 It's Wednesday. It's 11 o'clock. Time for our new show, American Issues, Take One. I'm Tim Apichell, your host, and today's title is Trump's Influence in the 2022 and 2024 election. You'd like to go right to our guests. I'd like to introduce Jay Fidel and Chuck Crumpton, Hawaii mediator and arbitrator. Good morning to you both. Good morning, Tim. You mentioned that Chuck, Chuck hosts not one but two other shows here on ThinkTech. So he's a visiting host with real credentials. Close to being a ThinkTech Hawaii junkie. Like us all. All right. Well, hey, thanks for coming on this morning and let's talk about Donald Trump. I mean, you know, after the election 2022, there was predictions on this very show, although it had a different title, that Trump influence would diminish, that he would be forgotten, kind of like when Richard Nixon went away. But that doesn't seem to be the case. And Jay, to you on this first question, you know, we have these books, these tell-all books from Mark Esper, his recent one, who was the Secretary of Defense, John Bolton, and William Barr, these books that tell these incredible tales of outlandish behavior and comments from Trump that weren't jokes. They were not said in jest. They were serious commands, if you will, from the commander-in-chief. And they basically had to go behind the scenes and try to placate him, or try to change the subject so he would get off these crazy topics. For example, in Mark Esper's book, he talks about the immediate withdrawal from South Korea. Or worse yet, all family personnel from military to leave South Korea, indicating to North Korea there might be a strike in the near future. Or his comments about bombing Mexico, sending missiles into Mexico to hit the drug labs. I mean, these are crazy, crazy statements, but they couldn't just pass them off. They had to seriously consider them. So here's the question. After these books that have come out and would indicate to the public that something's not right with Donald Trump, yet Donald Trump enjoys a healthy favorability rate, and everyone's knowledge that he is the top contender for the 2024 presidential nominee for the GOP. What are we to say about that? Only some people read those books, actually, Tim. Well, they're not just in the books. They actually hit both the news on Fox Entertainment and MSNBC and CNN. It's true. It's got to be getting out into the base to some extent, and they have a mechanism in dealing with it. I mean, they don't believe anything negative about Trump, or if they believe it, they don't think it's important. It's irrelevant to them, and they maintain their baseness. I use that term with multiple meanings. But you know, a bottom line is, it occurs to me just watching what's going on here, is that there's really two Trumps. One is the public face, which is flawed and ridiculous. But then there's the Trump that works behind the scenes. The Trump that spends 24 by 7 working on enhancing his base, his relationship with people. It doesn't come automatic. It doesn't happen just because of a couple of remarks he makes at an event. It happens because he's working all the time, and he's got a staff of people that are working all the time in order to enhance his relationships with the base. That's one reason why not only is he not diminishing, but he's growing. I think it's important to mention that the likelihood is that Elon Musk will buy Twitter, and the certainty is that if he does buy Twitter, he's going to let Trump back on again for reasons that are hard to follow. But Elon Musk has given us his rationale for that. And if Trump gets back on Twitter, and he said that he doesn't want to do it, he's got some other alternative Twitter type organization. But I don't think he's going to ride that one home. He's going to get back on Twitter, and if he does, and he will be using that more than he did before. And the other point I'd like to make before you go on here is that Trump, however ridiculous he is, and I could use lots of other adjectives, he learns. And he learned through his four years. He has learned since his four years. He has learned how to organize, for example, an insurrection. He has learned how to hire people that are completely unqualified. He has learned how to manipulate the Congress and the courts. He has learned how to do things that are completely destructive to the democracy in the country. And he, you know, it's a nightmare scenario. But if he gets elected in 2024, he's going to be more effective, believe it or not. And he is going to be much worse. And the democracy is going to be at much greater risk because he learns. Those are the defining things about him now. Let's go to the point about Donald Trump's potential reemergence on Twitter. You know, Mitch McConnell and the GOP probably could squarely assign blame to Donald Trump that the Senate races in Georgia were as a direct result of his comments before the run-up of the election. Is this going to serve the GOP well if Donald Trump gets back on Twitter and starts sending landmines or planting landmines all over the