Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Morgan State Prof: Trump Admin Seeks “Bit-by-Bit Destruction of Democracy”

Morgan State Prof: Trump Admin Seeks “Bit-by-Bit Destruction of Democracy”

“the continuing march forward of an attempted authoritarian regime”

https://youtu.be/_Nq8o6QEygA

On Al Sharpton’s MSNBC show this morning, Jason Johnson depicted the Trump administration as engaging in “the continuing march forward of an attempted authoritarian regime.” He accused the administration of seeking “the bit-by-bit destruction of democracy.”

Johnson is a professor at Morgan State University, a prominent HBCU, and is political editor of The Root, an African-American oriented online publication owned by Univision.

AL SHARPTON: I mean, what are we looking at here this week?

JASON JOHNSON: The continuing march forward of an attempted authoritarian regime. The only thing that we can be comfortable with as Americans is the sheer incompetence of this administration, that they haven’t been more effective in implementing the bit-by-bit destruction of democracy that people like Steve Bannon are seeking and people like Jeff Sessions are complicit in attempting to create.

Bonus Coverage: Ex-Apprentice Member Accuses Parts of Trump Base of “Pure Racism”

In the following segment, Tara Dowdell, a former member of The Apprentice cast turned Dem strategist, said that “for some in the [Trump] base, a big part of it is just pure racism.” Responded Sharpton: “well, that’s what he ran on.”

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Oh shut up and go pay your taxes!

An absolutely classic case of liberal projection.

JoeThePimpernel | August 6, 2017 at 10:56 am

Evidently the “perfesser” is unaware that the United States is a representative republic, not a democracy.

Democracy is two perfessers and a taxpayer voting on how much money the taxpayer owes.

Did they give any examples of the policies that are destroying democracy bit by bit?

Or did they all just nod and agree without ever getting into specifics?

The Friendly Grizzly | August 6, 2017 at 11:45 am

Yet still another further different HCBU “professor” professing nonsense and doing his level best to sound profound and erudite.

    This putz is a ‘professor’ like obama was a ‘professor.’

    We know what complete b.s. the life story of obama is:

    What obama really taught at law school (three subjects: “race, rights and gender”):

    “Among the lies about himself Obama consistently repeats is that he was a constitutional law professor.

    Lie one: Obama was never a professor; he was a lecturer. He did not have the qualifications to be a professor. Obama never published a single law paper. He was hired by the University of Chicago when they learned he had been given a book contract on race and law directly after graduating from Harvard. There was no book – just the contract, which he later reneged on. This is not the normal level of accomplishment for a University of Chicago professor or even lecturer.

    Obama was not capable of writing, and eventually, after failing to deliver, he changed it to a memoir, which he also struggled with. Finally, he asked Bill Ayers to write his memoir for him, using tapes that Michelle dropped off at the Ayerses’.

    Lie two: Obama did not specialize in the Constitution. Obama cared about and taught only one subject: race. One course was about race in the Constitution. It is on this flimsy basis that he attempts to pawn himself off as a constitutional scholar.

    As the New York Times explains, Obama the lecturer taught three subjects only: “race, rights and gender.”

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/01/heres_what_constitutional_scholar_obama_really_taught_at_law_school.html

    Imagine the qualifications of this moron, Johnson?

Actually he is correct. Trump is trying to restore the Republic.
We never were a democracy, the founding fathers feared tyranny by majority,
I’m surprised (well actually not) that you as a scholar wouldn’t know this.

    YellowSnake in reply to AMongoose. | August 6, 2017 at 1:11 pm

    1st of all, the was no ‘The Founding Fathers’. They agreed on little and compromised on much. Being absolutely literal, they accepted slavery. Perhaps you don’t know that Congress did not want to pay for the Army.

    So just what era ‘Great’ era would like? Would you like to restore child labor? Do away with fire regulations? Not have a standing military?

    I could go on and on and on. But you won’t get the point. At best you will pick out something and peck on it like a chicken.

