You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Democratic Party’ tag.
Please note: this post deals with a sensitive subject.
On Monday, September 18, 2017, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-California) gave a press conference to discuss the Democrats’ plan to work with President Donald J Trump on amnesty for illegal aliens.
She no doubt thought it would go well, but she did not plan for an angry mob of people without US citizenship to shout her down. She is visibly shaking in the video below. I almost felt sorry for her:
This is Pelosi’s hoped-for voting bloc. Actually, some non-citizens vote already and did so in last year’s general election:
But I digress.
Back to Pelosi’s press conference. The optics are bad.
Here is another view:
Breitbart reported that the group of protesters, the Immigration Liberation Movement, employed classic radical techniques used during the Occupy protests in 2011:
The group shouted down Rep. Pelosi, who struggled to maintain control of the meeting, and unfurled a large banner calling for all illegal aliens to be legalized.
Others held up signs, including: “Fight 4 All 11 Million,” referring to the estimated total of all illegal aliens in the U.S.
Pelosi regained her composure afterwards, but one cannot help but wonder what she was thinking:
Breitbart explains the purpose of the press conference in more detail:
Earlier, Pelosi had spoken at the podium with community leaders and fellow members of Congress from the Bay Area in support of her legislative push for a bill that would legalize the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
President Donald Trump canceled DACA earlier this month, but left Congress a six-month window in which to find a legislative solution for the roughly 800,000 DACA beneficiaries. Pelosi said that she wanted the “DREAM Act,” a long-dormant Democratic Party bill that goes much further than DACA, “to be the basis of how we go forward.”
“We’re not giving up our fight to protect America’s dreamers,” she said.
However, she could not speak over the protests. “It’s clear you don’t want any answers,” she said.
Obama created DACA by executive order. That was wrong. It should have been a bill created in Congress that went through the usual legislative process. This is why Trump got rid of it.
Obama was a genius (in all the wrong ways), because this is a political hot potato. He was great at creating chaos.
The Free Beacon reported on Pelosi’s press conference:
Pelosi and Democrats have held the position that Dreamers should be legalized because only their parents are guilty of illegally immigrating to the United States. The protesters did not agree with such an approach.
“Congresswoman Pelosi, you called this press conference in our name to defend the so-called ‘Dream Act,'” they chanted. “But you’ve already traded in our parents in our name.”
They also attacked Pelosi for reaching out to make deals with Trump.
“Last week you announced that you had agreed with President Trump, and I quote you, ‘to work out a passage of border security,'” they chanted.
The article says that the radicals are even upset with Obama, claiming that, during his time in office, nearly three million illegals were deported.
Trump voters, hoping for better border and immigration security, are more upset than ever. Trending heavily on Twitter are #NoDACA and #NoAmnesty:
However, this could be part of a master plan from the American president. A Breitbart reader offers this candid analysis:
Actually, it is a stroke of genius on Trump’s part. If he does not get the wall, there will be no deal. And all of the illegals will turn on the Dems and blame them. Then, the Dems will finally admit that the DACA are caca and throw them under the bus while they look for a way to get new voters. So Trump has put the Dems in the hot spot, & they will get the blame for conceding the wall in order to let the DACA’s stay on work permits. Except the Dems will never allow the wall to be built. They have “compromised” in the past, but the wall has never been built because they lie through their teeth. So, since the Dems cannot compromise, the DACA’s deport as soon as their permits expire, & we get the wall. Along with a huge host of other goodies. Like less immigration & H series visas. Grab the popcorn, it is going to get good!
Information about DACA
Until a few days ago, I was under the mistaken impression that those enrolled in DACA — Dreamers — are children.
The Daily Caller says this is exactly what the media want people to believe (emphases mine below):
CNN and MSNBC are repeating the false claim that DACA recipients are “children” or “kids,” while actually most are adults.
While DACA recipients were illegally brought to the United States by their parents when they were children, the minimum age to apply for the program is 15 years old. In fact, the majority of the applicants were over the age of 20 based on 2014 data from the US government. Some have estimated that the average age of dreamers is 25 or 26 years old–hardly children.
The Daily Wire tells us more about Obama’s brilliance — calling off any serious screening for DACA applicants:
With all the hype surrounding President Trump’s decision to end DACA, it’s important to remember a 2013 report from Judicial Watch revealing that under Barack Obama’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS), background checks were scrapped for those applying to be covered by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).
Documents from 2012 obtained by Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request show that memos were circulated about circumventing extensive background checks for those applying for DACA protection. For instance, memos from September 14 ordered the National Benefits Center (NBC) to provide “lean and lite” background checks to DACA applicants without a specified end date to stop the practice. Another email thread showed that DACA applicants couldn’t be denied protection if they were unable to produce some form of identification.
