Episode 40. January 18, 2020

CLP Topic Category: Democrat Party Socialism

Obama’s IRMAA Stealth Tax to Punish Retired Americans.

Introduction.

Our podcast today expands on Rush Limbaugh’s allegation that Democrats seek to punish success. We provide an analysis of Obama’s 2015 IRMAA stealth tax as an example to support Limbaugh’s allegation.

IRMAA stands for the Social Security income-related monthly adjustment to the social security retirement check of retired citizens. The effect of the tax is to reduce the monthly income retirement check, if the tax payer had a capital gain financial success in the previous 2 years.

The stealth tax punishes retired citizens who take a one-time capital gain on real estate or stocks and bonds. The capital gain is reported by the IRS to the Social Security Administration, without the citizen’s knowledge, or consent, and the gain bumps the citizen into a penalty bracket for earning too much income.

The one-time capital gain event overrides the entire life-time of earnings, used to calculate a citizen’s monthly Social Security retirement check.

In 2018, there were approximately 10 million citizens caught by the IRMAA punishment trap. The IRMAA is equivalent to a 2.2% surtax on income. The revenue from IRMAA flows to the general government coffers, and is not used to offset the social security deficit.

The Democrats use the tax code to punish citizens who do not conform to the socialist correct-think vision of “income fairness.”

Limbaugh stated the income fairness allegation against the Democrats,

“The entire Democrat Party is structured to punish success, or at least make voters think that they are going to punish success. Obama seeks  a path that punishes achievement, that punishes success, and he speaks negatively of the country.”

Most observers probably think Limbaugh is talking about the Democrat’s desire to punish rich or wealthy Americans, primarily because of the Democrat’s class war ideology that the rich do not pay a fair share of their income in taxes.

Typical of the Democrat’s anti-rich mantra is the statement by Elizabeth Warren that serves to heighten class hatred between Americans.

Warren deploys the socialist class envy ideology to convince voters that the American economic system is rigged against the average citizen, and that when she is elected, the Democrats will punish the wealthy citizens by taxing them.

Warren stated,

“People feel like the system is rigged against them. And here’s the painful part. They’re right. The system is rigged. Look around. Oil companies guzzle down billions in profits. Billionaires pay lower tax rates than their secretaries. And Wall Street CEOs, the same ones who wrecked our economy and destroyed millions of jobs, still strut around Congress, no shame, demanding favors and acting like we should thank them.”

According to the Democrat mantra, only the Federal government is powerful and righteous enough to overcome the unfair outcomes generated for working-class citizens by the rigged economic system of capitalism.

IRMAA contradicts the “tax-the-rich” mantra by describing how the Democrats inflict punishment on middle class citizens, not just the rich.

The Democrats punish middle class citizens by taking away social security benefits when the socialists deem the behavior of achieving a capital gain success as unacceptable.

Our podcast does not argue about the technical merits of IRMAA, or it’s justification as a method of raising revenue from retired citizens to offset the Social Security unfunded liability.

Rather, we explain the socialist logic that supports why socialists seek to punish success.

The logic of the Democrat socialist ideology of using the power of government to enforce fairness is captured by Obama’s statement, in 2010.

Obama stated,

“I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money”

We explain that IRMAA is a representation that a one-time capital gain is not fair because the gain means the citizen has made too much money.

We conclude that nothing will ever change the behavior of Democrats because they deeply believe that they are the sole, ultimate judges of what constitutes fairness.

Victor Davis Hansen explains that the Democrat strategy is to eliminate political opposition in order to gain a one-party political monopoly, like the one that existed in North Carolina and Louisiana, in the 20th century.

If the Democrats succeed in gaining the one-party monopoly, they will permanently punish citizens, through secret, stealth taxes, like IRMAA.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for January 18, 2020.

Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Police State Socialism, and is titled, Obama’s IRMAA Stealth Tax to Punish Retired Americans.

The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Episode 39 January 3, 2020

CLP topic category: Irreconcilable Differences.

Polarization and the Inevitable Disunion of America.

