The Daily Nooze

"All the news we deem fit to print"

  • Home
  • politics
  • satire
  • breaking news
  • Archives
  • Show Your Support
  • Opinion
You are here: Home / Archives for Constitution

100 Days Of Chaos: Who, Or What, Will Save Us?

April 24, 2025 By John DeProspo 1 Comment

April 30 marks 100 days into Trump’s return to the White House, and already the country looks bruised, battered, and barely recognizable. With his gang of sycophantic enablers, Trump has wiped his butt with the Constitution, taken a sledgehammer to the rule of law, turned corruption into a virtue, and breathed new life into Reagan’s infamous quip: “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” If this much damage can be done in just 100 days, imagine the wreckage four years from now!

How does this nightmare end? Can anyone—or anything—save us?

If you’re hoping the Republican-led Congress will step in to stop the madness, that’s laughable. These aren’t lawmakers; they’re loyalists, lackeys, and cowards. Faced with a president who openly flirts with authoritarianism, they’ve chosen fealty over fidelity to the Constitution. They’ve traded their oaths for applause, their spines for status. They are traitors who watched democracy burn and brought marshmallows.

And the Supreme Court—those robed “guardians” of the Constitution? Please. They greased the skids by slow-walking Trump’s immunity case until accountability timed out. Then, in a ruling both absurd and dangerous, they declared that a president is immune from prosecution for “official” acts. Translation: if you’re powerful enough, your crimes are just “policy” decisions.

What about the 2026 midterms? Maybe. But don’t hold your breath. Not if the traitorous Republican machine gets its way. Across the country, they’re already working overtime—gerrymandering maps, purging voter rolls, and passing laws designed to suppress Democratic votes. They don’t want fair elections. They want fixed outcomes.

The courts won’t save us. Congress won’t save us. The system is rigged to protect the powerful and punish the rest. It’s no wonder that many feel an overwhelming sense of dread about the future.

Can anything save us? Maybe not—unless the people themselves rise up. Not with memes but with pitchforks. Not with hashtags but with outrage, organizing, and relentless pressure. This isn’t politics anymore. It’s survival. It’s about whether we still have a country worth fighting for.

Hey, Mother Nature—if you’re reading this downer of a rant, a little karmic intervention wouldn’t hurt.

*To my loyal readers, I apologize for the long absence. I will try my best to chime in more frequently on this sh*tshow we are all unfortunately witnessing.

Filed Under: featured, politics Tagged With: 100 days, April 30, chaos, congress, Constitution, disaster, Donald Trump, rule of law, Supreme Court, who will save us

After Cheney Ouster, House Reps Propose New Oath Of Office

May 12, 2021 By John DeProspo 6 Comments

Reprint from moronmajority.com

During colonial times, when the United States were colonies of Great Britain, officials swore allegiance to the king. Following the Revolution, the founders decided to require an oath for all federal and state officials … to the Constitution.

Since Liz Cheney’s ouster from her House leadership position due to her refusal to swear allegiance to the king of her party, a few House Republicans have proposed a new oath to be taken by all new members on the opening day of a new Congress.

A bill soon to be introduced by Texas Representative Louie Gohmert, co-sponsored by fellow Republicans Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordan, contains the following oath:

“I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend Donald J. Trump against all political enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to same; that I take this obligation without any mental hesitancy or self-reflection, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter as directed by Our Leader. So help me Trump.” 

As Republican House members are in the minority, it is unlikely such a bill will pass. But it is interesting to note how American conservatives have gone full circle in just under 250 years!

Photo | Forbes.com

*moronmajority.com is a satirical site … seriously!

Filed Under: featured, satire Tagged With: Constitution, Donald Trump, Liz Cheney, Louie Gohmert, new oath, oath of office, Republicans, satire

Come Nov. 3, We Are Either Going To Have A New President … Or Our First King

April 17, 2020 By John DeProspo 7 Comments

The Founding Fathers knew enough about the evils of monarchy to not want one for the new American republic.  Prior to Washington’s election, they seriously debated what to call the new chief executive of the United States of America.