But there is more:
DACA also opened the door for family members of illegals protected under DACA to receive amnesty, as a directive allowed for “immediate relatives” of DACA illegals to receive protection for deportation. Therein lies the problem with DACA and efforts to provide legalization and citizenship to so-called Dreamers: it’s the first step toward broader amnesty.
The article concludes:
A country cannot adequately protect its citizens and uphold its sovereignty if it doesn’t know who is entering the country; by conducting only “light and lean” background checks and not requiring identification in applying for DACA, then extending protection to immediate family members of illegals protected by DACA, it’s very easy for people with criminal records to get through. Especially since so many of the DACA Dreamers aren’t actually children.
Trump cancelled DACA on September 5. New applications are no longer accepted.
Dreamers have to renew their paperwork for permits to remain in the United States. A permit is valid for two years. Anyone in the programme whose permit expires between now and March 5, 2018 must apply for a new permit before October 5, 2017.
After March 5, deportation efforts are likely to focus on criminals and not law-abiding Dreamers.
On September 5, The Daily Wire reported:
Trump is already promising not to implement immigration law in six months. That means this whole strategy is designed as a bluff to get Congress to legitimize DACA, and throw in funding for the wall as a sop to Trump’s immigration hawk base. In fact, as Politico is reporting, White House sources are saying Trump might leave DACA in place in six months if Congress doesn’t act.
The article concluded:
The odd thing about Trump’s policy here is that he had a far easier one available, as Byron York of The Washington Examiner points out: he could have simply pulled the Obama strategy on same-sex marriage by waiting for attorney generals to sue over DACA, then refuse to defend DACA. That would have avoided this brinksmanship while ending up with the same policy. Then Trump could bargain in good faith with Congress over DACA if he wanted to, without any bluff at all; even Democrats would see that DACA wasn’t long for the world and be forced to the negotiations table.
Lawsuits are being filed, including this one:
Why people are upset
DACA forces taxpayers to foot the bill for Dreamers and their families:
On the other hand:
Then there is the perspective from this legal immigrant — a Marine — who came to the US from Italy when he was two years old. He says — rightly — that every immigrant should follow the lawful process to enter the United States:
Amnesty has not worked in the past. Ronald Reagan gave amnesty at one point during his tenure in a bargain with the Democrats. The Democrats did not fulfil their part of the deal regarding workplace enforcement and border security. Bush II also gave an amnesty. Now here we are with DACA.
On September 8, Breitbart reported that the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner was working out possible deals with Democrats earlier this year, as an Illinois senator explained:
Sen. Dick Durbin, the second-ranking Democratic Senator, spilled the beans in an interview with Reuters, where he described how he worked with Jared Kushner and liberal Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham to promote the DACA amnesty in April and July …
Kushner also arranged phone calls between Durbin and then-Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, who now serves as Trump’s chief of staff.
On September 6, Trump took questions from the media about his meetings with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer (D-NY):
Q Mr. President, what do you say to those who say there are mixed signals coming from the White House over DACA?
THE PRESIDENT: No mixed signal at all. Congress, I really believe, wants to take care of this situation. I really believe it — even very conservative members of Congress. I’ve seen it firsthand. If they don’t, we’re going to see what we’re going to do.
But I will tell you, I really believe Congress wants to take care of it. We discussed that also today, and Chuck and Nancy would like to see something happen, and so do I. And I said if we can get something to happen, we’re going to sign it and we’re going to make a lot of happy people.
Q Do you want a pathway to citizenship for those DACA recipients?
THE PRESIDENT: That’s going to be discussed later, but we want to talk about legal right now. We haven’t discussed that.
Q What did you mean when you said you wanted to revisit the issue in six months?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we’re going to see what happens. I want to see what happens in Congress. I have a feeling that’s not going to be necessary. I think they’re going to make a deal. I think Congress really wants to do this.
Q And what would you like to see, Mr. President, in legislation?
THE PRESIDENT: I’d like to see something where we have good border security, and we have a great DACA transaction where everybody is happy and now they don’t have to worry about it anymore because, obviously, as you know, before, it was not a legal deal. It was a deal that wouldn’t have held up and didn’t hold up. And even President Obama when he did it, when he signed it, he said this is obviously not something that’s — he called it short-term.
I’d like to see a permanent deal, and I think it’s going to happen. I think we’re going to have great support from both sides of Congress, and I really believe that Congress is going to work very hard on the DACA agreement and come up with something.
In the early part of the 20th century, immigration was also a hot topic. In fact, immigration slowed to a trickle between 1921 and 1965, when, under Lyndon B Johnson, it resumed in earnest with the amended Immigration and Nationality Act.
All the belligerent immigration demands being made now in the United States would not be tolerated in other countries — especially south of the border.
I wonder what Nancy Pelosi is thinking today.
Advertisements
The radical Left’s violence and cry against historical statues continues apace.