Introduction.

Our podcast today expands on Zack Beauchamp’s article, “The Constitution Was Not Built For This,” to explain that the ideological polarization in America will lead to a civil disunion.

We argue that Beauchamp, a socialist writer for Vox, is correct that Madison’s Constitution of 1787, was not built to resolve the growing polarization between socialists and natural rights conservatives over the nation’s mission and purpose.

We argue that socialists promote class conflict and racial polarization as a strategy to overthrow the government in order to replace the current government with socialism,

Typical of the left wing hope for polarization is the article by Sam Tanenhaus, The Promise of Polarization, where he argues that “Ideological division was once seen as the solution to America’s political gridlock.”

In leftist language, “gridlock” is when socialists cannot convince Republicans to collaborate with Democrats.

Beauchamp writes,

“Republicans’ in the House who did not vote against Trump’s impeachment reveals a broken system — and a democracy at real risk of failure. … the GOP’s willingness to back the president to the hilt, in spite of clear and obvious evidence of abuses of power, speaks to an urgent threat to American democracy: Our constitutional system is ill-equipped to withstand extreme polarization.”

Beauchamp makes the same observation as Bill Maher that the result of polarization is that the two sides see each other as ultimate enemies, not a citizen-compatriots.

Beauchamp writes,

“Under conditions of extreme polarization, the two camps start to see the other side as not merely a political opponent, but an existential threat to the American way of life.”

For Beauchamp, the impeachment is simply a necessary first step in removing the voting rights of 63 million conservatives, in order to make progress to a hoped-for one-party socialist tyranny.

His argument is that Republicans in the House, who did not support the left’s drive for impeachment, are intolerant and are contributing to polarization.

In our first section, we argue that Madison’s Constitution was designed to ameliorate commercial and financial conflicts between the natural aristocracy and common citizens.

Madison assumed that all citizens understood that the purpose of the Revolution was liberty, and did not design the rules to resolve the first principles of the national purpose.

In our second section, we explain why Madison’s Constitution is inadequate in solving ideological polarization. We argue that Madison’s Constitution is a failure that cannot be fixed in order to ameliorate the divisions in America.

Victoria Nourse, a left-wing law professor at Georgetown University, explained her concept of a crisis, as opposed to a constitutional failure,

“A constitutional crisis is a fight among branches of government in which neither side backs down, and there is no clear resolution within the constitutional system.”

She is right that Madison’s Constitution offers no solution to polarization, but mischaracterizes the impasse as a constitutional “crisis.” Madison’s rules assume a national consensus among citizens that does not exist, and is a failure, not a crisis.

The socialists have a coherent strategy of using polarization to divide American citizens in order to implement a socialist state.

In our third section, we extend the comments of Beauchamp to include a representative range of left wing opinion to demonstrate that the desired outcome of polarization is the implementation of a one-party socialist state.

We conclude our podcast with the observation that natural rights conservatives must begin to see the Democrat socialists as an existential threat to individual liberty.

The only non-violent solution to polarization is for conservatives to create a new democratic republic, with a new constitution, that es

Episode 39 January 3, 2020

CLP topic category: Irreconcilable Differences.

Polarization and the Inevitable Disunion of America.

Introduction.

Our podcast today expands on Zack Beauchamp’s article, “The Constitution Was Not Built For This,” to explain that the ideological polarization in America will lead to a civil disunion.

We argue that Beauchamp, a socialist writer for Vox, is correct that Madison’s Constitution of 1787, was not built to resolve the growing polarization between socialists and natural rights conservatives over the nation’s mission and purpose.

We argue that socialists promote class conflict and racial polarization as a strategy to overthrow the government in order to replace the current government with socialism,

Typical of the left wing hope for polarization is the article by Sam Tanenhaus, The Promise of Polarization, where he argues that “Ideological division was once seen as the solution to America’s political gridlock.”

In leftist language, “gridlock” is when socialists cannot convince Republicans to collaborate with Democrats.