As Lorraine Boissoneault writes in Smithsonianmag.com:

 Some delegates to the Constitutional Convention suggested “His Exalted Highness,” with others chiming in with the more democratic “His Elective Highness.” Other suggestions included the formal “Chief Magistrate” and the lengthy “His Highness the President of the United States of America, and Protector of Their Liberties.” The debate went on for multiple weeks, according to historian Kathleen Bartoloni-Tuazon, because the House of Representatives worried that too grand a title might puff Washington up with power, while the Senate feared Washington would be derided by foreign powers if saddled with something as feeble as “president” (the title originally meant, simply, one who presides over a body of people‑‑similar to “foreman”). 

Of course, “president” won out.

Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution states that “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States.” Alexander Hamilton called the clause a “cornerstone of republican government,” saying that without titles of nobility, “there can never be serious danger that the government will be anything other than that of the people.”

And now it seems we’ve come full circle. We have a president who wants nothing more than to be a monarch … if not in name, then in deed.

During a press briefing earlier this week, Trump declared, “When somebody’s the president of the United States, the authority is total, and that’s the way it’s got to be.” On Wednesday, Trump threatened to adjourn both houses of Congress.

By now it should be clear that Donald J. Trump does not understand (or respect) the meaning of constitutional democracy. He does not see himself so much as the head of one branch of government, the executive, but as the supreme authority in the land.

And if he is reelected in November, you can be sure his thirst for autocratic power will only increase.

What’s there to stop Trump from issuing an executive order naming himself “El Exigente” (Wait, maybe not. Too Mexican)? The Constitution? Yeah right!

With the other two “co-equal” branches of government asleep at the wheel, failing in their constitutional duty to check a wannabe dictator like Trump, four more years of the corrupt Trump regime would effectively end that great experiment in constitutional self-governance envisioned by the Founding Fathers. And it would bring about what they feared most for the new nation … that it would collapse into tyranny.

You’ve heard it all too often … the next presidential election is the most important of our lifetimes. It’s become an election year cliché. 

But here’s the thing … the upcoming presidential election will not just be the most important of our lifetimes. It will also be the most consequential election in the 243-year-old lifespan of our nation. You think that’s hyperbole?

On November 3, 2020, we are either going to elect a new president or have our first king (though some might argue, and happily I might add, that Trump has already secured that distinction).

Photo | businessinsider.com

Filed Under: featured, Opinion Tagged With: 2020, Constitution, Donald Trump, election, Founding Fathers, king, monarch, monarchy, president

Our Democracy Is Just A Frog In Slow Boiling Water

January 31, 2020 By John DeProspo 2 Comments

Our democracy is slowly slipping into fascism thanks to Trump and his Republican enablers. Will we realize we’re being cooked before it’s too late? Vote like the future of your country depends on it … because it does!

Photo | washington press/ occupy democrats

Filed Under: featured, politics Tagged With: boiling water, Constitution, death, democracy, frog, Republicans, resist, traitors, trump, vote

Please, Let’s Stop Calling What’s Taking Place In The Senate A Trial

January 23, 2020 By John DeProspo 2 Comments

As we are all transfixed on the spectacle taking place in the Senate, let us not dignify it by calling it a trial.

The Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to try a case of impeachment. In other words, to hold a trial.

A trial by its very definition is a formal examination of evidence before a judge; an exercise in seeking the truth. The basic structure normally follows this pattern:

  1. Opening statements
  2. Witness testimony and cross examination
  3. Closing arguments
  4. Jury deliberation and verdict

What’s taking place in the Senate is not a trial but a partisan, and some might add, unconstitutional, impeachment process. Senate Republicans voted down every effort by the Democrats to call witnesses (and produce documents, for that matter). 

As many have observed, a trial without witnesses is a sham; a coverup.

Oh yes, but aren’t they just following the Clinton impeachment model you ask?

Yes and no.

Yes, in the Clinton impeachment there was unanimous agreement among senators to vote on the need for witnesses after the trial concluded. But key witnesses had already given sworn testimony before the trial. The idea of not calling live witnesses during Clinton’s trial was mainly due to the salacious nature of the facts which gave rise to Clinton’s perjury.

But in Trump’s case, there is nothing indecent about any potential witness testimony … just plain old-fashioned abuse of power and obstruction.