      C. Lashown in reply to YellowSnake. | August 6, 2017 at 2:16 pm

      RE: “So just what era ‘Great’ era would like?”

      The era when I was a young boy in the country, when you could nail a snake to a fence post to let the crows eat. The era when rapists were shot and clerks had shotguns to protect their livelihood. The era when a family or the children could be outside in the summer’s dusk, without worrying about thugs interrupting their activities. The era when following the law was expected behavior. The era when the cops weren’t called every 5 min. and expected to solve every owie of society.

      YellowTail,

      Very few here are lame enough to accept anything you say without a citation from the nonleftist rags you probably have been indoctrinated by.

      “There were no Founding Fathers?”
      The people hare are not as ignorant as you and your peers. Statements like this make you fodder for ridicule.

        Depending on how old you are, you might be one one of the unhappy, original leftist ignoramuses poisoning the minds of the young.

        In that case, being you are ripe as fodder for ridicule, consider yourself one of the Founding Fodders.

The “coastal elite communities” belief ‘crapola’, yet they remain the elite. Your ignorance would be better masked if you said they fomented the ‘crapola’ but they didn’t believe it.

The convervative ‘elites’ figured that out. They don’t belief the ‘crapola’ they feed you. Trump believes in nothing. Perhaps you missed the little story that probably wasn’t covered here: Trump’s Private Clubs In Florida Are Seeking Visas For Foreign Workers http://www.npr.org/2017/07/20/538387033/trumps-private-clubs-in-florida-are-seeking-visas-for-foreign-workers Yes it is NPR. But it is the truth.

    No, NPR is not the truth.

    YellowTail,

    You’ve done it: by citing generalities, making absurd and overbroad statements and ignoring incredibly damning facts against every argument you have ever made, you’ve single-handedly convinced everyone here that hillary clinton would have been a better president than Donald Trump.

    Congratulations. But please: tell us how you do it before you vanish.

JoeThePimpernel: Evidently the “perfesser” is unaware that the United States is a representative republic, not a democracy.

AMongoose: We never were a democracy,

The U.S. is a representative, federal democracy. Since the introduction of Jacksonian Democracy (c.1825), the franchise has been extended repeatedly, to all white men, then to most men (excluding Southern black men), then to women, then finally to all adult citizens.

democracy, a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.

    tom swift in reply to Zachriel. | August 6, 2017 at 1:13 pm

    A “representative democracy” is a republic.

    You’re trying to rename apples “citric apples” and then claiming that they’re oranges.

      tom swift: A “representative democracy” is a republic.

      That’s right. It’s also a democracy, a government in which the supreme power is exercised by the people through a system of representation involving free elections.

        SDN in reply to Zachriel. | August 6, 2017 at 6:43 pm

        Words: you do not define them.

        tom swift in reply to Zachriel. | August 6, 2017 at 7:02 pm

        supreme power is exercised by the people through a system of representation

        And that is not a “democracy”. It’s a “republic”. The two are not synonyms, no matter how hard you try to pound them into one mold.

        SDN: Words: you do not define them.

        tom swift: And that is not a “democracy”.

        Words are defined by usage. Practical lexicographers study how words are used and put that usage into a resource called “dictionary”.

        Merriam-Webster
        democracy, a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.

        U.S. government
        “the U.S. Capitol and its stately dome have become international symbols of our representative democracy.”

        Wikipedia
        Representative democracy (also indirect democracy, representative republic, or psephocracy) is a type of democracy founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy. Nearly all modern Western-style democracies are types of representative democracies

        Per your position, there is no such thing as a representative democracy. In fact, the term is used extensively, in scholarship, in popular culture, and by governments, to refer to systems with representatives elected by universal franchise.

        You trolls here are incredibly bad at what you are trying to do. Like the gang that couldn’t shoot straight.

        A republic is a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives. Period.