Beauchamp writes,

“Republicans’ in the House who did not vote against Trump’s impeachment reveals a broken system — and a democracy at real risk of failure. … the GOP’s willingness to back the president to the hilt, in spite of clear and obvious evidence of abuses of power, speaks to an urgent threat to American democracy: Our constitutional system is ill-equipped to withstand extreme polarization.”

Beauchamp makes the same observation as Bill Maher that the result of polarization is that the two sides see each other as ultimate enemies, not a citizen-compatriots.

Beauchamp writes,

“Under conditions of extreme polarization, the two camps start to see the other side as not merely a political opponent, but an existential threat to the American way of life.”

For Beauchamp, the impeachment is simply a necessary first step in removing the voting rights of 63 million conservatives, in order to make progress to a hoped-for one-party socialist tyranny.

His argument is that Republicans in the House, who did not support the left’s drive for impeachment, are intolerant and are contributing to polarization.

In our first section, we argue that Madison’s Constitution was designed to ameliorate commercial and financial conflicts between the natural aristocracy and common citizens.

Madison assumed that all citizens understood that the purpose of the Revolution was liberty, and did not design the rules to resolve the first principles of the national purpose.

In our second section, we explain why Madison’s Constitution is inadequate in solving ideological polarization. We argue that Madison’s Constitution is a failure that cannot be fixed in order to ameliorate the divisions in America.

Victoria Nourse, a left-wing law professor at Georgetown University, explained her concept of a crisis, as opposed to a constitutional failure,

“A constitutional crisis is a fight among branches of government in which neither side backs down, and there is no clear resolution within the constitutional system.”

She is right that Madison’s Constitution offers no solution to polarization, but mischaracterizes the impasse as a constitutional “crisis.” Madison’s rules assume a national consensus among citizens that does not exist, and is a failure, not a crisis.

The socialists have a coherent strategy of using polarization to divide American citizens in order to implement a socialist state.

In our third section, we extend the comments of Beauchamp to include a representative range of left wing opinion to demonstrate that the desired outcome of polarization is the implementation of a one-party socialist state.

We conclude our podcast with the observation that natural rights conservatives must begin to see the Democrat socialists as an existential threat to individual liberty.

The only non-violent solution to polarization is for conservatives to create a new democratic republic, with a new constitution, that establishes individual liberty as the end goal of the nation.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for January 3, 2020.

Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Irreconcilable Differences and is titled, “Polarization and the Inevitable Disunion of America.”

The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Episode 38 December 13, 2019

CLP topic. Vichy Republican Collaborators

America After Trump?

Introduction.

Our podcast today extends Angelo Codevilla’s recent analysis about the future of America, after the 2020 election.

We use Codevilla’s analysis to examine the future of America from the perspective of what happens to the establishment Republican Party, what happens to the Trump conservative movement, and what happens to America, as a nation.

Codevilla asks,

“The instant after the 2020 elections… the real question is: What will become of us? What can we, what must we, do for ourselves?...Not even winning a bloody civil war against the ruling class could accomplish such a thing as returning the nation to its founding principles.”

Codevilla argues that restoring the country to its founding vision is “out of the question.” He says,

“Constitutional conservatism on behalf of a country, a large part of which rejects common citizenship, is impossible.”

Codevilla cites the work of F. H. Buckley, in his book, American Secession: The Looming Threat of a National Breakup, to argue that the framework of state sovereignty federalism, in the Articles of Confederation, offered a better pathway for protecting the natural rights of citizens than Madison’s centralized representative republic.

Our podcast argues that Codevilla’s analysis of the impossibility of returning to the founding principles is correct. He argues that the deep state, which Codevilla calls, the “ruling elite class,” are too far entrenched in the existing government to ever return to a government based upon the consent of the governed.

The establishment Republicans, represented by Karl Rove, are the administrative organization of the deep state, and the State Department bureaucrats who showed up in the impeachment hearings to testify against Trump, are directed by the global ruling class leaders of the deep state.

