Former President Donald Trump makes a ‘special announcement’

Lawyer and pundit Robert Barnes has a theory about Donald Trump.

Barnes contends that working class voters across the nation have concluded that both major political parties are corrupt, insular, and will never represent their interests. These voters see establishment Republicans and establishment Democrats as an elite “uniparty” that doesn’t care about them at all. Their only hope to gain representation in Washington is to vote for non-establishment, even anti-establishment candidates for national office.

In effect, political populism is a desperate revolt against the establishment. And because the populist movement is grass-roots and deep, Donald Trump is the GOP’s best hope to win the White House in 2024.

I think Barnes is correct in his analysis, but more than this, the video reminds me that Trump rhetoric is powerful, perhaps more powerful than establishment propaganda.

66 thoughts on “Former President Donald Trump makes a ‘special announcement’

  1. Trump is not a team player. He is a narcissist who cannot stand the spotlight being on someone else even for a month. GOP leaders asked him to wait until after the GA runoff, to avoid energizing the Democrat base, but he went ahead anyway, A few weeks was not a lot to ask.

    Hopefully the GOP will reject him in the primaries and gently put him out to pasture. Even Ivanka has announced she will not be involved in the campaign this time around.

    But awful as he is personally. if he gets the nomination, anyone the Democrats could nominated to run against him will still be the greater evil.


    1. “. . . Democrats could nominated to run against him will still be the greater evil.”

      The “greater evil?” There you go again with your egregious and dangerous insults. Is that the Trump influence or have you always hated people who disagree with you?

      Liked by 3 people

      1. You’re projecting again.

        It has nothing to do with hate.

        Trump is a flawed person, but the Democrat agenda is systemically evil. It is based on plunder and vote buying to maintain power and reward cronies, with no regard for the future.


        1. “ Trump is a flawed person, but the Democrat agenda is systemically evil.”

          A more accurate description:

          Trump is an evil person, but the Democrat agenda is flawed.

          Flawed like any political action or agenda in a democratic republic. Since legislation is based on votes and complex partnerships among competing constituencies, left or right, flawed is how we roll and have since 1784.

          A functional, loyal opposition is what is missing in the Republican Party today. Trump voiced it accurately when he castigated Republicans for passing an infrastructure bill. Not for content, but rather to deny the Democrats a success that eluded him in his term.

          Liked by 4 people

          1. The Democratic party relentlessly seeks to shed the bonds of the Constitution and seize unrestricted power at the expense of Liberty.

            Those limits on government power are the only things standing between us and totalitarian rule, followed by a real insurrection to put it down.

            So, personal flaws notwithstanding(and Trump is not evil, just a selfish jerk who believes he alone can fix things) Trump remains the lesser evil simply because even the nicest Democrat is taking us down a road the leads to destruction.


          2. Broad generalizations of opinion do not define evil.

            The refusal to ensure the peaceful transition of power is evil. Goading a mob to hurt his own loyal VP while watching TV is evil. Weaponizing his DOJ and IRS to punish his opponents is evil. Extortion of officials to falsify election results is evil.

            Unrestrained, those actions are not just about better healthcare, but rather power for the sake of power itself.

            Liked by 4 people

          3. That is some conspiracy. A rabbit hole that can be touted but certainly not with any evidence.

            Barr, under orders, sent the FBI to monitor and investigate state elections before the election and without requests from the states. Unprecedented, particularly by a DOJ “Trump never had”.

            Liked by 4 people

          4. “Trump never had a DOJ,”…

            According to John Kelly, not only did Trump have a DOJ, he had an IRS that ex-POTUS wanted to use to investigate ANYONE who disagreed with him.

            Your projection attempt is busted by one who was in the room.

            Liked by 3 people

          5. Yo know as well as anyone that Trump reveled in the attention, whether good for him or not. And if he didn’t get it, he egged it on.

            He was the perennial victim…a good fit for the modern Republican party, or what is left of it. Like P.T. Barnum, his creed was that there is no such thing as bad publicity.

