’m just not going to put somebody like that on air.”
McEnany took to Twitter to flatten Jacob, posting a video segment of Stelter and Tapper’s conversation and labeling it “a therapy session for a broken network.”
“[Tapper] is lazy enough to participate by lobbing baseless personal attacks, with ZERO evidence,” she added before calling out his network for peddling years’ worth of a Russia collusion hoax to the American people.
“Jake’s real problem,” she added. “I do not leak. I do not lie. But I DO call out the lies of the media (i.e. CNN Russia collusion hoax!)”
This is a therapy session for a broken network, and @jaketapper is lazy enough to participate by lobbing baseless personal attacks, with ZERO evidence. Jake’s real problem: I do not leak. I do not lie. But I DO call out the lies of the media (i.e. CNN Russia collusion hoax!) https://t.co/Gz0RWbwhJZ — Kayleigh McEnany (@kayleighmcenany) December 27, 2020
RELATED: White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany Just Buried Hypocrite Chris Cuomo
Tapper Is A Coward
Senior legal adviser to the President’s campaign, Jenna Ellis, responded to McEnany’s tweet by mocking both Stelter and Tapper.
“(There’s) nothing more than two pathetic figures trying to convince themselves they’re relevant,” tweeted Ellis.
The reality is, Tapper and CNN avoid women like McEnany and Ellis because they’d run circles around the fake news narratives they’re trying to push out on behalf of the DNC.
McEnany has done it time and again.
This past spring she took down CNN anchor Chris Cuomo after he mocked President Donald Trump for taking hydroxychloroquine as a preventative measure against coronavirus.
It turned out Cuomo actually took a form of the drug during his own treatment for the virus.
This takedown of Chris Cuomo is one for the record books:@PressSec exposes that Cuomo is a complete hypocrite for going after Trump’s use of hydroxychloroquine when Cuomo himself took a LESS SAFE version of the drug after he tested positive for COVID-19. 🔥🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/PHVjP3SR0A — Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) May 20, 2020
Kayleigh McEnany has repeatedly turned Jake Tapper’s colleague Jim Acosta into a journalistic punching bag.
Kayleigh McEnany smokes Jim Acosta: “You have to let me answer your question, Jim. This isn’t a cable news segment. This is the White House podium.” pic.twitter.com/z2chinIqKM — August Takala (@AugustTakala) June 19, 2020
And she obliterated the media when they tried to call her out for downplaying coronavirus concerns early on in the pandemic.
This is amazing🔥🔥🔥. Watch WH Press Sec @kayleighmcenany torch fake news media outlets on their BS propaganda and fake news “reporting.” pic.twitter.com/TTWQIZswQq — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) May 6, 2020
CNN was also quite guilty of peddling misinformation regarding COVID.
CNN actually declared that “racist assaults and ignorant attacks against Asians” were spreading faster than the pandemic.
Here’s a video of Anderson Cooper downplaying the severity of the coronavirus …
Will Tapper be leaving the network now that he knows his fellow journalists “lie the way that most people breathe”?
It should also be noted that Tapper was too much of a coward to call out Senator Bernie Sanders for telling a blatant lie during a recent interview with him about defunding the police.
“Nobody I know who’s running for office talks about defunding the police,” Sanders lied. “What we talk about is making police officers accountable. That is not defund the police.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders: “Nobody I know who’s running for office talks about defunding the police — what we talk about is making police officers accountable.” pic.twitter.com/b80r0Bys9n — The Hill (@thehill) November 15, 2020
Many Democrats made it clear they were talking about defunding the police, and since then, every member of the ‘Squad’ has made it quite clear that they are indeed pushing the idea.
Is Tapper going to keep Sanders off the air because he “lies all the time”?
Of course not, Tapper is little more than a left-wing propagandist working for a B-list, DNC-approved ‘fake news’ network.


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-28--New York Post Turns On Trump – Demands He End ‘Dark Charade’ Of Challenging The Election