social media as he did before he was kicked off? I mean, it didn't help him in many ways that he was on Twitter. And so is the GOP, and specifically Mitch McConnell, are they hesitant to see that happen? You know, when they were criticizing him over that and blaming him for various things, including in so many words, the insurrection, I have one remark I want to make is the short sentence, that was then. And the GOP guys, you know, seemed to have a sort of this sort of general amnesia where they say one thing and the next time you look they're saying 180 opposite and they get away with it. And I think one of the reasons is that the whatever bonds them together is stronger than truth. We know that from Kellyanne Conway way back when and truth is not a high value. But you know, the other thing is that it's this is cultism. And he is one of the elements of his cultism is he gets off on being the bad boy. And there are people in this country who do not apply their critical thinking, but they like bad boys. So if he does stupid mean indecent things, they like him for it. So you can say that he hurt himself and shot him in the foot, shot himself in the foot by reason of some of his tweets on Twitter. But at the end of the day, he was he was being faithful to the bad boy image and the people in the face. They were they liked it. They liked it. And they're going to like it again. So he's got a very wide margin of error. He could shoot somebody in Fifth Avenue and get away with it. And they would love him for being the bad boy. Hmm. All right, Chuck, to you. You just heard Jay Fidel say that in via cultism, we have bad boys in government. Jay's bad boys is my wackadoodle. And speaking of wackadoodles, let's go to the primary elections that just took place in Ohio, West Virginia, Nebraska. Some of these candidates are I'll use Jay's term, bad boys. They're getting elected, except for that didn't happen in Nebraska. So what's going to happen to these bad boys in the general election? I mean, many times in a primary, we see extreme candidates when the when the election and only to fail, crash and burn in the general. What do you think is going to occur here with these particular three states and these candidates that Donald Trump endorsed and certainly had influence on? That's a great question, Tim. I think one of the things we got to look at is local leadership within the states and the localities, the big cities in the areas that are going to turn out to be swing states. Those people rather than the Trumps and Bidens may wind up making the most difference with the independent voters in terms of how those states come out. Media doesn't pay attention to that. The big money is in the high profile guys, Trump and his bad boys. But what will be interesting to see over the next few months for 2022 and the next couple of years for 2024 is who emerges as the most charismatic local and regional leaders that may offer some kind of counterbalance to the Trump Act. Secondly, what will DeSantis and Abbott and those guys who are trying to establish their own presidential bases of support off of Trumps? What will those guys do that may create divisions or splinters within the GOP? Let's go to that point. Are they going to relinquish their desires to be a presidential candidate in 2024 and let Donald Trump take the field, or are they going to be watching the polls and closely monitoring whether or not Donald Trump's influence and luster has waned? Narcissists don't change. I don't see any of those guys or Ted Cruz or any of the others giving up their own ambitions, aspirations, and self-interest for Trump. And you see that in people like Lindsey Graham who out of one side of his mouth will say, yep, he incited that insurrection all right. And on the other side, but I'm not going to vote to impeach him. And we'll punish people who do. Is Ronald Reagan's old advice to fellow Republicans that thou shall not throw fellow Republicans under the bus? Are those days gone? That's to you, Chuck. That's to you, Chuck. But I want to hear Chuck, too. My reaction to that question is those days are gone. All of the value, if you will, in the GOP, and arguably it was of some value at some point in American history in the last few decades, all that value was gone. And it's completely irresponsible and it doesn't deserve to be a political party. And its leaders don't deserve to be leaders of the country. They would rather destroy the country than provide any value. Okay, Chuck, your response to that question? Great question, Tim. And it kind of breaks into a couple of arch types. Most of them, like Cruz, Geitz, DeSantis, the others, they're so self-interested. They're never going to put Trump's interests ahead of their own. And they'll always put their interests first. The lesser lights who are more dependent on Trump for their base, the Marjorie Taylor Greens, Boebert's, people like that, are going to continue to be attached to him. So that's why whether the Democratic Party can mount leadership at local and regional levels that will be more charismatic in those