Incredibly, the Washington Post finally acknowledged Antifa’s violence in a report on rallies in Berkeley that took place on August 27, 2017:
Their faces hidden behind black bandannas and hoodies, about a 100 anarchists and antifa — “anti-fascist” — barreled into a protest Sunday afternoon in Berkeley’s Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park.
Jumping over plastic and concrete barriers, the group melted into a larger crowd of around 2,000 that had marched peacefully throughout the sunny afternoon for a “Rally Against Hate” gathering.
Shortly after, violence began to flare. A pepper-spray wielding Trump supporter was smacked to the ground with homemade shields. Another was attacked by five black-clad antifas, each windmilling kicks and punches into a man desperately trying to protect himself. A conservative group leader retreated for safety behind a line of riot police as marchers chucked water bottles, shot off pepper spray and screamed “fascist go home!”
All told, the Associated Press reported at least five individuals were attacked. An AP reporter witnessed the assaults. Berkeley Police’s Lt. Joe Okies told The Washington Post the rally resulted in “13 arrests on a range of charges including assault with a deadly weapon, obstructing a police officer, and various Berkeley municipal code violations.”
Oh, the irony — violence at a rally against hate:
“We’re just puzzled as to why people consider violence a valid tactic,” Berkeley resident Kristin Leiumkuhler, 60, told SFGATE. She, like others had turned out with neighbors for a peaceful rally but left when things got ugly. “We felt disappointed and surprised by how many people were not in any way discreet about being with antifa — in fact being very bold and prepared to be violent.”
Indeed.
As for the statues, particularly Confederate ones, frothing at the mouth continues. The Washington Times thinks it could be a problem of ignorance, as schools are no longer teaching proper history or civics. Cheryl K Chumley wrote an excellent, informative editorial, ‘Monument mayhem, history hysteria, rooted in poor public education’. Excerpts follow:
It’s the education, stupid.
That, in a nutshell, is a major reason why America’s monuments and national symbols are being torn down, removed, relocated and otherwise blotted from the public square.
If students in America’s public schools were properly taught the foundation of this country — the roots that made it great, the causes that both divided and united, the struggles of the nation to achieve even infancy, never mind maturity — then the leftist and anarchist calls to destroy would fall on deaf ears.
There would have been no Durham, North Carolina, toppling of the Confederate soldier monument.
There would be no fear of black-hearted antifa crowds coming to a community near you.
ESPN’s ridiculous removal of Asian Robert Lee from broadcasting duties at the University of Virginia’s home opener football game out of concerns for the politically correct crowd would not have happened. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s equally ridiculous consideration of a proposal to remove a Christopher Columbus statue from public view would die a quick political death.
She points out the hypocrisy that comes from ignorance, which she says started as school curriculum began to change in the late 1960s. If students had the facts and critical thinking skills:
they would see the double standard of pressing for the tear-down of Robert E. Lee statues, while turning blind eyes to the many West Virginia facilities named after the former Democratic Ku Klux Klansman, Sen. Robert Byrd.
They would see clearly the feminist hypocrisy of condemning President Donald Trump as a misogynist while adopting more nuanced views to praise the likes of churlish but progressive Franklin Delano Roosevelt, serial adulterer but left-leaning John F. Kennedy, and hound dog Democrat Bill Clinton as solid politicians for their side.
They would realize that tearing down Thomas Jefferson and George Washington for racism common to the era is not one and the same as condemning today’s neo-Nazis or KKKers …
They’d instead be placing flowers on veterans’ graves.
Exactly.
Richard H Black, a senator in Virginia’s state senate, wrote an excellent explanation of the state’s protection of Confederate statues. ‘Understanding the purpose of Confederate memorials’ has a lot of information for a relatively short article. I, a Northerner, learned a lot.
The statues went up in the early part of the 20th century, when many Confederate (and Union) veterans were in, or nearing, their dotage:
Localities erected monuments to those who fought in the War Between the States several decades after the war, while millions of those veterans were still living. The Confederate soldier monument, at the Old Courthouse in Leesburg, was erected in 1908, roughly 43 years after the war ended. Most Confederate veterans would have been in their 60s by then, and many had befriended old adversaries.
Black cites one such friendship:
In Northern Virginia, John Mosby, the famed “Gray Ghost,” had bedeviled the Union armies with hit-and-run cavalry tactics that earned him a prominent place in Civil War history. After the war, he befriended his old nemesis, Gen. Ulysses S. Grant. Their friendship began in 1866, when Grant issued him a handwritten safe-conduct pass. Later, Mosby became President Grant’s Republican campaign manager for Virginia, and he was fondly remembered in Grant’s memoirs. In such ways did our nation gradually bind the terrible wounds of our most tragic war.
President Abraham Lincoln wanted the nation to unite after the Civil War:
Millions of good people, North and South, endured great suffering. In Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address, he set forth his postwar goals: “With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan — to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.”
