Unmasking the Democratic Agenda: A Conservative Perspective on Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Claims

10

As political tensions continue to rise, the divide between conservative and liberal ideologies has become increasingly evident. In a recent statement, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene boldly declared that Democrats are actively working to undermine former President Trump's legacy. As a staunch conservative, I delved into this controversial topic with a critical lens, aiming to expose the truth behind Greene's claims.

First and foremost, let's address the elephant in the room: the Democrats' alleged vendetta against Trump. While many on the left may deny this accusation, the evidence speaks for itself. From the baseless impeachment trials to the constant barrage of negative media coverage, it's clear that Trump's opponents were determined to take him down by any means necessary. It's no surprise that Greene and other conservatives see this as a blatant attack on the former president and his supporters.

Moreover, it's not just about Trump himself, but his policies and initiatives as well. Take, for instance, the booming economy and record-low unemployment rates that were achieved under Trump's administration. These are undeniable successes that benefited the American people, yet the Democrats seem hell-bent on erasing them from history. Why? Because it undermines their own agenda and proves that Trump's conservative policies were effective.

But perhaps the most alarming aspect of Greene's claims is the Democrats' blatant disregard for the will of the people. Despite a substantial number of Americans supporting Trump and his policies, the left has consistently dismissed their voices and pushed their own agenda instead. This is a dangerous precedent for democracy and raises serious questions about the Democrats' true motives.

Furthermore, it's not just the Democrats' actions, but their words as well, that reveal their true intentions. In recent years, the left has become increasingly vocal about their disdain for conservative values and those who hold them. They've labeled Trump supporters as "deplorables" and "racists," trying to demonize and silence any opposition. Greene's claim that the Democrats want to erase Trump's legacy is just another way of saying that they want to silence and discredit anyone who supports him.

As a conservative, I can't help but feel frustrated and disheartened by the Democrats' actions. It seems that they are more concerned with pushing their own agenda and dismantling Trump's legacy than actually working for the betterment of the American people. And this trend is not just limited to Trump – we've seen it with other conservative leaders and policies as well.

In conclusion, while some may dismiss Greene's claims as mere conspiracy theories, as a conservative, I can't help but see some truth in her words. The Democrats' consistent attacks on Trump and their efforts to erase his legacy from history cannot be ignored.

It's time for Americans to wake up and see the true agenda of the left – to silence and discredit conservative values and anyone who supports them. As Greene said, "we must not let them succeed."

What are YOUR thoughts on the MTG video?

We want to hear from you! Please comment below to join the discussion.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

10 COMMENTS

  1. 1-Trump was left with a growing economy from Obama and he took credit for something he thought he did.
    2- Biden has done more for the middle class than Trump ever achieved, he just gave the very wealthy and corporate America much greater wealth.
    3-Trump wants to turn this country into a dictatorship like his pals Putin and the little fat bastard from North Korea whom he has high respect for.
    4-Marjorie Taylor Geene is a Maga conspiracy theorist who needs to be removed from the House of Representatives along with Matt Gates and the other Maga liars.

  3. The problem with Republicans is they are for advancing an agenda that best benefits the protection and freedoms of America as we know it. With that comes disagreement amongst the party members as to how to best achieve this. They often disagree with the solutions but they offer solid solutions for the betterment of this Country. According to the lame stream press, this is looked at as a “bad” thing, when it reality it is what our founding fathers wanted our Country to look like. While the Democrats all fall in line behind what ever crazy, woke, socialist agenda their cult leaders come up with. They have solidarity, even though their policies and agendas literally destroy America’s principles and values. You have the ambitious and intelligent Republicans on one side and the inane cult leaders and their followers on the other side. Which side do you think would be best to lead this Country into the future? Last time I checked, socialism and cult ideology doesn’t work. Never has and never will. We all make our decisions, some people just don’t make wise decisions.

  4. I completely agree with Majorie Taylor Brown. I am a conservative and am sick and tired of the democrats. I will help in anyway to help the republicans win this election!!!!! I’m praying for TRUMP!!!!!

  5. 
    Here we go again. Another Special Counsel to somehow figure out if President Trump is guilty?
    He must be guilty of something? Right?

    Now we have “special counsel Jack Smith” asking the Supreme Court to clarify or decide if President Donald Trump is immune to criminal prosecution for “alleged crimes“ Smith claims were committed by Trump from 2016-2020.

    Naturally Trump’s lawyers then argued that Trump has “presidential immunity”. Naturally bleeding liberal Smith can’t accept that so he MUST ask the US Supreme Court to expedite a review of bleeding liberal District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who ruled on Dec. 1 that Trump is not immune and that the President is NOT immune to criminal prosecution related to crimes he MAY have committed while in office. Chutkan is suppose to be a good attorney/judge but appears unable to read or follow established case law. (see Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982)).