The New York Post editorial board over the weekend published a scathing op-ed demanding that President Trump “ give it up ” when it comes to trying to challenging the 2020 election .
The board went on to call challenges to the integrity of the election a “ dark charade ” and alleged any efforts to overturn certification of the electoral college vote an “ undemocratic coup.
” In reality , is an actual example of an ‘ undemocratic coup , ’ an irony seemingly lost on the Post ’ s board members .
“ You have tweeted that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ’ they can overturn the results and give you four more years in office , ” the Post writes .
“ In other words , you ’ re cheering for an undemocratic coup.
” “ We understand , Mr. President , that you ’ re angry that you lost .
But to continue down this road is ruinous , ” they added .
The New York Post endorsed President Trump both in 2016 and 2020 .
The New York Post is referencing efforts by President Trump and other Republicans to challenge the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day that a joint session of Congress will be called and lawmakers officially certify the Electoral College votes .
Trump last week hosted a group of House Republicans who have promised to challenge the election results in Congress .
Politico revealed that the group “ strategized over a last-ditch effort to overturn the election results next month , according to several members who attended the meeting.
” The group consisted of roughly a dozen lawmakers regarded as ‘ Trump loyalists.
’ The Post accuses Trump of being “ obsessed ” with that day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigate the election .
But let ’ s be clear : Those efforts have found nothing , ” they added .
RELATED : Outgoing AG Bill Barr : No Need For Special Counsel To Investigate Hunter Biden Or Election Fraud The New York Post also took shots at lawyer Sidney Powell and Gen. Mike Flynn .
“ Sidney Powell is a crazy person , ” they suggested .
“ Michael Flynn suggesting martial law is tantamount to treason .
It is shameful.
” Flynn was notably in attendance at the meeting of House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the President ) could order the , within the swing states , if he wanted to , he could take military capabilities , and he could place those in states and basically rerun an election in each of those states , ” the General said in an appearance on NewsMax .
The Post go on to suggest ways in which President Trump could keep his legacy intact – focusing on the Georgia runoffs .
“ If Republicans David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler win , they will prevent Biden from rolling back what you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ A Republican Senate can pressure Biden against returning to the old , failed Iran deal , can stop him from throwing open our southern border , will prevent him from packing the Supreme Court.
” The Post seems incapable of understanding the concept of multi-tasking .
One try to boot Republicans in Georgia while also challenging election results due to perceived voter fraud .
Only being able to focus on one thing at a time is a tactic of left-wing media .
Do better , New York Post .

The New York Post editorial board over the weekend published a scathing op-ed demanding that President Trump “give it up” when it comes to trying to challenging the 2020 election.
The board went on to call challenges to the integrity of the election a “dark charade” and alleged any efforts to overturn certification of the electoral college vote an “undemocratic coup.”
In reality, voter fraud is an actual example of an ‘undemocratic coup,’ an irony seemingly lost on the Post’s board members.
“You have tweeted that, as long as Republicans have ‘courage,’ they can overturn the results and give you four more years in office,” the Post writes. “In other words, you’re cheering for an undemocratic coup.”
“We understand, Mr. President, that you’re angry that you lost. But to continue down this road is ruinous,” they added.
The New York Post endorsed President Trump both in 2016 and 2020.
NY Post Editorial Board: https://t.co/Ljq6eQSC3q — Joe Concha (@JoeConchaTV) December 28, 2020
RELATED: President Trump Hosts Meeting With House Republicans To Discuss Challenging Election
The New York Post Blasts Trump
The New York Post is referencing efforts by President Trump and other Republicans to challenge the election results on January 6th – the day that a joint session of Congress will be called and lawmakers officially certify the Electoral College votes.
Trump last week hosted a group of House Republicans who have promised to challenge the election results in Congress.
Politico revealed that the group “strategized over a last-ditch effort to overturn the election results next month, according to several members who attended the meeting.”
The group consisted of roughly a dozen lawmakers regarded as ‘Trump loyalists.’
The Post accuses Trump of being “obsessed” with that day.
“You had every right to investigate the election. But let’s be clear: Those efforts have found nothing,” they added.
Big meeting today with @realDonaldTrump, @VP, the President’s legal team, @freedomcaucus and other Members of Congress. I will lead an objection to Georgia’s electors on Jan 6. The courts refuse to hear the President’s legal case. We’re going to make sure the People can! — Rep. Jody Hice (@CongressmanHice) December 22, 2020
RELATED: Outgoing AG Bill Barr: No Need For Special Counsel To Investigate Hunter Biden Or Election Fraud
The Post Attacks Sidney Powell And Mike Flynn
The New York Post also took shots at lawyer Sidney Powell and Gen. Mike Flynn.
“Sidney Powell is a crazy person,” they suggested. “Michael Flynn suggesting martial law is tantamount to treason. It is shameful.”
Flynn was notably in attendance at the meeting of House Republicans last week.
“He (the President) could order the, within the swing states, if he wanted to, he could take military capabilities, and he could place those in states and basically rerun an election in each of those states,” the General said in an appearance on NewsMax.
Here’s Michael Flynn on Newsmax saying that Trump could order “military capabilities” to swing states and “rerun an election in each of those states.” “People out there talk about martial law like it’s something that we’ve never done. Martial law has been instituted 64 times.” pic.twitter.com/KNmiAGGiPF — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 18, 2020
The Post did go on to suggest ways in which President Trump could keep his legacy intact – focusing on the Georgia runoffs.
“If Republicans David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler win, they will prevent Biden from rolling back what you have accomplished,” they write.
“A Republican Senate can pressure Biden against returning to the old, failed Iran deal, can stop him from throwing open our southern border, will prevent him from packing the Supreme Court.”
The Post seems incapable of understanding the concept of multi-tasking. One can try to boot Republicans in Georgia while also challenging election results due to perceived voter fraud.
Only being able to focus on one thing at a time is a tactic of left-wing media. Do better, New York Post.


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-28--GOP Sen. Pat Toomey: Trump Should Accept Election Outcome, No ‘Credible Evidence’ Of Fraud

On Sunday , Republican Senator Pat Toomey said that President Donald Trump should accept the outcome of the 2020 election .
The GOP senator made his comments during an interview on “ Fox News Sunday.
” RELATED : Barr Praises Trump In Resignation Letter – Says It Was A ‘ Great Honor ’ To Serve As AG When asked about President Trump and his attitude about the election , Toomey said , “ I think the president should accept the outcome of the election.
” “ He had every right to challenge these votes , he had every right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continued .
“ He has done all of those things in my state of Pennsylvania , ” the senator added .
“ He ’ s drawn conservative Republican judges who ’ ve dismissed these cases for a lack of any credible evidence.
” Toomey Believes Trump Went Too Far With Pardons Toomey defended President Trump ’ s pardon of former national security adviser Michael Flynn , but criticized some of the other pardons Trump has issued .
The senator said , “ I think it ’ s a misuse of the power ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a connection to the President .
Toomey vaguely compared the Trump pardons he criticized with former President Bill Clinton ’ s pardon of financier Marc Rich in 2001 .
“ I mean , my goodness , we have tax fraud and bank fraud , witness tampering , obstruction of justice , but because they were close to the president they got pardoned , ” the senator said .
RELATED : Maxine Waters Says She Wants Trump ‘ Marched Out ’ Of White House By The Military In addition to Flynn , some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : • His former campaign manager Paul Manafort • Charles Kushner , who is the father of his son-in-law , Jared Kushner • Roger Stone , Alex Van Der Zwaan , and George Papadopoulos who were part of the Mueller Russia investigation .
Toomey was asked if presidential pardons should be restricted , the senator seemed skeptical .
“ It ’ s a good discussion to have but it ’ s a tough call , ” Toomey said .
“ I think it would be very challenging.
” When the issue of more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up , Toomey replied , “ The president is often unpredictable .
”

On Sunday, Republican Senator Pat Toomey said that President Donald Trump should accept the outcome of the 2020 election.
The GOP senator made his comments during an interview on “Fox News Sunday.”
Watch the entire interview below.
RELATED: Barr Praises Trump In Resignation Letter – Says It Was A ‘Great Honor’ To Serve As AG
Toomey: Trump Fraud Claims ‘Lack Any Credible Evidence’
When asked about President Trump and his attitude about the election, Toomey said, “I think the president should accept the outcome of the election.”
“He had every right to challenge these votes, he had every right to recounts and to litigate,” Toomey continued.
“He has done all of those things in my state of Pennsylvania,” the senator added.
“He’s drawn conservative Republican judges who’ve dismissed these cases for a lack of any credible evidence.”
On Fox, GOP PA Sen Toomey tells colleague Mike Emanuel “I think the President should accept the outcome of the election.” Notes that Trump’s cases were rejected by “conservative” judges in PA — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) December 27, 2020
Toomey Believes Trump Went Too Far With Pardons
Toomey defended President Trump’s pardon of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, but criticized some of the other pardons Trump has issued.
The senator said, “I think it’s a misuse of the power” referring to those pardoned merely because they have a connection to the President.
Toomey vaguely compared the Trump pardons he criticized with former President Bill Clinton’s pardon of financier Marc Rich in 2001.
“I mean, my goodness, we have tax fraud and bank fraud, witness tampering, obstruction of justice, but because they were close to the president they got pardoned,” the senator said.
GOP senator on Trump pardons: 'It is legal, it is constitutional, but I think it's a misuse of the power' https://t.co/uNRgcAwseq >><> Pennsylvania. This is what you elected. I know. Many of us supported him. Never again if he decides to run for something else. — Bo Snerdley (@BoSnerdley) December 27, 2020
RELATED: Maxine Waters Says She Wants Trump ‘Marched Out’ Of White House By The Military
Toomey: ‘The President Is Often Unpredictable’
In addition to Flynn, some of Trump’s pardons have included:
His former campaign manager Paul Manafort
Charles Kushner, who is the father of his son-in-law, Jared Kushner
Former Republican congressmen Chris Collins, Duncan Hunter, Steve Stockman, and Mark Sijander
Roger Stone, Alex Van Der Zwaan,and George Papadopoulos who were part of the Mueller Russia investigation.
Toomey was asked if presidential pardons should be restricted, the senator seemed skeptical. “It’s a good discussion to have but it’s a tough call,” Toomey said. “I think it would be very challenging.”
When the issue of more possible pardons by President Trump was brought up, Toomey replied, “The president is often unpredictable.”
Watch the interview here:


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-28--Third Coronavirus Vaccine May Be Out ‘As Early As Today’

Pharmaceutical firm AstraZeneca has announced that its coronavirus vaccine has an efficacy rate near to that of the Pfizer and Moderna ’ s versions , and reports indicate that the two-shot inoculation could be approved “ as early as today.
” The Daily Mail reported that AstraZeneca CEO Pascal Soriot said , “ We think we have figured out the winning formula and how to get efficacy that , after two doses , is up there with everybody else.
” RELATED : Ayanna Pressley , Member Of AOC ’ s ‘ Squad , ’ Calls For The Incarcerated To Be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mail noted , “ His comments come as officials reportedly prepare to approve the Oxford-AstraZeneca jab as early as tomorrow.
” On November 23 , AstraZeneca and Oxford University announced that their jointly created coronavirus vaccine is easier to distribute than the Pfizer version , which must be stored at -94 degrees .
On Sunday , Vaccines Minister Nadhim Zahawi told The Sun , “ The heroic efforts of the team at the University of Oxford have paid off , with its home-grown vaccine shown to be effective in older people as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the pandemic , people from across the nation have been working day and night to find a safe and effective vaccine , ” Zahawi added .
A hopeful Zahawi continued , “ We have seen the best of British at every stage , from our world-leading scientists working around the clock to carry out vital research , to builders and engineers constructing new facilities.
” “ Manufacturers are boosting their capabilities and hundreds of thousands of people in every corner of the UK are taking part in clinical trials — developing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involved us all , ” he finished .
The Telegraph reported on Saturday that the UK planned to roll out the vaccine to all citizens on January 4th .
RELATED : Rand Paul Calls For Us To ‘ Open The Economy Up ’ – Says It ’ s Our Only Chance Of Recovering One hazard in developing vaccines is that virii are always changing .
The Associated Press reported last Sunday , “ Health experts in the U.K. and U.S. said the strain seems to infect more easily than others , but there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deadly.
” The same is true of the flu , and that the new coronavirus mutations have not been deadlier is encouraging .
How quickly vaccines can be distributed to all citizens in the U.S. and abroad remains to be seen , but these early stories give reason for optimism .

Pharmaceutical firm AstraZeneca has announced that its coronavirus vaccine has an efficacy rate near to that of the Pfizer and Moderna’s versions, and reports indicate that the two-shot inoculation could be approved “as early as today.”
The Daily Mail reported that AstraZeneca CEO Pascal Soriot said, “We think we have figured out the winning formula and how to get efficacy that, after two doses, is up there with everybody else.”
FRIENDS > I those who follow my account know very well I have said all along that #OxfordVaccine #AstraZeneca #OXFAZN was the safest vaccine BUT would also be the best, most efficient vaccine & the one I'll be taking. Real effectiveness is a #WINNER #NHShttps://t.co/Xzo8x8baO2 — PoliticalPig (@politicalpig) December 27, 2020
RELATED: Ayanna Pressley, Member Of AOC’s ‘Squad,’ Calls For The Incarcerated To Be ‘Prioritized’ For Vaccine
UK’s Daily Mail: ‘Officials Reportedly Prepare To Approve The Oxford-AstraZeneca Jab’
The Daily Mail noted, “His comments come as officials reportedly prepare to approve the Oxford-AstraZeneca jab as early as tomorrow.”
On November 23, AstraZeneca and Oxford University announced that their jointly created coronavirus vaccine is easier to distribute than the Pfizer version, which must be stored at -94 degrees.
On Sunday, Vaccines Minister Nadhim Zahawi told The Sun, “The heroic efforts of the team at the University of Oxford have paid off, with its home-grown vaccine shown to be effective in older people as well as young.”
“From day one of the pandemic, people from across the nation have been working day and night to find a safe and effective Covid-19 vaccine,” Zahawi added.
Oxford Covid vaccine set to be approved MONDAY as huge efforts 'pay off' https://t.co/tZyaRRRZ5Y — Sun Politics (@SunPolitics) December 26, 2020
UK Vaccines Minister Touts Success
A hopeful Zahawi continued, “We have seen the best of British at every stage, from our world-leading scientists working around the clock to carry out vital research, to builders and engineers constructing new facilities.”
“Manufacturers are boosting their capabilities and hundreds of thousands of people in every corner of the UK are taking part in clinical trials — developing, finding and preparing for a vaccine has involved us all,” he finished.
The Telegraph reported on Saturday that the UK planned to roll out the vaccine to all citizens on January 4th.
The United Kingdom will roll out Oxford University’s COVID-19 vaccine from Jan. 4, according to plans being drawn up by ministers, The Sunday Telegraph reported.#oxfordvaccine #uk pic.twitter.com/8VEigYFdWU — flora williams (@florawilliamsdr) December 27, 2020
RELATED: Rand Paul Calls For Us To ‘Open The Economy Up’ – Says It’s Our Only Chance Of Recovering
Reason To Be Encouraged
One hazard in developing vaccines is that virii are always changing.
The Associated Press reported last Sunday, “Health experts in the U.K. and U.S. said the strain seems to infect more easily than others, but there is no evidence yet it is more deadly.”
The same is true of the flu, and that the new coronavirus mutations have not been deadlier is encouraging.
How quickly vaccines can be distributed to all citizens in the U.S. and abroad remains to be seen, but these early stories give reason for optimism.


