Marjorie Taylor Greene was born and raised in Milledgeville, once the capital of Georgia with public squares built to imitate Washington, D.C. It is rich in culture and arts and filled with historic architecture and landmarks. It is also a college town with the ethnic makeup of 48% White and 43% Black, a good ground for Progressivism. She graduated from the University of Georgia with a bachelor’s degree in business administration.

With such a background, MTG could have been a Progressive. Instead, she has become an ultra-conservative firebrand, making outlandish statements, many of them seem contrived, intended to catch attention or get credentials. She succeeded hugely in catching the attention of MAGA, and became a political star in the ultra-conservative movement. She got plenty of chances to sit at the table with MAGA big shots.

Some time in 2023 or 2024, she started going against MAGA and the president himself, saying that she never owed him anything. Then, she resigned from Congress in November 2025.

Many speculate that she positions herself to run for the U.S. Senate.

Probably.

But the fact is clear: she breaks with MAGA and Donald J. Trump. For such a colorful and energetic character as Ms. Greene, any direction she plunges ahead is a possibility. And there is one possibility worth consideration, a hypothetical one.

In one of those chances that she was sitting at a table with MAGA’s big shots, they talked past her to one another as if she was not there. Not once, they included her in the conversation. Those pretentious, obnoxious, chauvinistic men just ignored her. She was a member of Congress, but they did not consider her as a member of their club, which had been an exclusive one for white men only. She was one of, and among, important people in the room but felt alone.

And her mind wandered.

These men created a religion named after Him, which was based exclusively on His teachings; they had relied on His wisdom and been guided by Him through every step in their lives. At dinner time, they and their families, commanded by them, solemnly and humbly said thanks to Him before eating. But for more than two millennia, they had steadfastly and at times violently refused to admit His people into their club, why was she so naïve to think that they would admit her into theirs?

Suddenly she realized that she was a woman.

Biologically and anatomically, half of His people were more similar to them than she was. She was way different. She was a woman that means fetch me a beer. The difference was drastic. Wasn’t difference the basis and reason of their discrimination?

She had learned a lesson, or rather a truth. She decided to resign from Congress to show her independence and determination. Running for the Senate, or the Georgia governorship, or even a street corner groceries store, she would not beg them for help. If they did want to help, it would have to be on her own terms. She declared she owed the president nothing. That went without saying that she owed MAGA nothing. She would fight to prove her own worth. She would fight to show that she was an equal of men whether they accepted her or not.

And whether she realized it or not, MTG had become a feminist.

Gloria Steinem, give her a call immediately.

JOHN P. LE PHONG                                                                                                (This article appears on X, thelephongjournal.com, and Facebook)

Is Democracy fragile, weak, and vulnerable? During the last 10 months, MAGA has seemingly proved that it could bring down Democracy and all of its institutions.

The remarkable journalist Fareed Zakaria, one of the most astute political observers of our time, said that people have lost trust in Democracy. He must mean ordinary people, whose trust in government has been shaken by excessive policies of previous administrations. They felt threatened by the in-your-face influx of new cultures, customs, and beliefs. MAGA spoke to that fear by likening Washington D.C. to a swamp. The slogan “Drain the Swamp” was powerful and seducing. The people wanted to clean up the politicians’ mess.

Ordinary people should not lose trust in Democracy, which is their most desirable and final political environment as pointed out by the political science professor at Stanford, Francis Fukuyama. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, Democracy is of the ordinary people, by the ordinary people, and for the ordinary people.

Ordinary people know that truth by experience as well, which had been paid for with sweat, tears, and blood for centuries by the ancestors of Americans. Millions of them left their old countries for the democratic fertile ground created by the American Founding Fathers.

A little bit of interesting history: President Trump’s grandfather, Frederick Trump an ordinary German, could not fare well in the German monarchic regime ruled by the King of Prussia, later Emperor of Germany, Wilhelm I. He left for Democratic America at the age of 16 when Cleveland Grover, a DEMOCRAT, was U.S. president. Like they say, the rest is history. Frederick became a wealthy young man. True, he desired to go back to Bavaria to get married and settle there. But the clear fact remains that only in Democratic America that he found the opportunity to reach his potential and proved to the world, and his wife, who he was and what he was worth. No other political regime on this earth could boast that claim.

There are sharks lurking in any government and no doubt behind the Trump Administration’s effort to “Drain the Swamp”. Democracy is fertile ground for not just fescue grass but also crab weed, which fiercely vies for dominance. Lately, we have seen crab weed spreading wide and deep not just in Washington but all over the country, threatening Democracy. After the Civil War, America has never seen its military might set foot on American soil. Suddenly, they are everywhere, and only in “liberal” cities where the most threatening activities are sex and drug. MAGA sharks pretend that local law enforcement can’t police the cities. The nation’s chiefs of police and their officers, who have done the job all their professional life, are ostentatiously sidelined as incompetent, and the job can only be handled by the Secretary of Defense and his military.

Ordinary citizens must give the Roberts Supreme Court the benefit of the doubt that they had some other national interest consideration when they gave the country’s chief executive (not just President Trump) absolute immunity. But that ruling, regardless of their good faith in reading the Constitution or good reasons to support their decision, has wounded Democracy badly. It has moved our political system a lot closer to an Autocracy, an Aristocracy, or even a Monarchy.

We are living and functioning in a democracy. The chief executive must be held accountable for his personal wrongful conduct under our Constitution, a Democratic Constitution. To say otherwise is sophism.

Democrats have been busying themselves with the prestigious pursuit of forming world coalitions. It takes President Trump, of all people, to remind them that the enemy is within (of course his is different or opposite to theirs). To fight such enemies, they need the help of ordinary people. They need, as Mr. Zakaria hinted, to regain their trust.

That is the Democrats’ job but I, a mainstream Republican, would like to give them some advice: form coalitions with ordinary Americans that means being down to earth and divorcing yourselves from uncomfortable ideas before their time.

JOHN P. LE PHONG                                                                                        (This article appears on Facebook, X, and thelephongjournal.com)

Dinh Le picked up the napkin to wipe his mouth, took a sip of his tea, and calmly said, “It is not really important, but my first name is Dinh, and my last name is Le, L-E. I expected that Tim would go first to tell us what the president, or rather the Movement has been doing and planning to do. But since you ask a very important question, if Tim doesn’t mind, I will try to answer your question as much as I can. My answer, in fact, will shed some light on the administration’s action plan.” He stopped to finish his almond tea.

“I have dug deep to find the reason why the Movement was successful in seizing power. I say seizing power because their success is nothing short of a revolution, and I mean like the Bolshevik Revolution, which had been incubated for a long time starting with a doctrine, Marxism, a plan you may call Leninism, then the execution of the plan by Lenin and his lieutenants. We all know about that now, but like the Movement’s revolution, we know about it a little bit too late.

“The doctrine adopted by the Movement has been around for a long time, older than Marxism. You may call it Hobbesism or Burkeism or Lockeism, as it was advocated by Thomas Hobbes, Edmund Burke, and John Locke. I call it Elitism. These gentlemen firmly believed that average people should not be trusted to govern themselves. Even many of our country’s founders, notably James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, preferred indirect democracy, or a representative Republic. You all know that before the 17^th Amendment, U.S. senators were not elected by the people but by the state legislatures, which were controlled by the rich landowners. The most striking remnant of that elitist mindset in our Constitution is our presidential election: our presidents have not been elected by the people but by the Electoral College that has resulted, five times in the U.S. political history and twice in modern days, in a candidate being elected president even though he got fewer popular votes.”

Benedict was a little concerned that former secretary Joshua Bennett would lose patience with Le’s erudite lecture and explode with sarcastic comments. But he was amazed that he in fact was deep in thought with his eyes fixed on Le.

“I get your point,” mumbled Bennett.

“Do you have a question, Mr. Secretary?” Le asked.

“Oh, no. Please continue.”

Senator Hill reminded everyone where they were, “We are in a restaurant. Just let Dinh finish his thoughts. We ruminate over them later.”

“We now know that the Cook campaign was tinted with racism, which has never been a secret or new phenomenon in American politics. George Wallace, David Duke ran for public offices.  The Christian Republican Movement used the lowest layer of society, the racists, to form its core during the campaign. The racist emotion, if not stronger, is at least as energetic and powerful as religious fervor. They did not send out messages saying please contribute to the Cook campaign because he is a nice guy. Their messages were forceful: “Joe (or Jane), what happens to you, why don’t I see your contribution check in the mail? Are you American? Are you with us or with the woke leftists who want to destroy our country? Don’t you want to elect Zachary Cook so he can take our country back?’, and so on.

“The middle class, themselves are not necessary racist, may disagree with the Movement’s tactic. But its messages strike a chord that neutralize their ‘s sensibility toward races: us-with-our-Christian-culture-and-tradition versus them-with-their-alien-culture-and-tradition. To win the race, the Movement knew that they had to win over the middle class. They had thought about it, worked out a plan for quite some time, and meticulously implemented their plan. It would not matter whether it was under the Social Democrats’ radar or not, I am sorry to tell you this Senator Russell and Carter, their plan rendered you impotent – you cannot adopt it, and you have no countermove.”

“What are you talking about? What plan?” The former secretary asked.

“The Movement’s plan to win over the middle class,” Le said.

“Each party has always tried to get the middle class’s votes to win elections. It’s not a big secret.”

“You are absolutely right, Mr. Secretary. That is why the Movement’s strategy to win over the middle class was genius. They knew that the racist strategy would not do well with the middle class because regardless of individual cases of open racist behavior and attitude, the middle class as a whole is more sensible and more refined in their thought and act toward other races. They would loathe the coarse racist approach. The Movement modified their strategy.  They made a crime committed by one illegal immigrant, especially a recidivist, a national tragedy. They beat the drum hard and loud for years that affirmative action or health care for the poor or DEI, etc., are threats to the white race’s future, sending them into a panic. So, the middle class, a more rational and less prejudicial than the racists, was convinced to choose Cook and the Movement, the arch-conservative faction of the Christian Republican Party. They probably thought that let them solve those issues; if they strayed from the democratic norms, we would send the Democrats back in. They may be mistaken because the Movement has, of course, anticipated and prepared for such thinking.

“The past election was radically different, not in form but in what to be expected. The voters did not know that the winners, the Movement, did not maneuver to gain power to do good for the American people and the country, and wait for the next election cycle for the people to make a judgment on their performance. That has been the democratic process. The Cook administration and its backers, the Movement, have no intention of continuing to follow the democratic process or even to preserve Democracy. Their ultimate goal is to gain power in order to be able to consolidate and stay in power – for good, or until history forces them to relinquish power.

“You are so good at seeing things. Can you tell us what we can do?” The former secretary asked.

“Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I see some things going on in this new political climate. But I am not a policy maker like the rest of you. I can tell you this: the Movement’s effort to subvert Democracy has got tremendous boost from powerful quarters in the world, from dictatorial Russia to the kingdoms in the oil rich Middle East. They see the collapse of Democracy in America as a great vindication of their policy of dividing society into two classes, the have and the have-not-much, and keeping the have-not-much or ordinary people in their place.”

JOHN P. LE PHONG                                                                                              (This Excerpt appears on Facebook, X, and thelephongjournal.com)

“Can you explain to me why the billionaires seem to dislike Democracy and why they want to live in a different America?” Bennett asked.

“I don’t know for certain, Mr. Secretary, because I have never been a millionaire, let alone a billionaire. I guess they were conceived and born differently. We ordinary people love a moment of serenity on a lakeshore, or watching the sunset over the mountains, or breathing in the exhilarating breeze that blows our way in the morning, or walking on the beach, mingling with and saying hello to other beachgoers. Billionaires are endowed with extraordinary gifts of money and brains. They probably see only extraordinary things, but not the everyday pleasant things we enjoy, and therefore don’t feel close to us or comfortable with us. They don’t live in downtown New York or San Francisco. They don’t walk down the street to have a cup of coffee, mingling and shooting the breeze with Joes and Janes. They live on a yacht or buy an island to live away from the multitudes, that was why they love Oligarchy or Autocracy.

“Another explanation is that in an Oligarchy or even in an Autocracy or Aristocracy, the rich are always on top and, as history shows, have power over the rest of the populace. In a Democracy, ordinary people can call the rich by their first name, something billionaires would really dislike.”

“Huh, …” grumbled the former secretary.

“Sorry,” Le said, “I did not mean to make light of our country’s current political affairs. As a sincere apology, I would like to add some food for thought.

JOHN P. LE PHONG This excerpt appears on Facebook, thelephongjournal.com, and X

There has been so much talk, analysis, and criticism in the media about the indictment of Director James Comey and the appointments of President Trump’s personal lawyers to head U.S. Attorney’s offices (Lindsay Halligan in the Eastern District of Virginia and Alina Habba in the District of New Jersey).

When Mr. Comey was in power, he investigated people he believed to be wrongdoers and referred their cases to the prosecutors. Now the people he investigated, the president and his advisors among them, are in power, they investigated and now indicted him. Politically, his prosecution may not look good for the government, but legally, it is our cherished, normal American way of life.

The American Grand Jury can indict a ham sandwich? -Blame the grand jury institution not the prosecutors. The prosecutor in the case of Mr. Comey, a former insurance lawyer, has no prosecutorial experience? -Good for Mr. Comey as the case may not go past the U.S. District Court level. Prosecutors and lawyers read the same book, study the same case law and precedents. There is no reason why a lawyer cannot be a prosecutor.

These topics have taken so much writing and TV time, and the public is distracted from scrutinizing other matters in the news that may fundamentally affect our life: why does Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth summoned hundreds of generals to a meeting in Quantico with no agenda provided to them? Why does the government continue sending military forces to cities all over the country when there is no emergency requiring such deployments? Why does the president claim Portland is “war-ravaged” so he wants to send military troop there? Local leaders say it is “unnecessary”, and the city is “safe and calm”. Is it domestic war game or urban warfare exercise preparing the military for things to come?

Those are questions more important than whether a lawyer can act competently as a prosecutor.

JOHN P. LE PHONG                                                                                         (This article appears on X, Facebook, and thelephongjournal.com)

The U.S. Military struck Venezuela’s two boats, killing 14 people. What is the reaction of the Democrats: “We don’t know if it is legal”.

ICE men wrestle a Democratic U.S. senator to the ground at a rally because “he looked like one of them”. Democrats’ reaction: “we don’t know if it’s legal”.

The federal government moved military personnel into Los Angeles, then D.C., and soon Memphis, New Orleans, and Chicago. “We don’t know if it is legal”.

ICE men executed a raid on a Hyundai’s factory, arrested, handcuffed, detained many South Koreans who were working there legally. The Democrats’ reaction: a bewildered silence.

The government exerted tremendous pressure on the supposedly independent Federal Reserve to change its policies to its liking and now tries to fire one of its governors. “We don’t know if it is legal.”

So, what do you know?

That’s an indication of how weak the Democrats are. They have probably misunderstood politics and how it works in modern times.

After the shooting of a Democratic state senator seriously injuring him and his wife, the same man, a short while later, shot and killed a former Democratic Speaker of the House of Minnesota and her husband. The shooter was described by multiple sources as a Republican. The Democrats chose to play decent politicians and refused to take the low road of exacerbating the already muddy political water. They looked noble. They thought they were showing high-browed statesmanship – until they saw how MAGA Republicans reacted to the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Witnessing his memorial in Arizona attended by 90,000 people in State Farm Stadium with a capacity of only 63,000, Democrats must have murmured “Eureka”: that was real politics. That’s how you take a bad situation and bend the wind to blow your way to the fullest without creating chaos. You must show passion and enthusiasm like when Vice President JD Vance heatedly blamed Governor Gavin Newsom for … the shooting at a Dallas ICE facility.

In a world where even moral principles and religious tenets do not sway the voting population let alone chivalry and gentlemanliness, what do you have to persuade people to vote for you but your passionate belief in what is right and what is wrong?

Politics in America is no longer about ideologies, or symbiosis living togetherness in a utopia. It is a cold chess game between two sides: Democrats versus Republicans, who have been extremely well organized and effectively pushed by MAGA. Any talk about values, ideologies, taking the country back, rampant immigration, etc. is only secondary. The first and most important task is to win the game and of course understand what it is and how to win it.

The game can be succinctly summarized in one word: money – how to accumulate it and how to use it. A Katana sword was a piece of metal to most of us, but in the hand of a Samurai, it was an effective weapon, winning battle after battle for their bosses. Money for most people is really good for a hamburger, a car, or a house. But in the hands of the financiers, it is the ultimate tool to control people and even countries because they control, totally, the financial system. Since J.P. Morgan, they have never loosened their grip on the money system, as differentiated from money itself, therefore their power on national and now world politics. Owners of billion-dollar companies don’t necessarily have any decisive say in this control system or are members of this exclusive club. Unfortunately for Democrats and probably Democracy itself, this Club seems to think that democratic norms and moral decency must now be set aside, and an American Monarchy or Oligarchy should replace it.

When people have power, they wield them until they meet a counter force. Uday Hussein would just stop his car in the street to snatch women at will. Horrible, but everyone knew he could do it in Iraq and nobody expected him to restrain himself from behaving abominably.

In a Democratic society, we take for granted that our check and balance mechanism works effectively to prevent such abuse of power. Democracy affords everyone freedom of speech, political rights, law and order, etc. But another function of utmost importance for Democracy and its defenders is to protect itself against attack not just from the outside but also from the inside. Democrats don’t seem to find an effective counterforce to protect themselves and Democracy from gradual but relentless attacks against them and the Democratic foundational institutions. They should have copied a few Republican down-to-earth tactics. Instead, they love their high horse and look ridiculous for being out of touch with American political reality.

The political game in the U.S. is played by two players, Democratic Party and Republican Party, both vying to outdo the other to gain power, and both staying or should have stayed vigilant against the other’s scheme to obtain absolute power. It was not like the Republicans stealthily came out of a shadow to take Washington. They have never hidden their agenda. They even published a manifesto, Project 2025. Given the American White Revolt, the Democrats may be afforded some leeway when they are judged against their total failure in 2024. But they should not escape their responsibility for not being diligent and skillful enough to detect the mood of the voting population and strategize accordingly.

The will of the people counts only in a Democracy as the effective force against abusive political behavior. If the people do not favor democratic virtues and institutions but support and welcome dictatorial behavior or even a dictatorship, it will be hard for the Democrats to survive with a humble life, let alone triumph. They should have thought, definitely with the aid of AI, of this possibility years ago, long before 2016. Now, they should not wait for the Republicans’ excesses to turn the people’s sentiment against them. They must come up with their own plan to win the hearts and minds of the people.

That plan must include a consideration that MAGA Republicans, assisted by the supposedly best AI, may have charted their way forward 50 years or even 100 years ahead of time, with a chapter detailing their anticipation of the Democrats’ planned actions and their own plan to preempt them..

JOHN P. LE PHONG

(This article appears in thelephongjournal.com, on Facebook, and X)

Carrozza stepped out of the limousine to face a young attendant in a black suit.

“Madame, please follow me.”

She turned to look at her luggage being piled neatly on a cart to make sure that her large skin care and makeup bag was among them.

“Thank you, young man.”

“You are welcome. The Chief Usher will be here at any moment. Oh, here she is.”

Chief Usher Betsy Adegoke formerly Betsy Freeman walked toward Carrozza with a broad smile in long and purposeful strides, “Welcome to the White House, Ms. Carrozza.”

Carrozza discreetly glanced around but did not see Aurora. Well, she said to herself, she is a busy high-ranking government official, she cannot run down the stairs to meet an old friend.

The Chief Usher clarified the matter, “The First Lady will return tomorrow. She is aware of your visit and has sent her greetings.”

“Where is she?”

Ten seconds had passed before Adegoke said, “I am not privy to the First Lady’s schedule. I was told only that she would return tomorrow. Would you please follow me?”

They took the elevator to the second floor. Adegoke went ahead to open the door to the Lincoln Bedroom. The free-spirited Ms. Carrozza had been silent since leaving the elevator. She was in awe: she was actually walking in the White House on the second floor where the president of the United States of America was living. She followed Adegoke through the door into the Lincoln Bedroom and felt her knees were about to buckle. The room, part of a guest suite that included a sitting room, was even larger than her sumptuous bedroom suite at her mansion in the Hamptons. It was redecorated by First Lady Laura Bush in exquisite taste with light brown patterned wallpaper, emerald and gold geometric designed carpet, rich silk brocatelle window hangings, and a cornice over the bed.

Adegoke’s voice woke her up from a daze, “The president has a cabinet meeting, and the First Lady is not in residence. You can have dinner outside. There are many gourmet restaurants in D.C. One of my staff can assist you with choosing a good one. Since you’ve just arrived, I suggest that you order your meal from the White House kitchen so you can have more time to relax and rest. The White House’s chef is one of the best in the country. It’s my opinion.”

“Thanks Betsy, I take your offer. I am sleeping in the White House, why not take a White House bath and eat the White House food, right? Right?” Ms. Carrozza giggled. She stopped when she saw the erect Chief Usher’s face unmoved with her hands clasped together.

As Adegoke was leaving the room, Carrozza mumbled to herself, “That’s why the weasel is not here to greet me.” She meant Richardson. She closed the door and went straight to the bathroom.

For a long time before the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton was a star.  She looked beautiful, poised, confident, intelligent, clear-minded, decisive, and decent, an American lady, a sweeter and more approachable version of Margaret Thatcher. When the Democrats nominated her to be their candidate for president, she was considered a sure bet to be the first female president of the U.S.

Then something unusual happened: a technologist, Peter Thiel, who was not a politician was asked to give a speech at the 2016 Republican National Convention. Then, remarkable things were revealed: the technologist was the force behind the demise of Gawker Media, the lead in the move to kick Elon Musk out of Pay Pal and replace him as CEO, and a contrarian thinker. His probably most important achievement was founding and chairing a then little-known company named Palantir Technologies, which specialized in collecting and processing information. There were several other companies collecting and processing information such as IBM Watson, Oracle, SAS, for businesses and governments but not politics. Palantir filled the gap. It has accumulated more information, at least in the political field, than any other organization and created a Laplace’s Demon, not the perfect one as imagined by Laplace, but strong enough to influence the future of American politics.

The defeats of Hillary Clinton should arouse suspicion, true or not, that more than human works alone was involved in political enterprises, smacking of IT and AI.

The Democrats, late comers, have since played catch-up as they failed to see the formidable potential of IT and AI organizations whose tools could help political campaigns or organizations by charting strategies and designing operational tactics.

Democrats are faced with this reality: the central government is in the hand of MAGA Republicans, both chambers of Congress and a 6/3 majority Supreme Court with three or four justices young enough to outlast a few more presidents. Locally, MAGA has tried to solidify their power including supposedly unconstitutional and illegal measures, such as redistricting effort by MAGA in Texas to add five more Republicans to the House. There is little doubt that they have marshaled their IT/AI power to expand or at least maintain their advantage.

To win back its relevancy, the Democratic Party should look for a Palantir counterpart. It is already extremely hard for them that two of the best brains have already worked for the Republicans. Unlike the Democrats, MAGA Republicans would not look benignly upon turncoats. So, there is little hope that Mr. Musk, regardless of how upset he has been with the MAGA crowd, may help the Democrats for the love of Democracy. They must look somewhere else.

One suggestion: ChatGPT.

The war of the political AIs probably is here.

JOHN P. LE PHONG                                                                                        (This article appears on Facebook, X, and thelephongjournal.com)