To paraphrase V. O. Key, in Southern Politics in State and Nation, the agents of the deep state do the bidding of the global elite, without prompting, because they both share a deep ideological commitment to advancing global socialism.

According to the Democrat’s interpretation of impeachment, Trump abused his power by not obeying the agents of the deep state.

In her recent book about Trump, Nikki Haley identifies Tillerson and Kelly as members of the deep state governing apparatus. She explains that Tillerson and Kelly attempted to recruit her in the attempted deep state coup against Trump.

Rush Limbaugh sees Haley as the possible leader of the Trump conservative movement, after 2024. He thinks that the Republican Party is actually the Trump conservative movement, and that Haley has been converted as a Trump protégé.

Limbaugh writes,

“Now, I actually believe that the Republican Party doesn’t know it yet, but it is Trump’s party.”

Limbaugh believes that Haley is not willing to have the Republican institutional establishment returned to Karl Rove after the 2020 election.

In his article, “Nikki Haley fires the first shot in the GOP's post-Trump war,” J.T. Young, states that,

“Haley has signaled that she will not side with those desiring to return the party to its establishment. Establishment Republicans believe Trump to be just a momentary break in their political and policy continuum. After Trump, they will both purge the Trump interlopers and regularly beat a vulnerable Democratic Party now hostage to its left wing.”

Neither the establishment Republican Party of Karl Rove, nor Nikki Haley, as the leader of the Trump conservative movement, can overcome the irreconcilable differences between the socialist Democrats and natural rights conservatives.

Karl Rove’s American Crossroads and American Action Network are the defacto Republican establishment political front groups that use the Republican organizational apparatus to promote the interests of America’s wealthiest families and global corporations.

Rove, and his groups, are best seen as  Republican Vichy Collaborators, with the socialists, to implement a new world order. Rove is a political operative of the deep state, and takes his orders from the global ruling class.

Trump’s conservative political movement does not have a coherent political ideology of individualism, and Haley’s recent book about Trump does not address Codevilla’s argument about the entrenched power of the ruling elite class.

Unlike the establishment Republicans of Rove, the socialist Democrats have a coherent anti-American ideology, based upon grievance and victimization.

After 2020, the Democrats will continue to advocate the transformation of America into a global socialist nation, ruled by the deep state elites.  

The socialists are driven by their ideology that socialism is better than individualism, and they will never stop undermining America until they implement a totalitarian socialist regime.

There is no other side to the war over the future of America because Rove’s establishment Republicans do not have an ideology of individual freedom.

This podcast concludes that Codevilla and Young are correct in their assessment that America is over.

The obvious competitor ideology to socialism, after 2020, is to return to the revolutionary Spirit of ’76, and the restoration of the American Democratic Impulse.

The only peaceful, non-violent strategy for solving the irreconcilable differences is a civil dissolution of the nation, based upon a vote in each legislature to either join the new Democratic Republic of America, or cast their lot with the new Socialists States of America.

Episode 37. December 6, 2019.

CLP topic category: Democrat Police State Socialism.

Title: UNC Silent Sam and the Democrat’s Effective Political Use of Violence.

Introduction.

Our podcast today re-examines the destruction, in August of 2018, of the UNC Confederate monument, known as Silent Sam,

Our podcast places the criminal act of destroying the monument into the larger historical context of the Democrat’s effective use of violence to obtain their goal of a one-party political regime.

Our podcast argues that there is an unbroken historical continuity, from 1898 to 2019, in the violence of the Democrat Party, using the cover of “white supremacy” as the justification of the violence to obtain political goals.

The argument made in this podcast is that there never was a “New South.”

As C. Wright Mills correctly describes, the history of North Carolina is an unbroken continuity of the Democrats using violence to obtain political goals.

In the era of Julian Carr, the Democrats used the war cry “Negro Rule,” to erect the racial apartheid system that lasted 80 years. The violence of the Democrats created a one-party, totalitarian white supremacist society,

In the modern era, the Democrat Party uses the war cry, “white supremacy,” to justify their acts of violence to eliminate opposition. In their telling of history, the Republicans are a racist party, and Trump is a white supremacist.