House manager Adam Schiff put the difference between Trump and Clinton this way:

“If we’re really serious about modeling this proceeding after the Clinton trial, the Clinton precedent is one where all the documents had been provided, up front, where all the witnesses had testified, up front, prior to the trial. That is not being replicated by the McConnell resolution — not in any way, not in any shape, not in any form, far from it.

What the Senate is doing is flipping the meaning of “trial” on its head… conclude the presentation and then vote on whether witnesses and documents are necessary!

Look for Republican senators to vote down the need for witnesses at the end of the trial and for either a motion to dismiss or a quick vote leading to acquittal.

So, let’s just call what’s happening in the Senate what it is … a “presentation” by a group of Democrats seeking to uphold the Constitution and a group of Republicans willing to undermine our constitutional democracy. 

Photo | nypost.com

Filed Under: featured, Opinion Tagged With: Constitution, coverup, documents, impeachment, Republicans, Senate, sham, trial, trump, witnesses

Trump Asks Supreme Court To Rule Constitution Unconstitutional

January 11, 2020 By John DeProspo Leave a Comment

Reprint from moronmajority.com

Donald Trump is a very bright man. He has a prestigious Ivy League degree and is constantly reminding everyone how much of a stable genius he is.

So, it didn’t take all that long for Trump to solve one of his most vexing problems.

“It seems like everyone is always telling me I can’t do this or that because of the Constitution,” said Trump at a recent impromptu press gathering. “This goes totally against my powers as president of the United States.”

“Today I am asking the Supreme Court to declare the Constitution unconstitutional. This is all on good advice from my personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani,” Trump went on to say.

Trump’s request may not be so farfetched. Giuliani has recently written a piece in the Daily Caller arguing that the Supreme Court should rule Trump’s impeachment unconstitutional. So why not go one step further?

Trump’s logic is simple: The Supreme Court has the power to declare anything unconstitutional. The Constitution prevents me from carrying out my agenda. The Constitution therefore needs to be declared unconstitutional.

Trump believes there is a good chance the Court will toss out the revered founding document now that he has added two new allies, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, to the bench.

“In this country,“ opined Trump, “the Supreme Court has the final say as to what’s constitutional and what’s not. I’m confident Neil and Brett, along with the other conservative justices, will rule in may favor.”

Said daughter Ivanka, “My dad is a great businessman but he would have also made an excellent lawyer. His analytical thinking is so amazing!”

Trump’s Republican supporters in both the House and Senate are refusing comment on this latest development. 

Photo | gannet/usatoday.com

Warning – this could be “fake” nooze

Filed Under: featured, satire Tagged With: Constitution, Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, satire, Supreme Court, unconstitutional

Donald Trump Asks Interesting Question About Presidential Impeachment

October 29, 2019 By John DeProspo 9 Comments

Article courtesy of guest contributor, Alden Loveshade

Donald Trump asked on Twitter: “Are you allowed to impeach a president for gross incompetence?”

Thank you for asking, Mr. Trump.  I for one really appreciate that you are concerned about this issue. I must apologize, however, for not responding much sooner as you posted this way back on  June 4, 2014.

Fortunately, this is an excellent time for you and other Americans to see how this process works. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has initiated a formal impeachment inquiry against an American president.

But what is impeachment of the president? This is covered by Articles I and II of the U.S. Constitution. Article I states the House of Representatives can bring charges against a sitting president and the Senate has the sole power to try impeachments.

In practice, as this means overturning the “will of the people,” impeachment is reserved for very serious offenses such as Article II’s “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” This could include something like betrayal of the oath of office, betrayal of national security, or betrayal of the integrity of national elections.

Of course it’s hard to imagine any American president betraying their oath of office, the national security, or the integrity of national elections. But it’s good to know you and I, and all Americans, can be protected from such a president!

Did you know two, or three, presidents (people disagree on this) were impeached before you posted your tweet? Andrew Johnson, who became president after Abraham Lincoln was assassinated, was the first.  The second who clearly was impeached was Bill Clinton. There’s some debate as to whether Richard Nixon was impeached as the process had begun but was not completed when he resigned. No U.S. president has been removed from office after impeachment–at the time of your tweet.

But this does not answer your question: can the president of the United States be impeached for gross incompetence?