            Liked by 4 people

          6. Lesser evil if you prefer to tear apart the government and ignore the Constitution.

            I get the impression you either don’t grasp the real danger to our country, or that you don’t care so long as those you disagree with are vanquished legally or not.

            Liked by 3 people

          7. Trump’s followers, with or without his knowledge, delayed the transition by about 2 hours.

            It should not have happened, but it was not nearly the threat to the Constitution as Biden’s executive orders


          8. All those Trump-appointed directors, temporary and confirmed, were out to get him?

            Do you realize how asinine that sounds? Probably not, but I just thought you might want to see your words from another’s viewpoint.

            Liked by 1 person

          9. He can appoint all the directors he wants but there is an underlying bureaucracy that does whatever it damned well pleases, under the guise of independence, which is reletlessly partisan and self-protective.


          10. The DOJ is supposed to be independent. It is not just doling out subsidies to farmers or settling labor disputes. It is our national legal system with police, prosecutorial, judicial and correctional systems. All powers that the Constitution specifically addresses in the Bill of Rights. So independence from the political whims of any administration is the ideal.

            The laptop would fit that category. The laptop was already in the hands of investigators at the FBI at the behest of DOJ prosecutors working on tax and illegal lobbying charges against Hunter Biden. So it is not like it was stowed away.

            Ethically and legally, the president can’t use his DOJ for political purposes. But, of course, appointees might take implied direction.

            Like Barr did for Trump and his few pages saying Mueller found nothing.


            Point being that Trump cared not a whit about DOJ independence. The department, and Barr, were his personal legal team. That’s why Sessions was canned, he wouldn’t play that game.
            With that in mind, tell me Trump couldn’t demand a laptop “reveal”, backdoor style like using lackey phones instead of official ones, a favorite tactic of his. The same president who wanted his VP to break the law on 1/6.

            Liked by 2 people

          11. The FBI is our national police force for interstate crimes, federal crimes, domestic terrorism, spying, etc. It has arrest powers in addition to investigative ones.

            Oh, when Trump was born, it created a special department just investigate him. You didn’t know that, I bet. That’s all he talks about, so it must be true.

            Liked by 1 person

          12. But where in the Constitution is it authorized?

            That is not to say it cannot be useful, but it is a good example of what happens when we disregard the Constitution because it seems like a good idea at the time.

            Initially, it was tasked with investigating organized moonshining, bank robbery and kidnaping, but only if there was evidence that activity involved more than one state.

            Then it grew to crimes against Federally insured banks and security markets.

            Later, national criminal databases were added to assist State and local police.

            All good, so far, but still not Constitutional. But it seemed so useful that no one challenged it.

            But now it is tracking parents who are rightfully angry at school officials and are careless in how they express that anger, under the guise of laws intended for use against the KKK, which spans many states. Yet there is no evidence of intrastate coordination of those threat. That is clearly NOT the intended mission of the FBI.

            Nor is it the mission of the FBI to coordinate with big tech to suppress speech the FBI considers disinformation. This is a violation of the First Amendment by proxy.

            This is why I am picky about what The Constitution allows. Once we let an agency slip its leash even a little, it runs wild.


          13. Again with the false claim. Repeating it may be acceptable propaganda to you, but it does not make it true.

            “One false claim made on Facebook alleges the FBI is adding “threat tags” to parents who protest school boards.“

            Again you keep saying that. Domestic terrorism is real and nationwide. How do you know that the threats against school boards, teachers and administrators is not coordinated. 1/6 was. The gangs are national and they are a threat nationally.

            The FBI has better resources than the Suffolk PD and threats are not idle in today’s MAGA fueled political atmosphere. If they can credibly attack Congress in session and come within a few yards of the VP, a teacher has good cause to expect investigations.

            Liked by 2 people

          14. “But now it is tracking parents who are rightfully angry at school officials and are careless in how they express that anger”

            Another very generous euphemism for criminal behavior.

            “Rightfully angry”
            They may be angry – violent shitheads are easily angered – but there is nothing “rightfully” about it.