In other words, the term “white supremacist,” is a useful political term, that has no legitimate meaning, other than as a propaganda tool for the Democrats to legitimize their violence.

Our podcast argues that the destruction of Silent Sam was a carefully coordinated attack, led by Carol Folt, a Democrat, whose text messages on August 20, 2018, show her collaboration with antifa and the police to “stand down,” four minutes before the statute came down.

The main conclusion of the podcast is that violence works as an effective tactic for Democrats, and that the destruction of Silent Sam was a huge political success for the Democrats.

But, the victory over Silent Sam will never be enough for Democrats.

The Democrat’s goal is to use violence to create a totalitarian society, where only politically correct socialist ideas are allowed, under the penalty of death.

Episode 36. November 22, 2019.

CLP Topic. Destruction of the Rule of Law.

 

Title: What Pelosi Means When She Says “No One Is Above the Law.”

Introduction.

Our podcast today places Pelosi’s doublespeak, “No one is above the law,” into a larger general theory of the Democrat socialist ideology and behavior.

The theory in our podcast explains why and how there could be such a stark gap in reality between socialists and Trump voters over the issue of impeachment.

Doublespeak is language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. For Pelosi, doublespeak is a tool of propaganda that promotes her socialist vision of a socially just society.

Pelosi turns the historical meaning of the term on its head. The illicit impeachment hearing is not authorized by a grant of authority, from citizens  to Pelosi, to impeach Trump, without cause.

Under the American tradition, We, the People are the ultimate sovereign authority, and Pelosi is bound by the authority of the citizens.

The term originated, in 1215, and meant that King John was prohibited from acting against his subjects, without due process.

Applied to impeachment, Pelosi, as an agent of government, cannot unjustly deprive Trump voters of “life, liberty or property” and may not take illegal action against the sovereignty of citizens to remove Trump, without due process.

In order to understand Pelosi’s doublespeak, it must combined with an article of faith in Democrat ideology of social justice that an “expert” class of socialists make better decisions about social welfare than ordinary citizens.

Part of the theory of Democrat behavior explained in this podcast is that the Democrats behavior originates in their moral arrogance that they are the political experts that are better at making decisions than voters.

The socialists deeply believe that socialism is better than individualism.

In their world, there are two classes of citizens, the socialist experts, and the non-socialists, also known as the proletariat, or in modern terms, smelly Walmart shoppers.

When Pelosi uses her term, she means that Trump failed to obey the advice of the deep state experts in foreign policy. Trump, in other words, is not above the law of the experts.

Social welfare would have been better if Trump had taken the advice of William Taylor and George Kent. His failure to heed the expert’s advice becomes a high crime and misdemeanor, and evidence that Trump is failing to execute the duties of the Office.

In the past, the left couched the expert class in terms like “smart growth,” “global climate change,” or “sustainable growth.” The left’s intent is to remove these issues from democratic citizen authority, so that the socialist elites can have unhindered control over the policies.

The ultimate consequence of Pelosi’s socialist ideology of the expert class is a profound anti-democratic ideology against participatory democracy in favor of authoritarian dictatorship.

According to Pelosi, the 63 million Trump voters made a mistake in electing Trump, and their votes must be overturned, by the experts, to correct the voter’s mistake.

Part of the motivation for socialists is to replace a constitutional democratic  form of government with the socialist rule of law imposed on Trump voters, who are deemed to be enemies of the socialist state.

The law is whatever Pelosi says it is, at the moment that she says it. At one moment, Trump is not above the law on collusion with Putin. At the next moment, Trump is not above the law on obstructing justice. Then, Trump is not above the law on bribery with Ukraine.

Only Pelosi is competent to judge what the law is, and her word is the ultimate authority, not the written Constitution, and not the sovereignty of the people.

For example, the reason that Schiff controls the entire impeachment civil process is related to the socialist incipient urge for authoritarian control.

Representative Steve Scalise observes that,

Schiff controls who testifies.

Schiff controls how Republicans use our question time.

Schiff controls what gets released from his secret depositions.

Schiff shuts out witnesses who would contradict his one-sided narrative.

Pelosi’s ideological allegiance is to creating a socialist state, not to the voluntary obedience to the rule of law.

Just like Vindman’s allegiance is to the Interagency Intelligence Committee, not to the Constitution.

The expert class is the Democrat’s updated, modern version of the master class, which believed that Jews must be eliminated because they constituted an impediment to the goals of the Third Reich, in the same way that Trump voters constitute an impediment for Pelosi in the creation of the socialist state.

“No one above the law,” is Pelosi’s way of saying that no one is beyond the control of the socialist deep state to determine what is in the best interests of the nation.

Our podcast will argue that the impeachment process is a violation of the 14th Amendment of Trump voters, and violates the separation of powers that constrains the Congress from terminating a presidency, solely for political purposes to remove a political opponent.

We conclude that Bill Maher is correct that the Democrat’s attempt to remove Trump will result in a bloody, protracted civil war between socialists and Trump voters.

We conclude that the ideological differences between the police state repressive society of socialists and the individual liberties of a natural rights republic are irreconcilable.

The only peaceful, non-violent solution to the nation’s conflict is to dissolve the nation into two new nations:

The Socialist States of America

The Democratic Republic of America.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for November 22, 2019.

Our podcast today is under the CLP Topic Category, Destruction of the Rule of Law, and is titled, What Pelosi Means When She Says “No One Is Above the Law.” 

The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Episode 35. November 15, 2019.

 

CLP Topic: Vichy Republican Collaborators

Title: The Virginia GOP’s Message.

Introduction.

Our podcast today examines the message the Virginia GOP sent in the November 5, 2019 election.

Some supporters of the GOP suggested that the Virginia Republicans needed to tighten up their public relations marketing message.

For example, Scott Reed, of the U. S. Chamber of Commerce, noted,

“It was a rough night. The Republican Party is lacking message discipline, and that needs to be addressed.”

Tim Hannigan, a leader of the State GOP said that the Republican Party in Virginia needs to get its act together and deliver a winning message. He states,

"I think Republicans have failed to convey what we think is a winning message,"

Other observers suggested that the Virginia GOP message did not appeal to suburban voters. It was not a problem of the message, noted Austin Chambers, head of the Republican State Leadership Committee, it was a problem of marketing and packaging.

Chamber stated,

“No doubt about it, Republicans have a suburban problem. Anyone who looks at the data can see that. But the problem is a matter of substance for Republicans — it’s a matter of packaging. I don’t think you have to moderate your politics and beliefs to win in the suburbs, you just need to do a much better job communicating.”

 

Much of the media analysis of the Republican defeat in Virginia has focused on the shift of voter’s allegiance in the suburbs, from Republican to Democrat, based upon their hatred of Trump.

For example, the New York Times wrote,

“For the second Election Day in as many years, suburban voters demonstrated enormous political power in electing or aiding Democratic candidates in historically Republican areas, underscoring the drift of many moderate voters from the G.O.P. in the era of President Trump.”

The Washington Post noted that the 4 northern metro counties in Virginia voted overwhelmingly for the Democrats.

They noted,

“Virginia now stands as a fearful avatar for Republicans of what the nation’s unrelenting demographic and cultural changes mean for the party, as the moderate-to-liberal urban and suburban areas grow, and more conservative rural areas lose ground.”

The media’s focus on the geographical difference between suburban and rural voters is more accurately characterized as a rural working class versus metro bourgeois class division.

From the perspective of the NYT, the prospects for socialism depend on urban, well-educated, suburban voters, many of them immigrants from India, who hate Trump, because he has been branded as a racist, by the socialist media.

It would not have mattered what message was sent by the Virginia GOP, or how the message was packaged.

The message that was sent by the GOP was not the same message that was received by the voters. The National GOP allowed the NYT and Democrats to brand the GOP as racist.

 

The suburban voters in Virginia will never vote for the racist Republican Party and the Virginia GOP will never recover from this branding.

Corey A. Stewart, the outgoing chairman of the Prince William Board of County Supervisors, said,

“The Republican Party is toast in Virginia for the next 10 years. Republicans will cease to be a serious political power.”

No amount of media public relations or packaging of the Virginia GOP message will overcome the socialist branding of the Republican Party, as the party of racism, led by a white supremacist.

The Republican Party brand is permanently damaged because they were incompetent to brand themselves as pro-worker, pro-economic growth, pro-freedom, and pro-national sovereignty.

Our podcast concludes that the Republican Party is toast, not just for the next 10 years, but permanently.

The Republican Party must be replaced with a new conservative political party that has a coherent ideology of individual freedom and national economic sovereignty that appeals to the 63 million Trump voters, and to suburban immigrants in Northern Virginia, who came to America to benefit from the national culture of liberty.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for November 15, 2019.

Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Vichy Republican Collaborators, and is titled, The Virginia GOP’s Message.

The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Introduction.

Our podcast today expands on an insight that Lee Smith made about his book, The Plot Against the President.

In his book, Smith documents the facts of the Democrat’s coup, and his insight concerns his interpretation of what those facts mean for the future of America.

Smith’s insight came during an October 30, 2019, interview with Maria Bartiromo, when he described how Hillary had unleashed her vicious Russian hoax conspiracy about why she lost to Trump.

Smith stated,

“I think that the real lasting damage that has been done here to the nation is that Hillary placed an incurable sickness into the American society. Hillary paid for a conspiracy theory, and the sickness she placed into American society permanently divides the citizens.”

Mollie Hemmingway expanded on the damage of the coup by describing the danger of Hillary’s conspiracy when she wrote,

“We are facing an attempt to tear down the foundations of our republic by corrupt, unelected bureaucrats who have decided the will of voters is subordinate to their will to power. It represents a fatal threat to our system of government, and if this coup, the nation will cease to be a constitutional, democratic republic.”

Our podcast examines the Democrat’s moral arrogance of the impeachment by raising two related questions:

What is the ultimate end goal that the Democrats hope to achieve by impeaching Trump?

Why are 65 million Democrat voters so attached to the ideology of socialism that they would be willing to end Madison’s democratic representative republic?

Rather than seeing the impeachment simply as a partisan grab for power, our podcast explores what type of government the Democrat’s seek to replace Madison’s representative republic, and what values or benefits that registered Democrats believe they will obtain under this new government.

In other words, our podcast changes the direction of conventional media inquiry to examine the moral principles that bind 65 million registered Democrats to supporting Schiff’s impeachment.

We argue that the Democrats possess three related moral characteristics that are incompatible with the standards of morality of a representative republic.

These three Democrat characteristics are:

A moral arrogance of possessing absolute truth.

A social construction of reality that proceeds from the starting Marxian premise that the nation is a racist country led by racist capitalists.

The arrogance of power, which is similar to Nietzsche’s will to power, where individuals sublimate their own individuality to the greater glory of the state.

Our podcast concludes that negotiating with Democrats about the future of the nation is senseless. The Democrats are not suddenly going to abandon their socialist ideology and change their behavior from being morally arrogant to becoming morally tolerant.

The three characteristics of the socialists are fundamentally incompatible with the required moral characteristics of citizens in a voluntary constitutional democratic republic.

The Democrat’s allegiance to their ideological world-view is so alien and so subversive to Madison’s constitutional principles that they are willing to end the republic in order to implement their vision of a socially just society.

We conclude that the socialist threat to end the republic will result in either a bloody, protracted civil war, where hundreds of thousands of citizens are killed, or a peaceful civil dissolution of the 50 states into two new nations.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for November 5, 2019.

Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category, Democrat Police State Socialism, and is titled: The Democrat’s Moral Arrogance of Power to What End?

The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

www.clpnewsnetwork.com

Episode 33. October 26, 2019

CLP Topic Category. Economic Policy

Title. The Republican’s 3 Big Chinese Lies: “No, Really, the Chinese Are Just Like You and Me.”