        Crazy Pelosi’s morning emails aside, and watching Comedy Central for your news – read a history book written pre-CNN.

          TheFineReport.com: A republic is a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives.

          That’s right. The U.S. is a democratic republic, that is, representatives are elected through widespread suffrage.

Funny stuff. Particularly after eight years of President “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone” Obama.

Of course Obama wasn’t our really promising Democratic wannabee authoritarian poobah. That was Wilson, hands down. Obama was basically a hack. And a good thing too, as the Republic’s official, legal immune system isn’t really all that robust. What probably saved us in the 1919 era was Wilson’s stroke, and we can’t credit Constitutional safeguards for that.

    YellowSnake in reply to tom swift. | August 6, 2017 at 1:21 pm

    That is exactly why some people are concerned about Trump’s authoritarian tendencies. “The Republic’s official, legal immune system isn’t really all that robust. (sic)”

    To give just one example (of many): Trump still maintains that the ‘Central Park 5’ were guilty and should be rotting in jail. No amount of evidence. No examination of the timeline. No testimony by the admitted perpetrator has altered his view 1 bit. He protested their release while grabbing pu$$y.

    “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone…”

    Rumor has it obama confused the two, and not only stabbed himself several times in the ear, but it is said he often tried signing his name with a telephone receiver.

    let’s get real: obama couldn’t put that sentence together without someone writing it for him. Nor did he understand it until it was explained to him.

    As for obama’s legacy: I’ve got a toilet, and I’ve got obama toilet paper.

    https://www.amazon.com/Barack-Obama-Toilet-Paper-3-Pack/dp/B008D36BLS

Who will relieve us of this plague of Affirmative Action?

One person’s “authoritarian” is another’s “strict constitutionalist”. Draining the swamp means being unfair to the algae and muck. Yes, Trump endangers democracy… that is mob rule. Who is the “mob” you say? Your fellow travelers most likely.

Oh.. and please use gasoline for the wick…

Why has Sharpton not been indicted for tax evasion?

People Jailed for Owing Less Taxes Than Al Sharpton:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2015/02/05/people-jailed-for-owing-less-taxes-than-al-sharpton.html

The list includes rock legend Chuck Berry, Grammy winner Lauryn Hill, Ron Isley of the Isley Brothers, Survivor reality star Richard Hatch, hotel queen Leona Helmsely, and baseball’s Pete Rose.

According to a New York Times’ review of government records last fall, the MSNBC host and civil rights activist personally faces federal tax liens for more than $3 million in back taxes owed, and state tax liens of $777,657. So in total, Sharpton reportedly owes more than $3.7 million in back taxes. His other two for-profit businesses, Raw Talent and Revals Communications, (both now defunct) owe anywhere from $717,000 to more than $800,000, based on state and federal tax liens, reports from the Times and National Review indicate. Revals Communications also either didn’t file its tax returns, or underpaid its tax bills from 1999 to 2002.

Sharpton’s National Action Network also owed more than $813,000 in federal back taxes as of December of 2012, according to the nonprofit’s recent filings. At one point, the National Action Network’s tax liability more than doubled last decade, jumping from $900,000 in 2003 to almost $1.9 milion in 2006. In 1993, Sharpton also had entered a guilty plea for the misdemeanor of failing to file his New York State income-tax return. Sharpton has also said the National Action Network had once given him a loan to pay for his daughters’ tuition, which is a violation of the law.

When you argue with an idiot, you then have two idiots arguing.

When you argue with Sharpton or the likes of the dumbasses in the photos above, calling you an idiot is an insult to idiots.

Why is this black man free and critics of Trump? It was just a year ago that the “Trump is Hitler” crowd assured us that Trump was going to round up all the minorities for the concentration camps. Did we miss this one id did he escape?

So begins the Trumpian Long March through the institutions!

“The Root” should be renamed as “The Racists.”

If by “bit by bit distraction of democracy,” you mean bit by bit re-establishment of our Constitutional republic.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend