Former CNN correspondent Jim Acosta spoke with popular podcaster Jennifer Welch, discussing the plans for radical changes after a Democratic takeover this year. Like many Democratic figures, they said that the expansion of the Supreme Court is obvious. The expansion is essential to clear away any restraints on a radical agenda that will include the trial of a host of conservatives, from Trump to the young former DOGE employee who was injured when he came to the rescue of a woman in a carjacking in Washington, D.C.
What was most notable in the interview was the priority of expanding the Supreme Court. Figures like Eric Holder have expressly stated that packing the Supreme Court with a liberal majority will be the priority after any Democratic takeover.
This has long been the plan among far-left figures, but it is now being embraced by establishment figures as essential to securing a radical agenda to achieve lasting power.
Years ago, Harvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the system to guarantee Republicans “will never win another election.” However, he warned that “the Supreme Court could strike down everything I just described.” Therefore, the court must be packed in advance to allow these changes to occur.
Recently, Democratic strategist James Carville laid out the step-by-step process of how the pack-to-power plan would work.
“I’m going to tell you what’s going to happen,” he said. “A Democrat is going to be elected in 2028. You know that. I know that. The Democratic president is going to announce a special transition advisory committee on the reform of the Supreme Court. They’re going to recommend that the number of Supreme Court justices go from nine to 13. That’s going to happen, people.”
Acosta and Welch, however, added a Jacobin touch by demanding trials for a wide range of conservative figures — a call that has been echoed by Democratic members promising impeachments and investigations.
Welch, who appears to be auditioning for the role of Madame Lafarge, insisted:
“The blue tsunami means that Congress is going to haul Elon Musk, ‘Big Balls,’ and a bunch of other people’s a– in front and say, ‘What crimes did you commit?’ And it’s going to get really serious. And the same with Trump because I believe, and this is just my opinion, that Trump and all of the bottom-feeding morons surrounding him and Elon Musk and all the bottom feeding clinger-onners that surround him, I think they commit crimes every day.”
In my forthcoming book, Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution, I discuss how elected officials often try to enlist mobs to advance their political agendas — only to be consumed by the unrest they helped fuel. This yielding to a “mobocracy” was one of the critical dangers that the Framers sought to deter through protections against majoritarian tyranny.
What is most notable is the warning to establishment figures who are dismissed as “integrity Democrats” who might be squeamish about doing the things that must be done to political opponents. As always, Welch was the face of unrequited rage:
“And I think to reconcile all of this is going to take hardcore — not ‘integrity Democrats – ‘F–k you Democrats’ … ‘F–k you for f–king over our country.’ We are serious about this. We are prosecuting. We’re going to uncover every document, every phone call, everything you did. We will be relentless about it. And that’s the mindset they’ve got to have because I think the electorate is going from, ‘We’ve got to get him out, but also we want accountability.’”
With “integrity Democrats” out of the way, the left will be able to change the system to guarantee not just a radical agenda but permanent power, as explained by Klarman. It is a chilling and ironic prospect on the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” which will be released on Feb. 3 as part of the celebration of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.
What is this radical agenda that is so terrifying?
As to the DOGE kid, is there now some street justice on the conservative side that says one good deed excuses all bad deed?
Jennifer Welch, Me Too, Babe. I’ve had it with you. The key point here is simply that you advocate for illegals who are gun toting, drug dealing, rapists, and thugs and gang members and we need to honor them.
Did anyone ever tell you that you look like an angry pelican?
Looks like jury nullification in a trial of an alleged gangster.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/01/jury-nullification-far-left-jury-chicago-finds-latin
When a violent gang is involved I think 3xtra care should be taken to ensure the jury isn’t intimidated or tampered with.
The same could be said in trials like the George Floyd judicial lynching. For Chauvin there was no change of venue; the jury was not sequestered, media attempted to follow jurors, at least one juror may have been a BLM supporter who could identify other jurors to the mob.
That this could happen in corrupt Minneapolis is no longer a surprise. But I was surprised that none of the appeals courts corrected the injustices. It is a shabby and shameful stain on the American ‘justice’ system.
The left-wing liberal Supreme Court Justice who was and is much beloved by Democrats, felt strongly that 9 justices was the optimal number and “packing the court would be a bad idea” as well as damaging the court’s, “integrity and independence.” Neither of these issues are in any way considerations for today’s Democrats despite being the words of Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Besides, the current Democrat party has a large cohort of anti-Semites.
As Turley notes the D brand is now officially a socialist cult hell bent on there way or no way. Reasoning with this dystopian left crazed mindset is a no go.
We democrats will bury you in November. Remember that!
It’s not the Democrats to worry about. It’s the independents seeing what the Republicans have done and voting against the Republicans.
I am really getting along in years and do not have that many left. I think I have a good chance of voting in the 26 elections and God willing I may make it to the 28 elections. By then I might be too old to fight. I hate to say this and its not a threat, but the quickest way to a realy civiil war 1861 style is to have one party rule in this country. A few countries in the world are alreay there. China, North Lorea, Vetnam, Russia, Belarus, just to name a few. Wht might be different is Americans might invoke the Spirit of 1776. Not a gurantee but a perhaps. That will truly be a shame but we can never have one party rule. I define one party rule is a government where on party controls the White House, The Courts and the Congress, with maybe a smattering of opposition members in one or both houses of Congress but with no real power. Aint it fully. Democrats are convinced they can get a court that will rule the way they want it to rule whereas Republicans are constantly complaining that judges picked by their side often rule against Republican interests.
