The Obama administration, through its Eric Holder DoJ, has decided to prosecute Senator Robert Menendez (D, NJ) on various charges of misbehavior, charges which the administration and the NLMSM have been bruiting about for roughly three years. Why bring the charges now? Because we’re in the end game of the Obama “negotiations” with Iran over the latter’s nuclear weapons program, and the deal being talked about will codify Iran’s ability to build nuclear weapons. Menendez is a powerful Democrat, and he’s been a vocal critic of Obama and his Iran “negotiations.”

The attack on Menendez already has borne fruit: he’s stepped down from his position as Ranking Member of the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee. This committee will have a strong input on pending legislation that will give Congress an oversight say on that pending deal with Iran (or force Obama’s veto of oversight of him and his actions); the prosecution and Menendez’ withdrawal from the committee dilute Democrats’ participation in that legislation.

On the other hand (just across the street, as it were), the Obama administration, through its Eric Holder DoJ, has declined to prosecute the administration’s IRS’ Lois Lerner on the contempt of Congress charges brought by Congress. Lerner is a friend of the administration; she’s the one who headed up the IRS’ attacks on conservative political organizations, “lost” emails regarding those attacks, and then refused to cooperate with Congress’ investigation.

I often say at this point, and I say now: this is the level of integrity of the Democratic Party; remember this in 2016.

Some might say, though, that there are honest Democrats in the party. For instance, isn’t Menendez, a target of Party persecution [sic] one such? Of course, there may well be. But where is their integrity when they associate themselves with a fundamentally dishonest organization? What does their silence on this sort of thing say about them?

Those honest Democrats in the Party can show themselves in one of two ways. One is to end their shameful silence, even in the face of the present Chicago-style Party discipline. The other, more powerful, way (especially since, honest or not, they’re badly tainted by their association with this Party) would be to leave the Democratic Party and form their own political party to compete against the Republicans and Democrats from a platform built explicitly on integrity.

Certainly, third parties generally don’t do well in American elections. The Republican Party began as a third party, and the Bull Moose Party was a third party with a powerful impact on our national elections. However, since then third party attempts since have failed (Nader’s and Perrot’s attempts, while famous, were ephemeral). The difference between those failures and the prior successes, though, is not an evolved political environment. The difference is that the lately third party attempts did not have established politicians as members or in their leadership, and aside from an ability to self-fund, they didn’t have the finances.

The honest members of the Democratic Party, however, both are well-known and established politicians, and they have effective and stable fund-raising capacity. A New Democracy Party, formed of these honest, now ex-, Democrats would be in an excellent position immediately to compete on the local and State level, and in just a few election cycles (see the Republican Party) to compete on the national level.

It’s not at all an insurmountable problem. If those honest Democrats are willing fight Party discipline and to show themselves.

Remember this, too, in 2016.