The answer is “probably not.”

But I’m glad that you want to understand how American government works. Impeachment is specifically a trial for presidential crime(s) or misconduct, not ineptitude. That’s usually left for the voters to decide.

I appreciate that you, an American citizen, want to learn about how American laws and the Constitution work. While I understand your desire to see that a president who’s grossly incompetent is removed from office, the initiation of impeachment proceedings usually requires more than mere ineptness … perhaps something along the line of extorting a foreign government to dig up, or manufacture, dirt on your political rival for your personal, political benefit.

Photo | inquisitr.com

 

Filed Under: featured, Guest Posts Tagged With: Constitution, Donald Trump, gross incompetence, high crimes and misdemeanors, impeachment

Trump Threatens To Sue Founding Fathers

October 22, 2019 By John DeProspo 3 Comments

Resorting to his most tried-and-true tactic, Donald Trump has threatened to sue the framers of the United States Constitution. Citing how unfair and restrictive the document is to his presidency, Trump is seriously looking into a “very big” lawsuit against the legends of American history.

“I’m going against the whole lot of them,” said an angry Trump. “Washington, Hamilton, Franklin, Adams, Jefferson Jay and Madison.”

According to sources, Trump is upset how those American patriots and visionaries have hamstrung his presidency at almost every turn with their “phony constitution.” Asked Trump, “What good is being president if I can’t do whatever I want to do?”

“The president’s first instinct on these types of things is very often: Sue, sue, sue, and then sue some more,” said a close confidant of the Suer-in-Chief.

Trump’s personal attorneys, Jay Sekulow and Rudy Giuliani, have not informed Trump that it is not possible to bring a lawsuit against people who have been dead for over 200 years.

“I learned long ago never to question the wisdom of perhaps the most brilliant president in American history,” said Giuliani with a straight face. “The man usually gets what he wants.”

While seemingly incredible, it is being reported that Trump has consulted with the former slave and famed American intellectual, Frederick Douglass, in his pursuit of legal action against the authors of the Constitution.

“Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who’s done an amazing job and is getting recognized more and more, I notice,” said Trump.

Whether or not Trump actually follows through with his threat of legal action remains to be seen. If history is any guide, Trump’s threats to sue will amount to nothing more than a way to intimidate his enemies … dead or alive.

Photo | history.com

 

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: featured, satire Tagged With: Constitution, Donald Trump, Founding Fathers, lawsuit, satire, sue, suer-in-chief

A “Dear Nancy” Letter

May 21, 2019 By John DeProspo 5 Comments

Dear Speaker Pelosi,

We get it. You believe it’s politically advantageous to keep Donald Trump around until 2020.  And so you are pooh-poohing impeachment proceedings.

And while you said, “This is not about politics at all” during your contentious closed-door meeting yesterday with fellow Democrats (wink, wink), we know it’s all about politics.

But didn’t you take an oath to uphold the Constitution? We have a brazen criminal in the White House and you have the power, or should I say, the duty, to remove him from office. OK, at least, to get the ball rolling.

You think you can really pull a McConnell? You know, when good ol’ Mitch refused to carry out his constitutional duty of holding a confirmation hearing on Merrick Garland because there was an election coming up soon and we should “let the American people decide”?

The next presidential election is over 17 months away. Too many bad things can happen during that time if Trump is still commander in chief.

You know, like a WAR … a FINANCIAL MELTDOWN. Heck, anything is possible with that loose cannon in the Oval Office.

Oh, I see, while that would be bad for the country, it would be good for Democrats’ chances of regaining the White House, and maybe even the Senate.

But what about that pesky document called the Constitution … the rule of law? What kind of precedent would you be setting by letting perhaps the most corrupt president ever to occupy the White House hold on to his awesome powers?

You know you have more than enough evidence of “high crimes and misdemeanors” to begin impeachment proceedings tomorrow. No further investigations needed.

Oh, right, you think impeachment is divisive and would further divide the country; that it would just rile up Trump’s base. I have some news for you … Trump’s base is already riled up! They already think Dems are out to get their man just like the “fake news media.”

