Posted on Nov 18, 2023
Trump's American Carnage: Frank Luntz (interview) | FRONTLINE
690
26
10
7
7
0
Trump's American Carnage: Frank Luntz (interview) | FRONTLINE...
Long but very informative...
Frank Luntz is a strategist and pollster who has worked on behalf of the Republican Party for nearly three decades.
The following interview was conducted by FRONTLINE’s Jim Gilmore on Jan. 12, 2021. It has been edited for clarity and length. This interview is being published as part of FRONTLINE’s Transparency Project, an effort to open up the source material behind our documentaries...
Long but very informative...
Frank Luntz is a strategist and pollster who has worked on behalf of the Republican Party for nearly three decades.
The following interview was conducted by FRONTLINE’s Jim Gilmore on Jan. 12, 2021. It has been edited for clarity and length. This interview is being published as part of FRONTLINE’s Transparency Project, an effort to open up the source material behind our documentaries...
Donald Trump
Republicans
Election 2020
Posted 6 mo ago
Responses: 6
5
5
0
5
5
0
2
2
0
A Conversation on the Right: The Current State of Presidential Power
John Malcolm and John Yoo revive their discussion of presidential power, prosecution, impeachment, and separation of powers with the prosecution of former Pr...
https://youtu.be/7qBKCpiqqf0
https://youtu.be/Q7OfGnA8HJU
1.) A conservative case emerges to disqualify Trump for his role on Jan. 6
August 10, 2023 at 6:04 pm | Updated August 10, 2023 at 8:57 pm
The professors are active members of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, and proponents of originalism, the method of interpretation that seeks to determine the Constitution’s original meaning.
The professors — William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — studied the question for more than a year and detailed their findings in a long article to be published next year in The University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
“When we started out, neither of us was sure what the answer was,” Baude said. “People were talking about this provision of the Constitution. We thought: ‘We’re constitutional scholars, and this is an important constitutional question. We ought to figure out what’s really going on here.’ And the more we dug into it, the more we realized that we had something to add.”
He summarized the article’s conclusion: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”
A law review article will not, of course, change the reality that Trump is the Republican front-runner and that voters remain free to assess whether his conduct was blameworthy.
But the scope and depth of the article may encourage and undergird lawsuits from other candidates and ordinary voters arguing that the Constitution makes him ineligible for office.
“There are many ways that this could become a lawsuit presenting a vital constitutional issue that potentially the Supreme Court would want to hear and decide,” Paulsen said.
Trump has already been indicted twice in federal court, in connection with his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his retention of classified documents.
He is also facing charges relating to hush-money payments in New York and may soon be indicted in Georgia in a second election case
SOURCE : https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/a-conservative-case-emerges-to-disqualify-trump-for-his-role-on-jan-6/?amp=1
2.) Dark Money and the Courts
The Right-Wing Takeover of the Judiciary
Trump’s Judge Whisperer Promised to Take Our Laws Back to the 1930s
In the 1930s, the courts were fully complicit in maintaining the country as a thoroughgoing ethnocracy, governed openly for the benefit of white men. Public schools in 21 states were racially segregated by law. “Separate but equal” schools had been affirmed by the Supreme Court as late as 1927, in a unanimous decision allowing Mississippi to kick a Chinese American girl out of her local “white” school for being a member of the “yellow” race. The outlawing of segregation is settled law in our country, and nobody would dare dream of returning to those antiquated judicial interpretations, you might say? Several of Trump’s judicial nominees have conspicuously, outrageously, refused to say whether they thought Brown v. Board of Education, which ended legal school segregation in 1954, was correctly decided. Read the full piece in Slate.
SOURCE : https://www.acslaw.org/analysis/reports/dark-money/
3.) SEPTEMBER 17, 2019
Trump’s Judge Whisperer Promised to Take Our Laws Back to the 1930s
JAMAL GREENE Dwight Professor of Law, Columbia Law School
The average American doesn’t know who Leo is, but as the Post piece makes clear, he‘s one of the most influential lawyers in the country. A longtime leader within the Federalist Society, Leo has had Donald Trump’s ear on judicial appointments and has been the main curator of the president’s list of Supreme Court candidates. Two of Leo’s personal picks, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, have been elevated to the highest court in the country since Trump’s election. So when Leonard Leo says he wants to return to a pre–New Deal Constitution, you should listen. And you should be alarmed.