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-28--Trump Signs COVID Relief Bill, Continues to Demand $2,000 Stimulus Checks For Americans

President Trump unexpectedly signed the COVID relief bill but continued to demand $ 2,000 stimulus checks for Americans while simultaneously insisting “ wasteful items ” be removed in their current form .
The President ’ s move appears to come begrudgingly after two unemployment programs were set to lapse .
Trump last week had appeared to threaten a veto of the legislation passed by Congress noting , “ It ’ s called the COVID relief bill , but it has almost nothing to do with COVID.
” Of particular disappointment were the $ 600 stimulus checks to the American people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provides hard-working taxpayers with only $ 600 each in relief payments and not enough money is given to small businesses and in particular restaurants , whose owners have suffered so grievously , ” Trump said in a video statement .
“ I ’ m asking Congress to amend this bill and increase the ridiculously low $ 600 to $ 2,000 or $ 4,000 for a couple , ” he added .
White House deputy press secretary Judd Deere tweeted late Sunday night that the President had done an about-face , signing the bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and for other purposes.
” RELATED : Lawmakers Brag About COVID Relief Bill With $ 600 Checks To The American People – They Should Be Ashamed Did Trump Cave On The COVID Relief Bill ?
Trump ’ s sudden change of heart left many wondering if he had caved to the swamp on the bill many argued was designed more for the benefit of Congressional pet projects rather than the American people .
The President himself rattled off a massive list of pork and special interest gifts that were added to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also allows stimulus checks for the family members of illegal aliens , allowing them to get up to $ 1,800 each.
” The COVID bill was combined with an omnibus spending bill , which contained the offending items .
The reality is this – whether Americans get $ 600 or $ 2,000 stimulus checks – the only thing that is truly going to turn around the fortunes of the people will be a complete re-opening of the economy .
Senator Rand Paul ( R-KY ) opined correctly that “ the only thing that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Handing out money the answer , but if the government is going to do it in the midst of a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic , it sure as hell better be more than $ 600 , and the bill should focus on struggling Americans and businesses .
In the end , as we argued on these very pages , this isn ’ t about money from the government , it ’ s about the government preventing people from earning money .
Through no fault of their own people have been prevented from earning a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Democrat governors or Democrat mayors , but also some Republicans .
So the government needs to give those people some of their own taxpayer money back in times of crisis .
RELATED : President Trump Destroys Congress ’ COVID Relief Bill , Demands More Money For The American People Deere explained why President Trump ultimately chose to sign the bill .
“ The President is signing this bill to restore unemployment benefits , stop evictions , provide rental assistance , add money for PPP , return our airline workers back to work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distribution , and much more , ” he wrote .
Still , the President is insisting “ I want far less wasteful spending and more money going to the American people in the form of $ 2,000 checks per adult and $ 600 per child.
” Deere claimed that the Democrat-led House is voting Monday on a bill to send $ 2,000 stimulus checks to Americans in lieu of the $ 600 checks included in the COVID relief bill .
Did President Trump strike a deal to get the American people those $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said he would “ send back to Congress a redlined version , item by item , ” of what he considers wasteful spending projects , “ accompanied by the formal rescission request to Congress insisting that those funds be removed from the bill.
” That part seems more like wishful thinking by the President .