Black explains the statue in Charlottesville:
When the Courthouse Statue was erected, it was “to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan.” The statue is a quiet, reflective image of the men who fought that war. One can imagine those who attended when it was erected in 1908. No doubt they included veterans, widows, and those for whom the statue was a solemn memorial to long-lost friends; to fathers, husbands or brothers. It was not a political statement any more than the Vietnam War Memorial is a political statement about that war.
He concludes:
I have no doubt that statue removal would eventually invite removal of headstones from Confederate gravesites; there is always some new tool to perpetuate division and hatred. We should have the wisdom to respect our history and draw lessons from it.
I oppose weakening the Virginia statute protecting war memorials. If bills attacking war monuments are introduced in the Senate, I will vote against them.
In another editorial by Cheryl K Chumley, ‘Monument madness a leftist cover to crumble America from within’, the dangerous rabidness of the Left was the topic for discussion:
The clashes in Charlottesville, disgusting as they were — fatal as they proved — were quickly seized upon by a committed far-left that wants nothing more than to A) remove this president from office and B) change the constitutional nature of America’s society for one that’s ruled by whim and mob voice, rather than law and order.
She lists all the madness that occurred after August 12, the day of the Charlottesville violence. Do read her article, as this is only a portion of what happened:
Those who dared suggest the statue should stay for historical reasons became cast as white supremacists themselves. Those who pointed to the First Amendment rights of protesters of all walks, from far left to far right and all points in between, were slammed as neo-Nazi sympathizers.
Nancy Pelosi called for the National Parks Service to yank an already-approved permit for white supremacists to protest at a spot in California. The mayor of Charlottesville, the Democratic activist and anti-President Donald Trumper Michael Signer took to national television to draw a direct line between the White House and the city’s violence, saying most shamefully and unfairly, “Look at the campaign he ran,” while pointing blaming fingers squarely at the president.
The progressive, Asian, black and Hispanic caucuses in Congress penned quick letters to the White House, demanding the immediate removal of aides Steve Bannon, Stephen Miller and Sebastian Gorka because of their so-deemed, yet entirely unsubstantiated, white supremacist views.
Baltimore in the middle of the night removed its Confederate-tied monuments. North Carolina thugs in Durham tore down a Confederate soldier statue and kicked and spat on it. A pastor — a man of Christ — called for the renaming of Washington Park in Chicago, as well as the removal of its George Washington statue and the renaming of Jackson Park. Why? The names conjures images of slavery, he said.
Ultimately:
The journey’s not over. Next stop: The documents of these so-dubbed racist Founding Fathers. The Declaration of Independence. The U.S. Constitution. And the question that looms — the question that’s to be posed by the left: How can these documents represent the freedoms of all, when they were penned by those with racist mindsets? …
This is the left’s logic: If America’s founders were racist, then the documents the founders wrote were racist — and since these are the documents that still guide our governance today, then America’s entire political system is inherently racist.
This is what the left is after; this is the end goal — a complete upheaval of America’s republic and uprooting of law and order. The quest is dark. It would mean the end of America’s greatest asset — the fact that our country is built upon the foundation that individual rights come from God, not government. It would leave a nation at moral and political drift, a society in chaos, a wide open door for those with selfish desires to take the reigns of political power.
She concludes that people need to get involved:
Our job, our responsibility, as a nation of patriotic, evangelical, constitutional, civic-minded, law-and-order-loving people, is to root out the evil without killing the dream.
Nancy Pelosi (D-California), mentioned above, has been a poster woman for the post-Charlottesville hysteria.
Yet, her father helped to dedicate a Confederate statue in Maryland!
The Baltimore Sun reported that on May 2, 1948, then-Governor William Preston Lane Jr. and Pelosi’s father, Thomas D’Alesandro Jr., delivered remarks during the dedication ceremony for a monument of Robert E. Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson.
As Fox News noted: This is the same Pelosi family blood that just found several statues in Congress — statues that have stood for years and years and years — “reprehensible” in nature, needful of removal …
This is what D’Alesandro said during the dedication, Fox reported: “Today, with our nation beset by subversive groups and propaganda which seeks to destroy our national unity, we can look for inspiration to the lives of Lee and Jackson to remind us to be resolute and determined in preserving our sacred institutions. We must remain steadfast in our determination to preserve freedom, not only for ourselves, but for the other liberty-loving nations who are striving to preserve their national unity as free nations.”
But wait, there’s more.
He also said this, of Jackson: “In these days of uncertainty and turmoil, Americans must emulate Jackson’s example and stand like a stone wall against aggression in any form that would seek to destroy the liberty of the world.”
What a difference between father and daughter.
In closing, Victor Davis Hanson wrote an excellent article for the Washington Times, which I recommend to everyone for its historical content:
He gives us facts a lot of us did not know. A few are below. Okay, most of us knew about Margaret Sanger, but there are more:
The wide liberal search for more enemies of the past may soon take progressives down hypocritical pathways they would prefer not to walk.
In the present climate of auditing the past, it is inevitable that Margaret Sanger’s Planned Parenthood will have to be disassociated from its founder. Sanger was an unapologetic racist and eugenicist who pushed abortion to reduce the non-white population.
Should we ask that Ruth Bader Ginsburg resign from the Supreme Court? Even with the benefit of 21st-century moral sensitivity, Justice Ginsburg still managed to echo Sanger in a racist reference to abortion (“growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of”) …
President Woodrow Wilson ensured that the armed forces were not integrated. He also segregated civil service agencies. Why, then, does Princeton University still cling to its Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs? To honor a progressive who did a great deal of harm to African-American causes?
Wilson’s progressive racism, dressed up in pseudo-scientific theories, was perhaps more pernicious than that of the old tribal racists of the South, given that it was not regionally centered and was professed to be fact-based and ecumenical, with the power of the presidency behind it …
Why is 20th century Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, once a Klansman, still honored as a progressive hero? …
Farm-labor icon Cesar Chavez once sent union thugs to the border to physically bar U.S. entry to undocumented Mexican immigrants, whom he derided as “wetbacks” in a fashion that would today surely earn Chavez progressive ostracism as a xenophobe.
Hanson ends his article with a series of questions as to the point of all of these clamours for statue removal and monument defunding, among them:
Does toppling the statue of a Confederate general — without a referendum or a majority vote of an elected council — improve racial relations? Does renaming a bridge or building reduce unemployment in the inner city? …
Does selectively warring against the illiberal past make us feel better about doing something symbolic when we cannot do something substantive? Or is it a sign of raw power and ego when activists force authorities to cave to their threats and remove images and names in the dead of night?
Leftists — especially Antifa and their fellow travellers — really do need to a) get properly educated and b) do some critical self-examination.
This week in America with regard to matters domestic was nothing short of demonic.
It showed that a spiritual battle is going on of epic proportions. As horrible as it was, we are seeing only the surface. Things will get worse before they get better.
We know about the far right, so let’s look at the far left, since the media won’t.
The Far Left
After Charlottesville, the Far Left continued their rampage by tearing down a Confederate statue in Durham, North Carolina:
On Tuesday, August 15, the local ABC affiliate WTVD reported (emphases mine below):
Durham County sheriff’s deputies arrested a woman who said she took part in toppling the Confederate statue in downtown Durham. More arrests are expected.
Takiyah Thompson, 22, was taken into custody shortly after protesters held a news conference Tuesday afternoon at North Carolina Central University. Thompson climbed a ladder to the top of the statue to tie a rope around its neck before the crowd tore it down.
Thompson is charged with:
-
- disorderly conduct by injury to a statue (Class II Misdemeanor)
- damage to real property (statue as a fixture (Class I Misdemeanor)
- participation in a riot with property damage in excess of $1,500 (Class H Felony)
- inciting others to riot where there is property damage in excess of $1,500 (Class F Felony)
The protesters who took part in toppling Confederate statue in Durham on Monday held the news conference Tuesday to call for the dropping of any charges related to the incident.
Thompson was given a $10,000 unsecured bond. She bonded out at 5:48 p.m. The World Worker’s Party Durham chapter has set up a legal defense fund to help fight her case in court.
Deputies said Tuesday night that investigators continue to search for other suspects in the removal of the statue.
“The people decided to take matters into our own hands and remove the statue,” said Thompson, a member of the Communist-platform Workers World Party and a student at N.C. Central University. “We are tired of waiting on politicians who could have voted to remove the white supremacist statues years ago, but they failed to act. So we acted” …
At a news conference, Durham County manager Wendell Davis called pulling the statue down “unlawful and inappropriate”.
Wendell Davis is black. So are other Durham County officials.
The New York Post had details about the jail sentences accompanying the felony charges:
Takiya Thompson, 22, has been charged with disorderly conduct by injury to a statue, damage to real property, participation in a riot with property damage in excess of $1,500 — and inciting others to riot where there is property damage in excess of $1,500, according to the Durham County Sheriff’s Office.
The last two offenses are Class H and Class F felonies, with each carrying a sentence of up to 25 months and 41 months behind bars, respectively.
Interestingly, the left-of-centre and anti-Trump magazine The Atlantic recently published an article, ‘The Rise of the Violent Left’.
The author, Peter Beinart, posits:
Antifa’s activists say they’re battling burgeoning authoritarianism on the American right. Are they fueling it instead?
Yes, they are.
Beinart catalogues the various events that Antifa’s violence have cancelled in recent months. The Far Left group does not want any conservatives, Republicans or Trump supporters (not every Trump supporter identifies with either of those two groups) to hold or participate in any public gatherings.
Antifa and similar groups get a degree of ideological support from Democrats. Beinart explains:
For progressives, Donald Trump is not just another Republican president. Seventy-six percent of Democrats, according to a Suffolk poll from last September, consider him a racist. Last March, according to a YouGov survey, 71 percent of Democrats agreed that his campaign contained “fascist undertones.”
He’s anything but. Check YouTube for old videos of him helping the black community in New York. Here’s one for starters. I think it’s his Alpha masculinity that the Left — including Democrats — finds triggering.
Beinart goes into the history of Antifa:
“antifa,” which is short for antifascist or Anti-Fascist Action. The movement’s secrecy makes definitively cataloging its activities difficult, but this much is certain: Antifa’s power is growing. And how the rest of the activist left responds will help define its moral character in the Trump age.
Antifa traces its roots to the 1920s and ’30s, when militant leftists battled fascists in the streets of Germany, Italy, and Spain. When fascism withered after World War II, antifa did too. But in the ’70s and ’80s, neo-Nazi skinheads began to infiltrate Britain’s punk scene. After the Berlin Wall fell, neo-Nazism also gained prominence in Germany. In response, a cadre of young leftists, including many anarchists and punk fans, revived the tradition of street-level antifascism.
In the late ’80s, left-wing punk fans in the United States began following suit, though they initially called their groups Anti-Racist Action, on the theory that Americans would be more familiar with fighting racism than fascism. According to Mark Bray, the author of the forthcoming Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook, these activists toured with popular alternative bands in the ’90s, trying to ensure that neo-Nazis did not recruit their fans. In 2002, they disrupted a speech by the head of the World Church of the Creator, a white-supremacist group in Pennsylvania; 25 people were arrested in the resulting brawl.
Then things went quiet. Beinart says that these activists focussed on anti-capitalist activities.
He says that Antifa re-emerged from the time Trump ran in the Republican primaries in 2016. The activists garnered support from the mainstream Left:
An article in The Nation argued that “to call Trumpism fascist” is to realize that it is “not well combated or contained by standard liberal appeals to reason.” The radical left, it said, offers “practical and serious responses in this political moment.”
That includes violence.
Some Democrat-dominated cities, such as Portland, Oregon, have become defined by Antifa. Portland had days of violent protests after Trump won the presidential election on November 8, 2016. Other protests have taken place since then.
This sets a worrying precedent, because Antifa don’t like the police or local government, either, even when those officials are Democrats:
What’s eroding in Portland is the quality Max Weber considered essential to a functioning state: a monopoly on legitimate violence. As members of a largely anarchist movement, antifascists don’t want the government to stop white supremacists from gathering. They want to do so themselves, rendering the government impotent. With help from other left-wing activists, they’re already having some success at disrupting government. Demonstrators have interrupted so many city-council meetings that in February, the council met behind locked doors.
Meanwhile, Trump supporters are frustrated. They see Democrats buckling to Antifa demands:
Joey Gibson, a Trump supporter who organized the June 4 Portland rally, told me that his “biggest pet peeve is when mayors have police stand down … They don’t want conservatives to be coming together and speaking.”
Meeting with violence is another concern of Trump supporters and Republicans:
To provide security at the rally, Gibson brought in a far-right militia called the Oath Keepers. In late June, James Buchal, the chair of the Multnomah County Republican Party, announced that it too would use militia members for security, because “volunteers don’t feel safe on the streets of Portland.”
Beinart concludes:
Revulsion, fear, and rage are understandable. But one thing is clear. The people preventing Republicans from safely assembling on the streets of Portland may consider themselves fierce opponents of the authoritarianism growing on the American right. In truth, however, they are its unlikeliest allies.
The media
Because the media are almost universally Democrats, they will defend Far Left groups and even deny their existence. After all, someone has to protest Trump and his supporters. If they have to use violence, so be it.
And, it is interesting to see who the Left defines as ‘far right’, for instance, this multiracial group of readers and contributors to /pol/4chan. It’s difficult to describe /pol/ fans other than to say that they are young people who oppose political correctness and enjoy making fun of the Left. For that, they get branded as a hate group. I’m not necessarily defending them, but activists can take things way too far.
Returning to — and closing with — the media, watch for the Charlottesville story to run and run, while other incidents past and present are conveniently swept under the rug.
The media are shameful.
Trump will have to direct his communications office to begin revoking press passes, starting with CNN’s Jim Acosta, who has been belligerent from the beginning and known for interrupting Trump. He did so again the other day. More on that tomorrow.
At the weekend, another new — and bad — media narrative appeared: Charlottesville.
Charlottesville is in Virginia and should not be confused with Charlotte, North Carolina.
By now, everyone reading this will have seen video footage and commentary on the violence.
Although no one will entertain talking about it in Big Media, this was likely to have been a false flag driven by powerful opponents to President Donald Trump and executed by extremist and disturbed minions on the left as well as the right.
We do not know all of the facts yet, therefore, further speculation is premature.