It’s clear to see that you want Trump around because, contrary to popular belief, you believe a weakened, disgraced Trump would be very beatable in 2020. You want him to continue to slowly hang himself with his own rope; to continue to commit crimes and obstruct justice. Now we certainly wouldn’t want to run against a “moderate” Republican in 2020, say like a Kasich or Romney!

Sorry but I don’t think we have the time to play such political games. Too much at stake.

You need to start an impeachment inquiry, slow walk it as much as you like, but do what the Constitution requires … what the country needs. Or run the risk of losing Democratic support in 2020 because of your acquiescence and inaction during this critical time in American history.

Yes, it’s going to take some effort to overcome the false narrative put out by Trump’s lawyer (and Attorney General) Mr. Barr. But you can do it. The American people will be on your side once the true facts come out. Put Senate Republicans on the spot!

Don’t overthink this, please.

Photo | usatoday.com

 

Filed Under: featured, Opinion Tagged With: 2020, Constitution, Democrats, Donald Trump, high crimes and misdemeanors, impeachment, Nancy Pelosi, politics, rule of law

The Fate of American Democracy May Hinge On One Person … John Roberts

May 5, 2019 By John DeProspo 4 Comments

When Richard Nixon refused to comply with the Senate Watergate committee’s subpoena to turn over his White House tapes, the standoff resulted in litigation which made its way to the Supreme Court.

In an 8-0 decision (Justice Rehnquist recused himself), the Court ruled against Nixon and directed him to turn over the tapes to Congress.

Much like Nixon, the Trump Administration is refusing to comply with a lawful congressional subpoena for the full, unredacted Mueller report (and its supporting documents).

How would the current conservative Supreme Court rule on Trump’s clear defiance of established law?

There is little doubt this Court would be divided. No unanimous decision here, folks, as in United States v. Nixon.

You can bet on a 5-4 decision, either way.

Since Justice Anthony Kennedy retired from the Court, Chief Justice John Roberts has become the de facto “swing vote.” With four solid conservatives on the bench, now that Trump has been able to get Gorsuch and Kavanaugh to join the other two right-wing ideologues (Thomas and Alito), how would Roberts vote?

If Roberts joins his conservative colleagues, you can pretty much forget about the rule of law, and the Constitution for that matter, in this country. We will have a kneecapped congress unable to fulfill its oversight responsibilities, and we’ll have entered a new era of unchecked, unrestrained executive powers.

If Roberts sides with the four liberals on the Court, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan, we will remain a nation that honors the Constitution and the separation of powers. The decision would serve as a strong rebuke to a lawless president and administration.

So what would Roberts do if some form of United States v. Trump makes its way to his court?

If you remember, much to the dismay of conservatives, Roberts was the deciding vote which upheld Obamacare (Affordable Care Act.)

Roberts is what I would label a principled conservative jurist who actually cares about the Court’s reputation and how history will judge him and his court.

As Michael O’Donnell writes in The Atlantic, “Roberts is the most interesting judicial conservative in living memory because he is both ideologically outspoken and willing to break with ideology in a moment of great political consequence. His response to the constitutional crisis that awaits will define not just his legacy, but the Supreme Court’s as well.”

While he has sided with his conservative colleagues in 87.5 percent of 5–4 decisions, I’m betting there is a better than 50-50 chance Roberts will do the right thing and tell Trump and his cabal of corrupt cohorts they are not above the law.

Photo | newyorker.com

 

Filed Under: featured, Opinion Tagged With: congress, conservatives, Constitution, democracy, Donald Trump, John Roberts, Richard Nixon, rule of law, subpoenas, Supreme Court, swing vote

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page »

Recent Posts

What If Trump Had Not Accepted Biden’s Offer For An Early Debate?

Many political analysts love to talk about the two pivotal moments in the 2024 … [Read More...]

  • Republicans Sound The Alarm: Harris Administration Could Threaten to Pass Laws Most Americans Actually Want
  • Some Republicans Worried Country Not Ready to Elect First Convicted Felon as President
  • The GOP Is Stuck With Two Losers

Follow us online

  • Facebook

Advertisements

Navigation

  • About Us
  • Show Your Support
  • Guest Posts
  • Great Links
  • Contact

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Copyright © 2025 The Daily Nooze.com. All Rights Reserved. "All the news we deem fit to print"™