President Trump unexpectedly signed the COVID relief bill but continued to demand $2,000 stimulus checks for Americans while simultaneously insisting “wasteful items” be removed in their current form.
The President’s move appears to come begrudgingly after two unemployment programs were set to lapse.
Trump last week had appeared to threaten a veto of the legislation passed by Congress noting, “It’s called the COVID relief bill, but it has almost nothing to do with COVID.”
Of particular disappointment were the $600 stimulus checks to the American people.
“The $900 billion package provides hard-working taxpayers with only $600 each in relief payments and not enough money is given to small businesses and in particular restaurants, whose owners have suffered so grievously,” Trump said in a video statement.
“I’m asking Congress to amend this bill and increase the ridiculously low $600 to $2,000 or $4,000 for a couple,” he added.
White House deputy press secretary Judd Deere tweeted late Sunday night that the President had done an about-face, signing the bill “providing coronavirus emergency response and relief, and for other purposes.”
🚨🚨🚨President @realDonaldTrump has signed H.R. 133, an Act making consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2021, providing coronavirus emergency response and relief, and for other purposes. — Judd Deere (@JuddPDeere45) December 28, 2020
RELATED: Lawmakers Brag About COVID Relief Bill With $600 Checks To The American People – They Should Be Ashamed
Did Trump Cave On The COVID Relief Bill?
Trump’s sudden change of heart left many wondering if he had caved to the swamp on the bill many argued was designed more for the benefit of Congressional pet projects rather than the American people.
The President himself rattled off a massive list of pork and special interest gifts that were added to the relief package claiming, “The bill also allows stimulus checks for the family members of illegal aliens, allowing them to get up to $1,800 each.”
The COVID bill was combined with an omnibus spending bill, which contained the offending items.
Did Trump cave on the COVID bill? Reading mixed messages. — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) December 28, 2020
The reality is this – whether Americans get $600 or $2,000 stimulus checks – the only thing that is truly going to turn around the fortunes of the people will be a complete re-opening of the economy.
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) opined correctly that “the only thing that can save us is opening the economy.”
To reiterate:
Handing out money isn’t the answer, but if the government is going to do it in the midst of a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic, it sure as hell better be more than $600, and the bill should only focus on struggling Americans and businesses. In the end, as we argued on these very pages, this isn’t about money from the government, it’s about the government preventing people from earning money.
Through no fault of their own people have been prevented from earning a living by governments – particularly those run by Democrat governors or Democrat mayors, but also some Republicans.
So the government needs to give those people some of their own taxpayer money back in times of crisis.
RELATED: President Trump Destroys Congress’ COVID Relief Bill, Demands More Money For The American People
Trump Still Fighting For $2,000 Stimulus Checks
Deere explained why President Trump ultimately chose to sign the bill.
“The President is signing this bill to restore unemployment benefits, stop evictions, provide rental assistance, add money for PPP, return our airline workers back to work, add substantially more money for vaccine distribution, and much more,” he wrote.
Still, the President is insisting “I want far less wasteful spending and more money going to the American people in the form of $2,000 checks per adult and $600 per child.”
Deere claimed that the Democrat-led House is voting Monday on a bill to send $2,000 stimulus checks to Americans in lieu of the $600 checks included in the COVID relief bill.
On Monday the House will vote to increase payments to individuals from $600 to $2,000. Therefore, a family of four would receive $5,200. — Judd Deere (@JuddPDeere45) December 28, 2020
Did President Trump strike a deal to get the American people those $2,000 stimulus checks?
The President also said he would “send back to Congress a redlined version, item by item,” of what he considers wasteful spending projects, “accompanied by the formal rescission request to Congress insisting that those funds be removed from the bill.”
That part seems more like wishful thinking by the President.


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-29--Newt Gingrich Reveals Why Middle Class Have Been The ‘Big Losers’ In Pandemic

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich spoke out on Tuesday to reveal how the middle class have been the “ big losers ” in the coronavirus pandemic as he also voiced his support for President Donald Trump ’ s calls to increase the payout in the COVID-19 stimulus checks from $ 600 to $ 2,000 .
“ This is like being in World War II , ” Gingrich said while appearing on “ Fox & Friends.
” “ We have a disaster in this country made dramatically worse by Democratic governors in places like California , Illinois , New York who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the restaurant industry.
” “ You know , the big losers have been middle-class Americans , ” he added .
“ The big winners have been the very rich and government employees who got paid for not doing any work , including millions of members of the teachers union who didn ’ t do any work , but got … collectively billions of dollars for sitting around.
” Related : Newt Gingrich Stands By Trump – Says 2020 Election Could Be ‘ Biggest Presidential Theft ’ Since 1824 “ So , I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you look at all of this mess , and you think the government has clearly not done its job , particularly the state governments led by Democrats , and $ 2,000 will help me .
I think that ’ s what ’ s going on , ” Gingrich continued .
“ [ T ] his is not about deficit spending .
That train is long gone .
We ’ re in the middle of a disaster .
I think the average American deserves some help , ” he concluded .
This comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Why I will not accept Joe Biden as president , ” which was published in The Washington Times .
In this op-ed , he explained that he can ’ t accept the results of this election because of an anger he has never felt before .
“ As I thought about it , I realized my anger and fear were not narrowly focused on votes , ” Gingrich wrote .
“ My unwillingness to relax and accept that the election was over grew out of a level of outrage and alienation unlike anything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years involvement in public affairs.
” He went on to lament that those on the left and the right now “ live in alternative worlds.
” “ You have more than 74 million voters who supported President Trump despite everything — and given the election mess , the number could easily be significantly higher .
The truth is tens of millions of Americans are deeply alienated and angry , ” Gingrich wrote .
“ If Mr. Biden governs from the left — and he will almost certainly be forced to — that number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win a massive election in 2022 , ” he added .
This piece was written by James Samson on December 29 , 2020 .
It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission .
Read more at LifeZette : Kamala Harris ’ Kwanzaa Celebration Video Backfires As She ’ s Allegedly Slammed For Shameless Political Pandering Ted Nugent Eviscerates Black Lives Matter – Rips Protests As ‘ Soulless ’ And ‘ Stupid ’ Maxine Waters Outrageously Claims Trump Has Been ‘ Compromised ’ By Putin – Calls On Us To ‘ Rely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And China The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Political Insider .