This was the president’s statement in full. In it, he said that many groups were responsible:
A professor who is an expert on nationalism concurred:
Fox News has a summary of those on the left and the right who complained about Trump’s statement. Former Arkansas governor and Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said:
“Donald Trump, I thought, was very explicitly clear in condemning what happened,” he said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends.” “He will never satisfy those who hate his every word.”
The Washington Examiner reported that Huckabee also said:
some people “cannot get over the fact he is president”.
A Department of Justice and FBI investigation is currently underway.
One hopes the investigators will find out exactly who issued the order for the police to stand down. The police are there to protect protesters who have a permit to demonstrate. Both left and right had permission to be there on Saturday, August 12. The left said they would be peaceful, but they came with the weapons, not the others. The police left defenceless people unable to fend off their aggressors. Then there was the guy in the car. You can see the footage here; also note the broken windscreens, front and rear.
The city — and the state — are governed by Democrats.
Trump supporters are highly suspicious of what took place. One says the events in Charlottesville look just like the Soros-engineered ones in Ukraine in 2014. Virginia declared a state of emergency and, as no one is talking about the violent left-wing groups, it would not be unreasonable to assume there could be calls for martial law in various states.
There are further indications that this could have been a false flag: a) a Soros-backed organisation was preparing to go days before Trump supporters (who, incidentally, did not go) learned of the event and b) the Charlottesville mayor worked with Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta at the Center for American Progress as well as on Obama’s transition team.
There was also a man whom MSNBC and the New York Times interviewed who happened to be at the protests in Charlottesville on Saturday. He worked for the State Department and managed a Democrat Virginia gubernatorial campaign. (Mirror link of the images is here, in case the other link is removed.)
Hmm. Never think the Deep State couldn’t be involved in this.
By the way, August 12 just happened to be Soros’s birthday.
All of this was designed to make Trump and his supporters look evil.
But, who is decrying the violent leftists there that day? No one in the media. Telling, isn’t it?
Condolences to the families of the lady and two state police officers who, sadly, lost their lives that day. I hope that those who were injured recover fully and soon.
On July 20, I wrote about Michael Caputo, one of Bill Clinton’s advisers during his presidency.
He explained one of his jobs to Tucker Carlson on Fox News:
You can see the full interview here:
Essentially, as I wrote on that post:
Caputo helped to ensure Yeltsin’s re-election.
As president, Hillary’s husband ordered — and got — interference in a Russian election.
I wanted to get that point across to anyone who thinks the Democrats are saintly.
However, Caputo made a second point to Tucker Carlson.
When Carlson asked him if he thought whom the Russians would have preferred as president of the United States, Caputo said Hillary Clinton.
Caputo said that the Russians consider Hillary Clinton ‘predictable’, and, therefore, easier to out-manoeuvre.
They are less sure about Trump because he is exactly the opposite. He is capable of outsmarting them.
That is important to know, especially as other world leaders are likely to have the same impression.
It has often been said that Trump plays 4-D chess. At least one world power thinks that is true.
Interestingly, Caputo ended up becoming Donald Trump’s communications advisor for the 2016 presidential campaign.
Leo Lyon Zagami is a Freemason living in Italy.
He often uses his middle name as his mother was related to the Queen Mother’s family, the Bowes-Lyons.
I first heard him on The Alex Jones Show on July 11, 2017 discussing the conflicts currently going on in the Vatican. It is unclear whether Zagami is still a practising Catholic — and, yes, I am aware of the Catholic Church’s proscription on being a Freemason. Regardless, he takes a keen interest in what is going on in Rome.
N.B.: This post explores adult themes and is not for children.
Zagami told Jones that there are two factions operating at the Vatican: Pope Francis’s group and the traditionalists. Paedophilia is common in both groups, and orgies take place in the Pope’s circle.
Today, July 26, 2017, Cardinal George Pell — a traditionalist — appeared in Melbourne Magistrates’ Court in Australia on charges of sexual abuse. US News reports:
Pell, Australia’s highest-ranking Catholic and Pope Francis’ top financial adviser, is accused of sexually abusing multiple people years ago in his Australian home state of Victoria, making him the most senior Vatican official ever charged in the Catholic Church sex abuse crisis. Details of the charges have yet to be released to the public, though police have described them as “historical” sexual assault offenses — meaning crimes that occurred years ago.
Pell has not yet entered a plea. But on Wednesday, his lawyer told the court that the 76-year-old cardinal plans to formally plead not guilty at a future court date.
“For the avoidance of doubt and because of the interest, I might indicate that Cardinal Pell pleads not guilty to all charges and will maintain the presumed innocence that he has,” lawyer Robert Richter told the court.
The court appearance lasted only minutes. Initially, it was believed these crimes were all committed by priests in his diocese. However, after Australian detectives flew to the Vatican in 2016 and as recently as last month to interview the elderly cardinal, it is thought that Pell, too, might have been directly involved.