    Trump’s lawyers then state the obvious that Trump’s Presidential immunity should cause the DOJ charges to be dismissed. Trump’s lawyers then also pile on the fact that the Senate acquitted Trump of these 2020 election obstruction charges back in 2021, (Impeachment) which would mean “double jeopardy”. With all the constant (judicial political witch-hunting) its probably safe to say that we are probably dealing with more like “triple or quadruple jeopardy”.

    Bleeding liberal’s are claiming Smith’s petition to the Supreme Court will finally clarify whether Trump has immunity or not. Really? It sounds more like it’s proving what Trump has been saying all this time that the DOJ and the courts are being weaponized against him. Would the Court have instantly taken up a case like this for anyone else other than Trump? No. They instantly took it on “specifically” because Trump is running to return to the White House in 2024. Just the fact that the Court instantly picked up the case also instantly proves what Trump is claiming.

    Most political analysts now fully believe the U.S. DOJ is completely politically targeting Trump for prosecution to reduce his Presidential electability in 2024. That is political and judicial weaponization of the U.S. government to influence voters in 2024, which is totally unconstitutional and illegal.

    It is pretty obvious that we now have two distinct justice systems within the U.S.. One specifically designed for President Trump and one designed for everyone else. Smith’s double legal standard attempt is no doubt specifically designed to force the Court to take on this case, thus increasing the media frenzy over the entire issue. Which is like throwing gasoline on a fire, that Smith just happened to have created.

    All this to continue the super politicized attorney general’s office, which is a never ending procedure of its top leadership being soft on Democratic politicians and dramatically hardcore on Republican politicians. All this just to support a blundering and extremely politically weak Joe Biden somehow getting re-elected… I don’t think any of this liberal underhanded and unscrupulous democratic behavior is going to help out poor old Joe.

    Most likely Smith and Chutkan both know that there’s been a bunch of historic legal action on this issue. Case in point (Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982)). In the end the U.S. Supreme Court again rediscovered that the U.S. President is pretty much insulated from all forms of legal actions against the office.

    If the office were not protected like this with absolute immunity from damages and liabilities because of the official acts of the Presidency, what do you think would happen every time the President was forced to deal with top secret information and decisions? Every Presidential decision would be open to both criminal and civil penalties, thus completely neutralizing the office and thereby jeopardizing the entire nation. America’s enemies would love such a mixed up and militarily neutralizing insanity.

    In other words the office of the Presidency possesses an official civil and criminal inviolability and specifically designates Congress to address such issues within it’s impeachment procedures. Surely both Smith and Chutkan understand the logic of this Presidential Immunity situation but they obviously don’t care. They obviously don’t care about the involved legal realities, only the political realities and the media frenzy they can create by revisiting the Presidential Immunities issue over and over for maximum media impact within 2024 elections.

    Special Counsel Jack Smith and Judge Tanya Chutkan should be charged right now with Obstruction of Justice but (guess what) their offices are completely insulated and immune to civil or criminal prosecution! These people want to illegally deny President Trump the same legal protections (themselves, Congress and their legislative aids) are currently using to prevent anyone from prosecuting them? What an amazing coincidence…

    This is what America looks like when it lacks free and honest elections. America currently stands at the edge of a cliff. One step in the wrong direction could easily send it into a non recoverable political and judicial free fall. The outcome of the 2024 election will shape your life for years to come, for better or for worse.

    ———-

    Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982)
    The DOJ has long held that presidents cannot be criminally indicted while in office—arguing in a memo it “would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch”—and the Supreme Court ruled in Nixon v. Fitzgerald that presidents can’t be held liable in civil cases for actions they undertook as part of their official duties, though the high court separately found in Clinton v. Jones that presidents can be sued in civil court for actions taken before they were president.