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich spoke out on Tuesday to reveal how the middle class have been the “big losers” in the coronavirus pandemic as he also voiced his support for President Donald Trump’s calls to increase the payout in the COVID-19 stimulus checks from $600 to $2,000.
Gingrich Speaks Out
“This is like being in World War II,” Gingrich said while appearing on “Fox & Friends.” “We have a disaster in this country made dramatically worse by Democratic governors in places like California, Illinois, New York who have been crushing small business, killing the restaurant industry.”
“You know, the big losers have been middle-class Americans,” he added. “The big winners have been the very rich and government employees who got paid for not doing any work, including millions of members of the teachers union who didn’t do any work, but got … collectively billions of dollars for sitting around.”
Related: Newt Gingrich Stands By Trump – Says 2020 Election Could Be ‘Biggest Presidential Theft’ Since 1824
“So, I think if you are an average everyday person, you look at all of this mess, and you think the government has clearly not done its job, particularly the state governments led by Democrats, and $2,000 will help me. I think that’s what’s going on,” Gingrich continued.
“[T]his is not about deficit spending. That train is long gone. We’re in the middle of a disaster. I think the average American deserves some help,” he concluded.
Gingrich Refuses To Accept Biden As President
This comes after Gingrich wrote an op-ed called “Why I will not accept Joe Biden as president,” which was published in The Washington Times. In this op-ed, he explained that he can’t accept the results of this election because of an anger he has never felt before.
“As I thought about it, I realized my anger and fear were not narrowly focused on votes,” Gingrich wrote. “My unwillingness to relax and accept that the election was over grew out of a level of outrage and alienation unlike anything I had experienced in more than 60 years involvement in public affairs.”
Related: Newt Gingrich Outlines Current National Plight
He went on to lament that those on the left and the right now “live in alternative worlds.”
“You have more than 74 million voters who supported President Trump despite everything — and given the election mess, the number could easily be significantly higher. The truth is tens of millions of Americans are deeply alienated and angry,” Gingrich wrote.
“If Mr. Biden governs from the left — and he will almost certainly be forced to — that number will grow rapidly, and we will win a massive election in 2022,” he added.
This piece was written by James Samson on December 29, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.
Read more at LifeZette:
Kamala Harris’ Kwanzaa Celebration Video Backfires As She’s Allegedly Slammed For Shameless Political Pandering
Ted Nugent Eviscerates Black Lives Matter – Rips Protests As ‘Soulless’ And ‘Stupid’
Maxine Waters Outrageously Claims Trump Has Been ‘Compromised’ By Putin – Calls On Us To ‘Rely On Biden’ To Take On Russia And China
Read this Next on ThePoliticalInsider.com Trump’s Party: Over 70% Of Republican Voters Want Their Lawmakers To Be More Like Trump
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Political Insider.


thepoliticalinsider--2020-12-29--Trump’s Party: Over 70% Of Republican Voters Want Their Lawmakers To Be More Like Trump