            Liked by 1 person

          15. “When teachers won’t tell parents what they are teaching their children . . .”

            Yeah, sure. That happens all the time.

            What is really going on is that exploitive “conservative” politicians stirring up racial animus for short term political gain. Well, I invite you to think about how well that worked out for you people in the last election.

            Liked by 1 person

          16. “When teachers won’t tell parents what they are teaching their children, anger is justified, Violence is not, but angry words are.”

            Do you have a cite for that happening on a wide-scale basis? Or are you just repeating the same old BS about teachers “grooming” children?

            Anger is fine. Anger followed by threats of violence are not. The threats are the ones being inversitgated and rightly so.

            Liked by 1 person

          17. “He can appoint all the directors he wants . . .”

            So, only a Democratic President such as Obama or Biden can control the “deep state” and turn them into personal and partisan agents. Yeah, right. That is why they screwed Clinton and protected Trump in 2016. Makes sense. Not.

            You people who are constantly attacking our law enforcement and security services are de facto agents of Vladimir Putin and his FSB. Given your uncritical support of his aggression against Georgia and Ukraine and your bizarre views about endangered white Chirstian civilization I suspect it is a deliberate choice.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. “The Democrat agenda is systemically evil”

          Double down on your ignorant and dangerous insults, much?

          You have completely neutered the word “evil.” Your idea of “evil” is ANYTHING in public policy that you do not like. I would add, that holding such an ignorant belief does not exempt you from being civil. In a civil society, it is best to do a little self-editing.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. “Placing the existence of our Republic in peril . . . definition of evil”

            Our majority party is “evil,” but Trump is merely “flawed.”

            You really, really hate democracy. Better clutch your pearls, your pocketbook, and your gun close to your bosom because democracy just had a very good election day.

            Liked by 4 people

          2. “Placing the existence of our Republic in peril in pursuit of short term power pretty much fits my definition of evil.”

            I/6/21 should fit that definition like a bespoke Savile Row suit. A planned attempt to violently coerce Congress and his own VP to reinstall a losing candidate.

            The 2022 election was the response of an electorate that valued democracy and women’s rights over the very temporary and fixable issues with inflation, immigration and crime.

            Liked by 3 people

          3. Inflation, immigration and crime can be fixed, but once the Constitution is abandoned in favor of the tyranny of the majority, reversing it is very hard to do, the reactions to Plessy and Dobbs are proof of that.

            Biden just tried to spend up to a trillion dollars to buy votes of student debtors without congressional appropriation.

            Even if you think making people who did not go to college pay the debts of those who did is a good idea, doing it contrary to the Constitution should be upsetting, That anyone defends it is proof of how far down that slippery slope we have gone.

            Perhaps if the deal had been to buy Sport Utility Rifles for Republicans without congressional appropriation the problem would be more clear.

            The Constitution provides the guardrails that protect from the self-immolation other democracies before us have suffered and the Democratic party’s determination to evade and ignore those limits is evil.


          4. Suppose Pence had followed Trump’s wishes and refused to accept the results from key states. There goes a Constitutional guardrail, or rather a Constitutional framework, in favor of autocratic fiat.

            Aside from the probable increase in political violence around the country, a precedent would be set for the next elections. Essentially making them as useless exercises in phony voting with the veracity of a Putin ballot in Donbas. If it weren’t for some conscientious and honest Republicans in swing states, that too would have cemented a failed democracy.

            You are literally throwing baby and bath water down the drain. I was not in favor of the student loan forgiveness program the way it was structured and passed. Apparently the courts agreed with me and many others. But that was a policy dispute and handled as it should be through judicial review. Threatening to hang the VP and kill the Speaker is not the path to settle political disagreements or bypass the will of the people.

            Liked by 3 people

          5. You are correct. so the courts struck down the Executive Action. In the normal course of events today, presidents have too much power. Trump did, Obama did, Bush did, etc. But the point is that separation of powers with oversight is what keeps autocrats in check.