    Absolute immunity is appropriate when the threat of liability may bias the decisionmaker in ways that are adverse to the public interest. But as the various regulations and statutes protecting civil servants from arbitrary executive action illustrate, this is an area in which the public interest is demonstrably on the side of encouraging less “vigor” and more “caution” on the part of decisionmakers. That is, the very steps that Congress has taken to assure that executive employees will be able freely to testify in Congress and to assure that they will not be subject to arbitrary adverse actions indicate that those policy arguments that have elsewhere justified absolute immunity are not applicable here. Absolute immunity would be nothing more than a judicial declaration of policy that directly contradicts the policy of protecting civil servants reflected in the statutes and regulations.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/12/11/is-trump-immune-from-criminal-charges-what-to-know-about-presidential-immunity-as-supreme-court-weighs-taking-up-case/?sh=6c871c7c5074
    ——
    Yes. The Court held that the President “is entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability predicated on his official acts.” This sweeping immunity, argued Justice Powell, was a function of the “President’s unique office, rooted in the constitutional tradition of separation of powers and supported by our history.”
    https://www.oyez.org/cases/1981/79-1738
    This means that all of the democratic legal cases against President Trump involving January 6th, 2020 are a complete waste of time and will eventually dissolve into nothing.
    ——
    “There are . . . incidental powers belonging to the executive department which are necessarily implied from the nature of the functions which are confided to it. Among these must necessarily be included the power to perform them. . . . The president cannot, therefore, be liable to arrest, imprisonment, or detention, while he is in the discharge of the duties of his office, and, for this purpose, his person must be deemed, in civil cases at least, to possess an official inviolability
    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/731/#744
    ——
    The President’s unique status under the Constitution distinguishes him from other executive officials. [Footnote 31] Page 457 U. S. 751
    Because of the singular importance of the President’s duties, diversion of his energies by concern with private lawsuits would raise unique risks to the effective functioning of government. As is the case with prosecutors and judges — (Page 457 U. S. 752) for whom absolute immunity now is established — a President must concern himself with matters likely to “arouse the most intense feelings.” Pierson v. Ray,386 U.S. at 386 U. S. 554. Yet, as our decisions have recognized, it is in precisely such cases that there exists the greatest public interest in providing an official “the maximum ability to deal fearlessly and impartially with” the duties of his office. Ferri v. Ackerman, 444 U. S. 193, 444 U. S. 203 (1979). This concern is compelling where the officeholder must make the most sensitive and far-reaching decisions entrusted to any official under our constitutional system. [Footnote 32] Nor can the sheer prominence of the President’s (Page 457 U. S. 753) office be ignored. In view of the visibility of his office and the effect of his actions on countless people, the President would be an easily identifiable target for suits for civil damages. [Footnote 33] Cognizance of this personal vulnerability frequently could distract a President from his public duties, to the detriment of not only the President and his office but also the Nation that the Presidency was designed to serve.
    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/731/#744
    —-
    The Court today does no more than extend to the President the same sort of immunity that we have recognized with respect to Members of Congress, judges, prosecutors, and legislative aides. In none of our previous cases have we extended absolute immunity to all actions “within the scope of the official’s constitutional and statutory duties.” Concurring opinion of THE CHIEF JUSTICE, ante at 457 U. S. 761, n. 4.
    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/731/#744
    ——
    [The President] is placed high, and is possessed of power far from being contemptible; yet not a single privilege is annexed to his character; far from being above the laws, he is amenable to them in his private character as a citizen, and in his public character by impeachment. [Footnote 3/17]”
    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/731/#744
    ——
    “[the President] can do no criminal act without Coadjutors (helper) who may be punished. In case he should be re-elected, that will be sufficient proof of his innocence. [Footnote 3/8]” Colonel Mason, Page 457 U. S. 772
    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/731/#744
    ——
    Here a former President asserts his immunity from civil damages claims of two kinds. He stands named as a defendant in a direct action under the Constitution and in two statutory actions under federal laws of general applicability. In neither case has Congress taken express legislative action to subject the President to civil liability for his official acts. [Footnote 27] (Page 457 U. S. 749)
    Applying the principles of our cases to claims of this kind, we hold that petitioner, as a former President of the United States, is entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability predicated on his official acts. We consider this immunity a functionally mandated incident of the President’s unique office, rooted in the constitutional tradition of the separation of powers and supported by our history. Justice Story’s analysis remains persuasive:
    “There are . . . incidental powers belonging to the executive department which are necessarily implied from the nature of the functions which are confided to it. Among these must necessarily be included the power to perform them. . . . The president cannot, therefore, be liable to arrest, imprisonment, or detention, while in the discharge of the duties of his office, and, for this purpose, his person must be deemed, in civil cases at least, to possess an official inviolability.”
    Courts traditionally have recognized the President’s constitutional responsibilities and status as factors counseling judicial deference and restraint. For example, while courts generally have looked to the common law to determine the scope of an official’s evidentiary privilege, we have recognized that the Presidential privilege is “rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution.” United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. at 418 U. S. 708. It is settled law that the separation of powers doctrine does not bar every exercise of jurisdiction
    Page 457 U. S. 754
    over the President of the United States. See, e.g., United States v. Nixon, supra; United States v. Burr, 25 F. Cas. 187, 191, 196 (No. 14,694) (CC Va. 1807); cf. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U. S. 579(1952). [Footnote 36] But our cases also have established that a court, before exercising jurisdiction, must balance the constitutional weight of the interest to be served against the dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch. See Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U. S. 425, 433 U. S. 443 (1977); United States v. Nixon, supra, at 418 U. S. 703-713.