I have previously posted that the Democrats on the left of the party seemed like Jacobins. This comment by Professor Turley inclines me to think that almost the entire Democrat party is infested with Jacobins.
And recent revelations from USAID and other government programs in Minnesota and other blue states suggest that it may also be an enormous criminal enterprise grabbing votes, power and money by any means available. The Mafia was less dangerous to the country. Maybe both criminal and civil RICO actions against this menace are due.
Political parties do not have the immunities enjoyed by actual governments.
Welch just needs to get her hair dyed blue, at least 2 nose rings and gain about 100 lbs to become the iconic angry white woman (?) Democrat Socialist psychopath she so clearly admires and emulates.
But, like them all, she’ll never fairly debate anyone on the other side, of course, because she knows how full of $hit she really is, and that she’s just playing the part to gain the adulations of her like-minded ignorant mob bubble.
But the best part is when these wannabe anarchists suddenly realize that they are on the wrong side of 2A.
We’ll be waiting, Jenny. Hope to see you soon! 😉
The Democrats’ goal: Pol Pot on the Potomac.
OK, so you want to see the Epstein files all you Democrats. I’ll see your hand and raise you double the pot.
Show me your King Bill and Queen Hillary or just shut your mouth and fold.
It’s amazing how all the OPEN THE EPSTEIN FILES Democratic talking points have disappeared now that two of their own are being called before the tribunal. Bluff noticed and bluff called but too stupid to see it coming. Those low information voters they were counting on weren’t so low information after all.
I don’t mind seeing what the Epstein files have to say about Bill or Hillary. What they don’t intend is to be pulled into a circus center ring. If there is something to charge them with, that’s for the DoJ, not Congress. The authority of Congress in this sort of action is limited to those things which affect the operation of the Legislature. This is why the couple of goons got in trouble for ignoring the subpoena to testify about the attack on the Capitol and the House of Representatives and the Vice President.
Nothing about the Epstein files fit that limited scope. The House smoke-screen group has exceeded their authority to compel the Clinton’s to testify.
For the last 16 years, the Executive branch (deep state and in 2 cases POTUS complicit), with the collaboration of the progressive oligarchy ruling America, have used the DOJ in a police state tool to create gossip and leak that inadmissible as evidence through the New York Times and Washington Post, CBS, MSNBC, ABC, NPR, . . . as a propaganda tool.
While this does violate Federal Law, the position taken by Al Gore using his office and the VP residence as fundraising in violation of the Pendleton Act, “there is no controlling, legal authority” – hence violation of the law is perfectly acceptable with that logic as we have seen for the last 16 years – whether it is true or not.
For those actually interested, it might be worth examining 28 CFR 23 – PART 23—CRIMINAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS OPERATING POLICIES, §23.20 Operating principles:
(b) A project shall not collect or maintain criminal intelligence information about the political, religious or social views, associations, or activities of any individual or any group, association, corporation, business, partnership, or other organization unless such information directly relates to criminal conduct or activity and there is reasonable suspicion that the subject of the information is or may be involved in criminal conduct or activity.
Even if it has now been shown the creation of the Steele Dossier was intentionally the gathering of gossip (hearsay evidence collected by two known foreign and possibly double agents) for distribution via leakage, no prosecution is possible for two reasons (according to the Garland Gestapo):
1. Expiration of statute of limitations on all relevant evidence
2. “there is no controlling, legal authority” – hence it cannot be prosecuted except if we appoint (illegally) a prosecutorial body sired by Jack Smith.
Welcome to America
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-28/chapter-I/part-23
No one was prosecuted based on the contents of the Steele Dossier. It was mentioned in the warrants because ignoring it would be suppressing evidence.
Trump gathered the mob, incited the mob to anger, and the commanded the mob to go to the Capitol and FIGHT LIKE HELL!
When he was shot in the head, he got up and shouted, “Keep up the fight. Keep up the fight.”
“No one was prosecuted based on the contents of the Steele Dossier.” But they meant to. They used it to initiate a brawl, to bring about the overthrow of our government. It backfired and now the treasonous criminals are going to prison.
“Harvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the [educational] system to guarantee Republicans ‘will never [be hired at Harvard].’”
Still believe that those fascists in spirit do not ban conservatives from academia?
Harvard is not a government and excluding Republicans from a single institution when the remainder of the country is available as an alternative, is not fascist. It is also unlikely that any professor has that ability to make the change anyway.
I still have hope that one day you will almost make sense. You are so wacko, many believe there’s no hopes for you.
” It is a chilling and ironic prospect on the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.”
Democrats are sick. Democrats are perverted. Democrats are criminal. Democrats are totalitarianism. Democrats are evil, with one purpose, to destroy the US with it’s freedoms and liberty. The Communist is coming, I hope all you trolls enjoy it, because you will be the first ones shot. Communist don’t put up with trolls.
Destroy it in what way? No electrical power? No food, no water, no roads, no schools, no buildings? Mass starvation and roving masses of zombies trying to eat brains. Will you be ordered out of your mother’s basement? How destroyed will America be?
Be specific.
And those are their good points