two groups is going to make a big difference in 2022 and 2024. Well, let me add something to that, Tim. Yeah, go ahead. You know, that's the biggest question of all. Is the Democratic Party going to get its act together? Because it has not had its act together. It doesn't respond in kind. It brings a spoon to a knife fight your term. And you know, bottom line is, can you name some real leaders of the Democratic Party as a party? Can you name, I mean, I can't the name, for example, the chair of the DNC right now. I don't think I can. There is no real high profile leadership that nobody who's charismatic. And beyond just charisma, there is nobody who's pulling it together. You know, you talk about how it's going to go in this state or that state. It should go somewhere nationally because the GOP is going somewhere nationally. They have, you know, they have no values and they have no platform or public policy positions, but they are together. And their togetherness is based on undermining Joe Biden and our democratic government. You can't say that the Democrats are together. I think it's really critical. Well, they're together in hiding. They're together. They make my point. Yeah, there you go. Chuck, before I move on to Jay, I want to ask you this. And that is, we're going to have the House Select Committee come out with their public hearings here probably in June. The report God knows when that's coming. To what degree will the contents of that report or the televised hearings? To what degree does that diminish Donald Trump's influence in politics or certainly over the GOP? Well, the problem is in the reason that it's not likely to diminish his influence and may actually backfire against them and enhance it is that it's divisive in the ways that he uses the most effectively by allying with the people who parrot him, who support him, who stick by him, even when they acknowledge that he's wrong and he's at fault and he's dangerous and he's destructive. Look at the media. They gave away the narrative to Trump for four years. And as they slide toward the 2022 and 2024 elections, they seem to be doing that again. Responsible independent media is another thing that's missing. Yeah, I echo that point absolutely. He calls the dance. And what you get is all we have to see what Trump is doing. They talk more about him than they should. They don't talk about the Democratic leadership. They don't elevate the Democratic leadership the same way. Maybe it's hard to do that. But I feel that the media spends altogether too much time working the Trump story. And part of that, Chuck Kim, part of that is that he makes it that way. Remember, this is the guy that used to plant stories about himself in the New York press when he was doing real estate. And he's doing the same thing now. Nothing has changed. He learns. He learns. Yeah, he adapts. All right, Jay, please for me, put on your Nostradamus hat. And give me your best prediction of what would the first 12 months, if Donald Trump is reelected, what would that first 12 months look like? To what degree would he influence institutions, news media? What would you predict? Because he does adapt. He does learn. Well, I mean, from my new vantage in Bogota, Colombia, I think he'll get in there with a vengeance. And I think his base and his acolytes will get in there with a vengeance. And they'll do all the terrible things that they've been trying to do over the past few years. It will be a train wreck. It will be, may I use this as a noun? It'll be a Ukraine. He'll be destroying things left and right. Now, some things, you know, it's not going to affect us. I mean, all of us. But other things will affect everyone in the country, like the loss of civil rights, including freedom of the press. So I think in the first six months, if you ask me that, I would say we're going to have a national train wreck. He's going to take, he's going to treat it as a mandate to be king and autocrat in every way. So when we had the Stop the Steel lawsuits, you know, there's over 60 court cases. I think Trump's team only won one out of 60. Yet the courts did prevail to stop what was the over, you know, an election stolen from Donald Trump to say he had his election stolen. Will the court still be there if Donald Trump is reelected? And he tries to do what you're suggesting. Well, certainly I want to turn this over to Chuck, but it seems to me that those 60 cases did not really stop the base. A third of the country still believes that Biden stole the election. A third of the country doesn't believe that Biden is a legitimate president. And a fair number of them believe that Biden is a pedophile, of course, because, you know, there's no evidence whatsoever. But if you want to be a nutcase about it, you know, you think of things like that and you do QAnon on it. So I mean, truth, justice is irrelevant. Furthermore, I'm not sure the federal judiciary is as good as it was when Trump started to appoint his hundreds of judges, and they are insinuated now into the fabric of the federal judiciary, such as that judge in Florida