In the 1930s, the courts were fully complicit in maintaining the country as a thoroughgoing ethnocracy, governed openly for the benefit of white men. Public schools in 21 states were racially segregated by law. “Separate but equal” schools had been affirmed by the Supreme Court as late as 1927, in a unanimous decision allowing Mississippi to kick a Chinese American girl out of her local “white” school for being a member of the “yellow” race. The outlawing of segregation is settled law in our country, and nobody would dare dream of returning to those antiquated judicial interpretations, you might say? Several of Trump’s judicial nominees have conspicuously, outrageously, refused to say whether they thought Brown v. Board of Education, which ended legal school segregation in 1954, was correctly decided.
SOURCE : https://www.acslaw.org/expertforum/trumps-judge-whisperer-promised-to-take-our-laws-back-to-the-1930s/
BONUS -
POLITICS
One Year In, Trump Has Kept A Major Promise: Reshaping The Federal Judiciary
January
President Trump is delivering on one of his biggest and most significant campaign promises: He is starting to reshape the federal judiciary. In his first year in office, Trump welcomed a new, young and conservative lawyer, Neil Gorsuch, onto the Supreme Court. And he won confirmation of 12 federal appeals court judges — a record.
But they rallied behind Trump after he vowed to appoint judges in the mold of the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. "So far his record is outstanding," said Ed Whelan, a former law clerk to Scalia who now runs a think tank called the Ethics & Public Policy Center. "Far better, I think, than any of us would have expected."
Democrats and civil rights advocates find plenty of reasons to be troubled, starting with what they call Trump's blindness about diversity among his choices.
"More than 91 percent of them are white, and nearly 77 percent of them are men," said Kristine Lucius, executive vice president at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
"You would imagine those numbers in a day where law schools were segregated or law schools didn't admit women. But we have not been in that place for generations," she said.
Lucius said many of Trump's selections for lifetime federal judge spots are hostile to gay and lesbian rights.
* The lower court
* But the last year hasn't been entirely smooth sailing for candidates on some of the lower courts. Three nominees withdrew from consideration last year in less than two weeks.
* First, it was Brett Talley, a Justice Department lawyer. Talley came under scrutiny for failing to disclose his wife worked for the White House counsel's office and that he had written blog posts praising an early version of the KKK.
* There is no sign of a slowdown. Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced 17 nominees.
* Conservatives said there is a good reason the White House and the Senate are rushing to confirm as many judges as they can: If the Senate changes hands after the November elections, Trump's system for filling vacancies could come to a screeching halt.
SOURCE : https://www.npr.org/2018/01/21/579169772/one-year-in-trump-has-kept-a-major-promise-reshaping-the-federal-judiciary
https://youtu.be/Q7OfGnA8HJU
1.) A conservative case emerges to disqualify Trump for his role on Jan. 6
August 10, 2023 at 6:04 pm | Updated August 10, 2023 at 8:57 pm
The professors are active members of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, and proponents of originalism, the method of interpretation that seeks to determine the Constitution’s original meaning.
The professors — William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — studied the question for more than a year and detailed their findings in a long article to be published next year in The University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
“When we started out, neither of us was sure what the answer was,” Baude said. “People were talking about this provision of the Constitution. We thought: ‘We’re constitutional scholars, and this is an important constitutional question. We ought to figure out what’s really going on here.’ And the more we dug into it, the more we realized that we had something to add.”
He summarized the article’s conclusion: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”
A law review article will not, of course, change the reality that Trump is the Republican front-runner and that voters remain free to assess whether his conduct was blameworthy.
But the scope and depth of the article may encourage and undergird lawsuits from other candidates and ordinary voters arguing that the Constitution makes him ineligible for office.
“There are many ways that this could become a lawsuit presenting a vital constitutional issue that potentially the Supreme Court would want to hear and decide,” Paulsen said.
Trump has already been indicted twice in federal court, in connection with his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his retention of classified documents.