            But all that assumes adherence to the rule of law and not the executive planning a violent attempt to halt the duties of Congress as laid out in the Constitution. Once that is set as a precedent it makes no difference what party is in power, our Constitution is dead. Then you can despise the Democrats all you want, it makes little difference to the dictators.

            Liked by 3 people

          6. That’s why I am so picky about those things.

            Powers granted to deal with an emergency never go away, even long after the emergency. Powers the Patriot Act gave to Bush keep getting renewed, and they grow over time with no additional Congressional action. Surveillance powers granted to the FBI to stop another 9/11 get used to spy on a political campaign and then on parents who lose their tempers at a school board meeting.

            Once the bureaucracy learns to use such power creatively they go places where the Congress that granted them would be horrified to see.

            And it doesn’t matter who is President. those emergency powers become just another tool in the box.

            Now, the COVID emergency is used to spend nearly a Trillion dollars Congress never appropriated to cancel loans taken out long before COVID.

            So yeah, I get nit-picky about the Constitution because once you make an exception, you have to live with it.


          7. You repeat this fabrication about irate parents getting investigated like you are a talk radio host.

            “In response to a letter from the National School Boards Association (NSBA), the U.S. Department of Justice announced in early October that the FBI and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices would meet with federal, state, Tribal, territorial and local law enforcement on strategies to address the recent increase in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence against school boards, teachers and other public school workers.”

            “One false claim made on Facebook alleges the FBI is adding “threat tags” to parents who protest school boards.“


            The key is threats of violence against board member, teachers and administrators. Are you really excusing that?

            Liked by 2 people

          8. “Threats of violence are often crimes, but they are local in nature and thus none of the FBI’s business to track.”

            If you want to get technical, the shithead forums and chatrooms that the FBI can monitor for domestic terror threats are never going to be confined to a single state.

            Liked by 1 person

          9. I have no problem with Congress taking the reins when a president overreaches. That means our system works.

            That is why 1/6 investigations are so critical to expose weaknesses in a system that has guardrails and frameworks that we rely on for our freedoms. And to discourage such presidential malfeasance and seditious behavior in the future.

            Liked by 2 people

        3. “It has nothing to do with hate.”

          Actually, it does. You have stated too many times to count that you hate any and all things Democrat. If that isn’t blinding you to possibilities, then you are fooling yourself. Those of us who have taken off the blinders and get out of bubbles know that there is no EVIL in ANY Democratic plans. The evil is embedded in the de facto leader of the GOP, Mr. DJT.

          Future? You are the one who has no regard for it. Your climate denialism is dangerous to living things and this planet. Nothing evil about trying to save the planet and the people in it.

          The difference between the GOP and the Democrats is the GOP votes are BOUGHT. Crony capitalism is a bedrock in the GOP. You like it because you believe that you are served by it. Makes you foolish.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. First, a far greater share of political donations from large corporations went to Democrats, not Republicans.

            Circumventing the rule of law to replace it with fiat rule is evil.

            Please do show me evidence of an existential threat to humanity from climate change. I’ll be waiting. Rantings of an autistic teenager do not count as proof.


          2. “Circumventing the rule of law to replace it with fiat rule is evil.”

            Yet you have defended actions in that direction repeatedly for over 5 years.

            You just refuse to see how hypocritical your statements are. Seriously, when it is done by the GOP, it is good governance or some other positive thing. When it is done by a Democrat, it is “evil”, “corrupt”, or some other negative thing.

            Get out of your VERY tiny bubble and get real before casting aspersions. You come off as petty and not interested in any kind of compromise between the two ideologies. And I know you will say that Democrats have no interest in compromise. That is BULL 5h17 and deep down, I think you know it.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. “Please do tell me where Trump circumvented the courts or Congress in his actions as President?”

            Gee, that is a tough one.

            Maybe when he sent an armed mob to stop the Congress from fulfilling its Constitutional duties?

            Or, how about that time he took funds authorized by Congress to help Ukraine and failed to deliver them without extorting a personal quid pro quo?