who without any medical information, any public policy considerations throughout the, what was it, the mask requirement on all transportation, among other things, a national order. That was really nutcakes. And now we have surges. So what I'm saying is that you can't count on the judiciary and you can't count on those 60 cases anymore. And you certainly can't count on a situation where a lot of people ignore the rulings of those cases. They keep on trucking, no matter what, Trumping, no matter what. And finally, those cases ultimately may have to be decided, in large possibility, they'll have to be decided at the United States, the Supreme Court, which is a different court. And tomorrow with Abbey Stoifer, we're going to talk about how it's different today than it was. But I would say that even if you win 60 cases on some point of craziness, you can't count on the Supreme Court to make it better. Chuck, for us, please put on your nose to draw on this hat and reply to the same question. I mean, Jay's prediction is, and I hate to summarize it this way, is bleak. Do you share that same opinion? I think on our good days, it'll be bleak. But the real question is, where is Trump and the people who are willing to do what he wants them to do, going to concentrate their focus? Certainly, immigration is likely to be one. The southern border has always been a focal one for Trump that's worked very well with his base. I can't imagine him not going back there. And I distinguish a little bit between the learning that Jay talks about and strategic learning that has any national or long-term benefit. He doesn't care. He's almost 80. The last thing in his mind is what it's going to be like 10 years from now, except to have his image instilled to the extent possible. So immigration is an area. Jay, Tim, what do you think will be the other focal areas for him and his minions? Elevating his family. Don't forget at the end of 10 years, he may be older, but his family's not old. He'll try to get them in office. Yeah, the legacy factor. That's important for a narcissist is the legacy. Yeah. I think it's going to be actually beyond our comprehension, because we're all abiding rule of law people. And I don't think we can actually imagine the kinds of things that he would do. It goes way beyond the kinds of things he tried to do. I mean, for example, I see great risk for the average citizen in terms of civil rights, the search of seizure, First Amendment, all those degradations that took place in the 30s in Germany. That's where he's going. And if there's no God rails, nobody has stopped him in the federal courts or in the agencies around him, the Mark Esper book is particularly scary, because Mark Esper, although he came out a little late, I understand that, but he came out a little late. Fact is that he stopped Trump from doing some bad stuff. And next time, Trump isn't going to have a Mark Esper on his staff. Next time, he's going to have a complete acolyte over there. And if the guy isn't an acolyte, he'll be fired instantly, and he'll bring in some moron person who is neither qualified nor has a backbone. And the result is Trump will do whatever Trump wants. It'll be a beacon to the world that autocracy works. And that's what'll happen. To go to your earlier question, almost immediately, you'll see it as a mandate. And I agree with Chuck, immigration is one thing, but you can name three or four other things. They'll never be gun control. Voting rights will be further diminished. The right of the people, the social safety net, all those social programs are out the window. And he doesn't care, as you said, he doesn't care if people like him. He's in power. He will not have to cotton to the base anymore. President can do whatever he wants. I think that we're missing the big one, then, and as all dictators know that if they're going to be successful of the rise to power of an autocracy, they've got to attack the media. They've got to stop journalism in its tracks as best as possible. So you can expect to see some kind of intervention. His influence on the FCC and further erosion of journalism and the reporting of Trump administration behavior. Okay, so Chuck, what strategies might the Democrats, I mean, once they get out of hiding, if that ever happens, what kind of effective strategies could they employ to blunt the wave of popularity for Donald Trump? What strategies avenues can they say, hey, we got to stop this? The last successful strategy for the Democratic Party has to look back toward the Obama time. And that was one of the best grassroots coalition campaigns that we have seen in our history. If they don't do that, they're going to be looking at really bleak results. Whether they can do it, how they can do it, they're going to need really, really good local regional leaders with charisma, courage and conscience, those three elements. All right, good answer. Does a candidate who sees Donald Trump as the era parent does a GOP candidate or even a Democrat or independent candidate for president in 2024, do they try to use the tactic of