A new Rasmussen survey indicates 72 percent of Republican voters want their legislators to be more like President Trump .
In fact , in their view , Trump is an extraordinarily better role model than most members of Congress .
The national telephone and online survey “ finds that 72 % of Likely Republican Voters think their party should be more like Trump than like the average GOP member of Congress , ” Rasmussen reports .
By contrast , 24 percent see the average Republican in Congress as a better example for their party .
Overall , voters gave the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent to just 40 percent for the President .
RELATED : Trump Just Ended Obama ’ s 12-Year Streak As Most Admired Man Republican Voters Want Congress To Be More Like Trump It ’ s really no surprise that Republican voters want to see their congressional representatives emulate Trump , a political outsider who actually fights for the people .
As bad as his approval ratings are thanks to Democrat-controlled media , President Trump is easily more admired by Republicans than members of Congress .
In fact , in 2020 , he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Trump tied former President Barack Obama for the honor last year but edged out his predecessor this year , ” Gallup reports .
They add , “ Trump ’ s first-place finish ends a 12-year run as most admired man for Obama , tied with Dwight Eisenhower for the most ever.
” Congress meanwhile , fared much worse in a recent survey asking Americans to rank professions by their honesty and ethics .
Congressional members actually tied used car salesmen with a mere 8 percent rating them highly , while advertising practitioners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Rounding out low-ranking groups were business executives at 17 percent , lawyers at 21 percent , and journalists at 28 percent .
Still , Rasmussen notes that 52 percent of Republican voters think their party should put a candidate on the presidential ticket in 2024 , while 33 percent say the GOP should promote a candidate who has already run .
At a Christmas party in December , the President hinted that he would be back in the White House in 2024 .
“ It ’ s been an amazing four years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a live stream of the party by former Oklahoma Republican Party Chair Pam Pollard .
“ We ’ re trying to get another four years , ” the President continued , “ but otherwise I ’ ll see you in four years.
” A similar Rasmussen survey six years ago saw Republican voters clamoring for a new face to run for President .
That new face turned out to be Donald Trump , as he easily dispatched with establishment politicians during the Republican primaries , and eventually defeated another entrenched swamp creature in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might surprise in a similar manner and emerge in 2024 ?

A new Rasmussen survey indicates 72 percent of Republican voters want their legislators to be more like President Trump.
In fact, in their view, Trump is an extraordinarily better role model than most members of Congress.
The national telephone and online survey “finds that 72% of Likely Republican Voters think their party should be more like Trump than like the average GOP member of Congress,” Rasmussen reports.
By contrast, 24 percent see the average Republican in Congress as a better example for their party.
Overall, voters gave the “average member of Congress” 45 percent to just 40 percent for the President.
72 Percent of Republicans See Trump as Model for Future of GOPhttps://t.co/P1eJFOxOjJ pic.twitter.com/00Pf9rNgTw — HYVE (@HYVEE7) December 29, 2020
RELATED: Trump Just Ended Obama’s 12-Year Streak As Most Admired Man
Republican Voters Want Congress To Be More Like Trump
It’s really no surprise that Republican voters want to see their congressional representatives emulate Trump, a political outsider who actually fights for the people.
As bad as his approval ratings are thanks to Democrat-controlled media, President Trump is easily more admired by Republicans than members of Congress.
In fact, in 2020, he was even more admired than Barack Obama.
“Trump tied former President Barack Obama for the honor last year but edged out his predecessor this year,” Gallup reports.
They add, “Trump’s first-place finish ends a 12-year run as most admired man for Obama, tied with Dwight Eisenhower for the most ever.”
Gallup: President Trump is most admired man of 2020. Ends Barack Obama’s 12-year most-admired run. https://t.co/k1E8VufMMe pic.twitter.com/XoXx6OaO9f — Byron York (@ByronYork) December 29, 2020
Congress meanwhile, fared much worse in a recent survey asking Americans to rank professions by their honesty and ethics.
Congressional members actually tied used car salesmen with a mere 8 percent rating them highly, while advertising practitioners came in slightly better at 10 percent.
Rounding out low-ranking groups were business executives at 17 percent, lawyers at 21 percent, and journalists at 28 percent.
Nurses, medical doctors, grade-school teachers and pharmacists top Gallup’s annual Honesty and Ethics of Professions poll. https://t.co/iLaJiqqX6D — GallupNews (@GallupNews) December 22, 2020
Trump 2024?
Still, Rasmussen notes that 52 percent of Republican voters think their party should put a new candidate on the presidential ticket in 2024, while 33 percent say the GOP should promote a candidate who has already run.
At a Christmas party in December, the President hinted that he would be back in the White House in 2024.
“It’s been an amazing four years,” Trump is heard saying in a live stream of the party by former Oklahoma Republican Party Chair Pam Pollard.
“We’re trying to get another four years,” the President continued, “but otherwise I’ll see you in four years.”
Trump at the White House Christmas party: “It’s been an amazing four years. We’re trying to do another four years, otherwise I’ll see you in four years.” h/t @ZekeJMiller, @colvinj pic.twitter.com/72Q3bVY3jP — Andrew Solender (@AndrewSolender) December 2, 2020
A similar Rasmussen survey six years ago saw Republican voters clamoring for a new face to run for President.
That new face turned out to be Donald Trump, as he easily dispatched with establishment politicians during the Republican primaries, and eventually defeated another entrenched swamp creature in Hillary Clinton.
Is there anyone who might surprise in a similar manner and emerge in 2024?