            Or that time he took funds authorized by Congress for military bases and diverted them to building his wall which Congress would not approve?

            Or his flagrant abuse of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act to avoid Congressional approval of his appointees.

            Or his flagrant abuse of the Trade Expansion Act to impose tariffs on Chinese steel on the phony pretext of national security. (DOD needs about 3% of U.S. produced steel.)

            Or – Bombing and missile attacks on Syria without following ANY of the requirements of the War Powers Act.

            Or – here is one you will like – banning bump stocks without Congressional authority.

            Liked by 2 people

  2. In a sense it doesn’t matter what Trump wants or whether he is a good or bad person. What matters is what his supporters want, and how many of them there might be.

    I think there are vastly more potential Trump supporters than either of the major political parties is willing to admit.


    1. RE: “In what sense are MAGA-Republicans held in chains?”

      Per the theme of the post at the top of the thread: “Barnes contends that working class voters across the nation have concluded that both major political parties are corrupt, insular, and will never represent their interests.”


      1. Okay, sure. But that does not explain why it is a MAGA who is in chains and not just a cartoon working stiff.

        Actually, it is a pretty silly cartoon. We are still a democracy and if people would get out and vote their actual interests instead of their fears and hatreds the chains would be gone.

        Liked by 3 people

    2. “I think there are vastly more potential Trump supporters than either of the major political parties is willing to admit.”

      You think poorly. The number is probably around 30 million. Not enough to do anything except split the GOP when DeSantis gets the nod and Trump runs an independent campaign.

      I’m good with that.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. If Trump’s grand announcement is any indication, there’s not much support for another Presidential run. These are supposed to be Trump’s “most dedicated fans.” They were invited to Mar-a-Lago for the grand launch of Trump’s 2024 campaign. They were bored out of their tree. They turned their backs and tried to leave before he was finished speaking. Security stopped them.

    Murdock has said FOX News and the WSJ won’t be supporting Trump this time. Big donors are backing out. Even Ivanka didn’t attend the ceremonies. And if Hannity and Tucker aren’t telling those “working class voters” how great Trump is every night, I’m pretty sure a lot of them will come to doubt it too. Even on the off chance there are no indictments for all of Trump’s crimes, I don’t see him as a serious candidate for anything ever again.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. I heard another rumor. I heard they were going to nominate Liz Cheney for Speaker. Apparently, one does not have to be a member of the House to be Speaker. They can nominate anybody. Every Democrat in the House would support her. They wouldn’t have to peel off many Republicans to elect her.

        If the Republicans had gained control of the Senate, I’d worry about Trump becoming Speaker. Before the Red Wave turned into a puddle of blood, Republicans were talking about making Trump Speaker of the House and then impeaching and removing both Biden and Harris, thereby making Trump President again. But now, even though they may impeach Biden and Harris, they have no way to remove them.

        Still, either choice, Liz or Trump, could produce some entertaining disasters.

        People say McCarthy can’t keep control of the House. Can you imagine what Trump would do? They’d need to double the size of the cleaning crews in the House. Ketchup on the walls!

        Trump may be the de facto Speaker for a while, but I suspect the boy’s going to have more things on his mind than House politics in the near future.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. The only reason Trump threw his golf cap in the ring is to shield himself from criminal indictments. “Help me, political persecution…oh, the humanity…”.

          Of course extortion, tax fraud, bank fraud, election interference, violent attacks on Congress, and stealing state secrets are not crimes if committed by certain ex-government employees, according to the gaslight division of the Republican Party.

          McCarthy, a craven and shallow a politician as ever created, was honest twice in his life: when he bragged that the Benghazi hearings were specifically for hurting Clinton politically and when he lambasted Trump after the attack on the Capitol, but before he knelt and begged forgiveness in Mar a Lago. With those sterling credentials McCarthy might do just fine.

          Liz would be a nice comeuppance. 5 or 6 Republicans with integrity might be hard to find, but hope springs eternal.

          Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s