the 14th Amendment paragraph three, basically saying if you were involved with any kind of sedition activity that you are not qualified for office, does someone try to pull that to start to try to stop Donald Trump? Absolutely. No, that's for Chuck first. Chuck. Sorry, let's see if he agrees with me. It may be worth a shot if they can bring it, for example, in D.C. where they have a very courageous federal district court judge who has stood up to Trump consistently and to Trump's DOJ during that period. So where they do it, how they do it, who does it, will be critical. And at what point do they have to enter into the fray of that? When would they have to suggest a suit, Chuck? Well, they've already seen the unsuccessful result with Marjorie Taylor Greene. They have to learn from that. Timing and strategy are going to be critical for them. They will need to build a grassroots base of support for that as well as the legal support. They can't just win it by winning one or two cases at the lower federal court levels. Alrighty. Jay, go ahead and have at it the same question. Well, you know, timing, it's all about timing, I think. If you go too early, you've got a problem with standing. If you're already an opponent in an election with Trump, you definitely have standing. And so that's kind of a little late to get this show on the road, but I don't think you'd have the standing problem then. Mostly it's about timing. If you come in late, then it's going to go wending its way through the federal courts and get to the Supreme Court, which I wouldn't count on. And then they're not going to change very much between now and then. And so I would have no confidence, I'm sorry, with this Supreme Court. So would now be the time? Well, if you can find a way to get into court, yes. You know, because I tell you the truth, and you can quote me on this, both of you guys can quote me on this. The 14th Amendment, Section 3, is written in English. It says in English you can't run if you've been involved in an insurrection. It says that. And there is no question whatsoever in the English language that this applies to Trump and his friends. And on the other hand, some federal judges don't read English very well these days. Mostly the Trump appointees. So I think, you know, as Chuck says, it's worth a shot to try it out. But, you know, it's got to be in the right district or circuit. And it's got to be with the right plaintiff. Well, maybe a candidate with standing takes the House Select Committee report and plops it on a desk of a court and say, there's my brief. It's all right there. We'll see. That's all a witch hunt. You know that. Yeah, exactly. Okay. You know, we're out of time. So I want to go and ask Chuck for your last thoughts about this topic or any other topic you might have in mind. I think in a nutshell, it has to come from the people that has to come from charisma, courage and conscience at their leadership level more than at the national level and reinforce this. I know this last comment, but here's my last question. Do you see anyone in the Democratic Party that has the charisma, the luster? I was thinking of Governor Newsom, but do you see anyone out there? I don't. I see people who have some of the elements, Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, others, but we really need a lot more Stacey Abrams out there. Great. Jay, your last thoughts. Yeah, Stacey Abrams. I've heard that from so many people. It's a rising chorus of Stacey Abrams. No, my takeaway on this, Tim and Chuck, is this. This is a civil war and the Democratic Party has got to see it as a national experience, not necessarily a local one. It's got to start with leadership nationally and the Democratic Party not doing that. You know, I get email every day by the hundreds from various races and organizations around the country. And most of them, I don't know who they are. And I am not going to send the money. I'm not going to click on their checkbox for $5 or $10. I don't know who they are. If there were a national DNC, if there was somebody I could identify with who said, look, why don't you give money to this candidate in this state? Why don't you give money to this organization in this place following these, you know, these principles? That would be very convincing to me. And I would act on that. Right now, the fragmentation is deafening. And unless the Democratic Party does that and talks to me, talks to me about all these fragmented pieces and gives me some guidance, I'm not going to get together with the others. This is a national experience. People are giving money across state lines. Local elections become national elections. Local fights become national fights. Somebody has got to lead the national fight. And that's not happening. All right. So it's more than just the economy. All right, Jay, Chuck, I want to thank you both. Jay Fidel, Chuck Crumpton, for joining us on our recent edition of American Issues Take One. Please join us next Wednesday at 11 o'clock. And I'm Tim Apachele, your host. And till then, aloha. us at think.kawaii.com. Mahalo.