    When judicial action is needed to serve broad public interests — as when the Court acts not in derogation of the separation of powers, but to maintain their proper balance, cf. (Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, supra,) or to vindicate the public interest in an ongoing criminal prosecution, see (United States v. Nixon,) supra — the exercise of jurisdiction has been held warranted. In the case of this merely private suit for damages based on a President’s official acts, we hold it is not.

    [Footnote 37] Page 457 U. S. 755

    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/731/#744

  6. I believe she’s right. The democrats are deathly afraid of Trump, and they’ll stop at nothing to get rid of him. What’s even more disgusting are the American people who want see it happen. Imagine if the Republicans were doing this to a democrat. Look at how the democrats wail and whine over the biden impeachment. All they do, while in session, is bring up Trump and MAGA ad nauseam, because they don’t want to admit the BANK STATEMENTS AND SARS REPORTS ARE REAL. So they deflect by using up their time yelling about Trump. They sound so desperate and pathetic. Every single democrat won’t stick to the subject, which is impeachment. Democrats tried to impeach Trump because of a phone call that proved to be ridiculous. That was okay because it was Trump.

    Democrats are a cancer. They have proved that they hate America. They’re flying Palestinian flags inside their office building. No matter that Israel is our ally. They need to be lectured by Mosab Hassan Yousef, whose father was one of the founders of Hamas. Years ago he found Jesus Christ, because he realized Hamas were brutal animals. Antifa members are their love children. How many are getting rich from kickbacks. They want to disarm Americans. They ignore the Constitution. They want to pack the Supreme Court with liberals. They want illegals to vote so they can stay in power forever. They want open borders, because for some reason they believe they’re protected against the enemies they’ve allowed into this country. Indoctrination of children is acceptable to them. They believe that a 1 year old knows they’re the wrong gender, so let’s mutilate and shove beta blockers down the throat. Drag queen shows for young children are extremely necessary. Pornographic and sexually explicit books are appropriate for young children. They believe in and support a weaponized government. Rules for thee, but not for me is their motto. They LOVE illegal immigrants, they put them above homeless veterans and the elderly. Kick veterans out of the veterans home so illegal immigrants can take over. Kick American kids out of school so the illegal immigrants have a place to live. They’re conniving, deceitful, lying, hypocritical, and above the law. They support this “put in place” president, who’s nothing but a dictator. And the list goes on. The democrat symbol, an ass, is so appropriate. BUT DONALD TRUMP IS GOING TO DESTROY DEMOCRACY! And they’re too ignorant to know that we’re a Republic.

  7. The Clinton-Obama-Biden crime families and their super wealthy marxist associates have complete control of the federal branches of government, the established media networks, the largest unions, and academia. They know how to steer elections and they can repeat 2020 election fraud again. 2024 could be the final nails in the USA free market Republic coffin.

  8. The Democrat agenda is not the will of the people. Nor is it what voters voted for. Rogue politicians need to listen to their constituents. They are to represent the people who elected them. If the Democrats steal the 2024 election like they did in 2020 our future looks very bleak. They have already corrupted the FBI, CIA, IRS, DOJ, and our court system is broken. It allowed to be in the White House for four more years you won’t recognize America from other communist countries.

  10. The “selected president” biden inherited a great economy from Trump, no matter how much the bidenettes try
    to gaslight 99% of the American people.
    Bidenettes actually believe (bless their hearts) that those millions of votes that popped up in the middle of the night were valid.
    Those bidenettes also believe Americans are better off today than when Trump was President. Try to remember that when you pay for groceries, gas, utilities, etc. Bidenettes must have money if they don’t see the rise in the cost of living. Forget buying a home with these interest rates.
    Bidenettes believe that Trump will be a dictator. But, I don’t hear him pushing for EV’s, shoving “climate change” down our throats, wanting to weaponize the DOJ or FBI, calling for the elimination of gas stoves, demanding that taxpayers must pay for the war in Ukraine, or for the cancellation of student loans (that the SCOTUS said NO to). Trump isn’t trying to abolish the 2nd Amendment, or the Constitution, for that matter. Trump isn’t insisting that the southern border remain open, that he wants illegal immigrants to vote so he can stay in power, he’s not shutting down pipelines and cutting out fossil fuels, or that he’s trying to ruin our
    democracy. Which is really a Republic. Truth is, BIDEN IS A DICTATOR.
    Bidenettes will claim Trump was responsible for January 6th, but the testimonies of the whistleblowers blew that lie out of the water.

    Biden’s brokenomics has broken the economy. Biden has destroyed America. Biden has made America the laughing stock of the world. Biden has thrown our ally Israel, under the bus, for votes. Biden is a joke. And not a funny one.

    If my opinion has ruffled the feathers of the bidenettes, get over it. Because I don’t give a rip.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here