He is also facing charges relating to hush-money payments in New York and may soon be indicted in Georgia in a second election case
SOURCE : https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/a-conservative-case-emerges-to-disqualify-trump-for-his-role-on-jan-6/?amp=1
2.) Dark Money and the Courts
The Right-Wing Takeover of the Judiciary
Trump’s Judge Whisperer Promised to Take Our Laws Back to the 1930s
In the 1930s, the courts were fully complicit in maintaining the country as a thoroughgoing ethnocracy, governed openly for the benefit of white men. Public schools in 21 states were racially segregated by law. “Separate but equal” schools had been affirmed by the Supreme Court as late as 1927, in a unanimous decision allowing Mississippi to kick a Chinese American girl out of her local “white” school for being a member of the “yellow” race. The outlawing of segregation is settled law in our country, and nobody would dare dream of returning to those antiquated judicial interpretations, you might say? Several of Trump’s judicial nominees have conspicuously, outrageously, refused to say whether they thought Brown v. Board of Education, which ended legal school segregation in 1954, was correctly decided. Read the full piece in Slate.
SOURCE : https://www.acslaw.org/analysis/reports/dark-money/
3.) SEPTEMBER 17, 2019
Trump’s Judge Whisperer Promised to Take Our Laws Back to the 1930s
JAMAL GREENE Dwight Professor of Law, Columbia Law School
The average American doesn’t know who Leo is, but as the Post piece makes clear, he‘s one of the most influential lawyers in the country. A longtime leader within the Federalist Society, Leo has had Donald Trump’s ear on judicial appointments and has been the main curator of the president’s list of Supreme Court candidates. Two of Leo’s personal picks, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, have been elevated to the highest court in the country since Trump’s election. So when Leonard Leo says he wants to return to a pre–New Deal Constitution, you should listen. And you should be alarmed.
In the 1930s, the courts were fully complicit in maintaining the country as a thoroughgoing ethnocracy, governed openly for the benefit of white men. Public schools in 21 states were racially segregated by law. “Separate but equal” schools had been affirmed by the Supreme Court as late as 1927, in a unanimous decision allowing Mississippi to kick a Chinese American girl out of her local “white” school for being a member of the “yellow” race. The outlawing of segregation is settled law in our country, and nobody would dare dream of returning to those antiquated judicial interpretations, you might say? Several of Trump’s judicial nominees have conspicuously, outrageously, refused to say whether they thought Brown v. Board of Education, which ended legal school segregation in 1954, was correctly decided.
SOURCE : https://www.acslaw.org/expertforum/trumps-judge-whisperer-promised-to-take-our-laws-back-to-the-1930s/
BONUS -
POLITICS
One Year In, Trump Has Kept A Major Promise: Reshaping The Federal Judiciary
January
President Trump is delivering on one of his biggest and most significant campaign promises: He is starting to reshape the federal judiciary. In his first year in office, Trump welcomed a new, young and conservative lawyer, Neil Gorsuch, onto the Supreme Court. And he won confirmation of 12 federal appeals court judges — a record.
But they rallied behind Trump after he vowed to appoint judges in the mold of the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. "So far his record is outstanding," said Ed Whelan, a former law clerk to Scalia who now runs a think tank called the Ethics & Public Policy Center. "Far better, I think, than any of us would have expected."
Democrats and civil rights advocates find plenty of reasons to be troubled, starting with what they call Trump's blindness about diversity among his choices.
"More than 91 percent of them are white, and nearly 77 percent of them are men," said Kristine Lucius, executive vice president at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
"You would imagine those numbers in a day where law schools were segregated or law schools didn't admit women. But we have not been in that place for generations," she said.
Lucius said many of Trump's selections for lifetime federal judge spots are hostile to gay and lesbian rights.
* The lower court
* But the last year hasn't been entirely smooth sailing for candidates on some of the lower courts. Three nominees withdrew from consideration last year in less than two weeks.
* First, it was Brett Talley, a Justice Department lawyer. Talley came under scrutiny for failing to disclose his wife worked for the White House counsel's office and that he had written blog posts praising an early version of the KKK.
* There is no sign of a slowdown. Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced 17 nominees.
* Conservatives said there is a good reason the White House and the Senate are rushing to confirm as many judges as they can: If the Senate changes hands after the November elections, Trump's system for filling vacancies could come to a screeching halt.
SOURCE : https://www.npr.org/2018/01/21/579169772/one-year-in-trump-has-kept-a-major-promise-reshaping-the-federal-judiciary
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google 