Our podcast today uses China’s two most recent reneges on trade agreements as a way of exploring the Republican’s responsibility for promoting trade with China, in 1999, and explaining that they were responsible for ameliorating the labor market and financial effects on displaced American workers.

The two reneges by China, in 2019, are placed into the historical context of the main Republican lie that “the Chinese are just like you and me.”

Just beneath the public lies of the elected Republicans, in 1999, the Business Roundtable and U. S. Chamber of Commerce provided the financial support to the Republicans to change the American economic structure from an industrial production nation to a rentier, financial services, managed global corporate nation.

Because of the way that insider corruption works in Washington, the Roundtable members wrote the law, and rigged the terms of trade to benefit their members.

Our podcast argues that when the Chinese ships come to the U.S. full of cheap goods, those ships leave with U. S. debt securities, that pay for the trade deficit.

Beginning in 2003, but especially after 2008, the payments for the huge trade deficit fundamentally changed the structure of the U. S. economy into a managed global financial services economy that benefitted 5 big New York banks.

The income and employment multiplier effects of the banking rentier economy are concentrated in the elite social classes, making income inequality much greater than under the industrial production economy, which existed prior to 1999.

Our podcast concludes that the ideology of globalism explains the entire Trump impeachment effort by Democrat global socialists and the global crony capitalist Republicans.

The lynchpin of the Republican lie, to paraphrase Trump, is the globalist ideology that financial elites and political elites make better decisions about society than consumers in a free competitive markets.

Codevilla states this issue of global class elitism this way,

“No prominent Republican challenged the ruling class’s continued claim of superior insight, nor its denigration of the American people as irritable children who must learn their place. The Republican Party did not disparage the ruling class, because most of its officials are, or would like to be part of it.”

The threat to American liberty, and sovereignty, is globalism, and the Chinese communists are the lead propagators of both globalism and brutal repression of any political opposition to their global vision of world domination.

The Chinese are aided and abetted by the globalist socialist Democrats and  crony capitalist Republicans, who have combined forces to remove Trump because he is a nationalist, not a globalist.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for October 26, 2019.

Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Economic Policy, and is titled, The Republican’s 3 Big Chinese Lies: “No, Really, the Chinese Are Just Like You and Me.” 

The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Episode 32. October 18, 2019.

CLP Topic Category: Irreconcilable Differences

Schiff’s Nullification and Disenfranchisement of Republican Voting Rights.

Introduction.

Our podcast today places Schiff’s impeachment proceedings into the bigger historical context of nullification and disenfranchisement, by the Democrats, of Republican voting rights.

Our podcast argues that two representatives from the State of California are attempting to nullify constitutionally-protected rights of Republican voters, by overturning a legitimate national election.

When placed into the historical context of nullification and disenfranchisement, Schiff’s initiative can be seen as an attempt to use the power of Congress in a political effort to destroy the Republican Party, and impose one-party rule.

The podcast presents the historical parallels between Calhoun’s 1828 nullification argument over tariffs and slavery, and the subsequent attempt, in 1898, of the Democrat’s efforts to eliminate the voting rights of black people.

In the broader historical context, the socialist attempt to eliminate political opposition is a normal course of behavior for a totalitarian regime, and has been attempted before by the Democrats in the South, to maintain one-party rule.

Our podcast concludes that the differences between the Democrat socialists of Schiff and Pelosi, and Trump natural rights conservatives, are irreconcilable and irrevocable.

Schiff’s impeachment proceedings constitute a dramatic and fundamental breach of shared constitutional values of American citizens. Schiff and Pelosi’s initiatives are evidence that California Democrats intend on subverting the Constitution, in order to implement a global socialist regime.

The only peaceful, non-violent solution of the ideological split is a dissolution of the current states into two new nations:

The Socialist States of America, led by California, and any other states that choose to live under a socialist regime, and,

The Democratic Republic of America, created on the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation, which changes the representative republic to a democratic republic.