Although members of victim advocacy groups were outside the court, so were Pell supporters who believe he has been unfairly targeted. Pell has long been a controversial figure at the Vatican for theological reasons. His defenders among the Catholic faithful believe he is shoring up the one true faith.
We shall see.
Leo Zagami writes (emphases mine):
The two men who made abuse allegations against Cardinal George Pell say they are “over the moon” about the decision to lay charges. But their lawyer stated to the Herald Sun, they were not confident the case would be successful. It is up to us, the alternative media to build pressure around this very important case. So please dear readers, share this information on your social media accounts, before the largest disinfo operation in history, could send it into oblivion
Clergy sexual abuse survivor Andrew Collins stated that the fact that Cardinal George Pell had finally been charged, was something he never thought he would hear as “Cardinal Pell … is one of the most powerful men on the earth,”.
Well if Cardinal Pell falls, it’s only a matter of time before the Vatican pedophile network goes down with him, so let’s pray for this very important day for the future of humanity, the 26th of July 2017.
On July 19, Zagami wrote about the two paedophile factions in the Vatican, a topic he discussed on The Alex Jones Show:
One faction, closer to Pope Francis, and the Gay lobby, wants a more liberal Church, ready to embrace homosexuality for priests, and an open support for Islam and the upcoming One World Religion, that will gradually push for the acceptance of pedophilia. This faction is represented by Cardinals such as Coccopalmiero, involved in the Gay Orgy raid, or Godfried Cardinal Danneels of the St. Gallen Mafia.
St Gallen is a secret group of Catholic clerics from the Vatican that meets annually in that Swiss town. Zagami says it is a rogue Masonic lodge.
Then there is the traditionalist faction — Pell’s:
The other faction, the more conservative one, mostly controlled by Pope Ratzinger the Pope Emeritus, is instead contrary to any liberal change imposed on the Catholic Faith by the Jesuit Pope, but still hides terrible compromises and links to the infamous pedophilia rings that hide behind the Catholic hierarchy.
However, there is also a secular aspect to paedophilia outside the Vatican. Zagami alleges that a longtime Italian educator Rodolfo Fiesoli, arrested in 1985 and again in 2011, is a good friend not only of Prime Minister Matteo Renzi but may also have links to the Democratic Party in the US. Zagami alleges that Fiesoli is:
an influential figure in the international pedophile network connected to the US Democrats.
Fiesoli spoke at a TedX conference in Florence just a few weeks before his 2011 arrest:
After his arrest, Zagami says:
references to this pedophile monster connected to Matteo Renzi, head of the ruling Democratic Party, and the US Democratic Party, disappear from the online site of the initiative, and from YouTube but fortunately we still have a surviving footage of the event.
In 2015, Fiesoli was sentenced to 17 years in prison, but has not yet spent a day behind bars because of his powerful connections not only in Italy, but also, perhaps, in the United States.
Fiesoli first gained broad attention in Italy during the 1980s (emphasis in the original):
Fiesoli participated as a supposed “educator”, despite being condemned several times since the mid 80’s, for sexual abuse to minors, at his community called Forteto di Vicchio, established in 1977, to support his bizare theories on family, and the recovery of minors in distress. In the audience was the then-Mayor Matteo Renzi, who was smiling during Fiesoli’s speech, nodding his head several times and clapping to show his approval.
Zagami believes that President Donald Trump is the only person who can break this network wide open.
The Vatican’s opposition to Trump might be evidence that they also think he can expose the network, which is why they are taking such strong objection to him and his Christian supporters. An article appeared earlier this month in the English edition of La Civiltà Cattolica (Catholic Civilization), a Jesuit publication. The editor-in-chief is Antonio Spadaro SJ.
On July 14, Zagami wrote about Spadaro’s diatribe and translated some of it into English. An excerpt follows (more in Zagami’s post):
After reading the article I will add that the Jesuits are declaring war not only on Trump, but on American Christianity. Jesuits write about American Christians in the following way:
…
Theirs is a prophetic formula: fight the threats to American Christian values and prepare for the imminent justice of an Armageddon, a final showdown between Good and Evil, between God and Satan. In this sense, every process (be it of peace, dialogue, etc.) collapses before the needs of the end, the final battle against the enemy. And the community of believers (faith) becomes a community of combatants (fight). Such a unidirectional reading of the biblical texts can anesthetize consciences or actively support the most atrocious and dramatic portrayals of a world that is living beyond the frontiers of its own “promised land.”
They also attack Steven Bannon – a Catholic – and accuse him of being a “supporter of an apocalyptic geopolitics.”
This is the final declaration of war against real America made by the Jesuits and Pope Francis, so it’s about time we openly declare war on their pedophile networks and Vatican Money Laundering Schemes.
Only a small percentage of Trump supporters think that way. In fact, most Americans who think like that are anti-Trump because he is not godly enough.
As for Steve Bannon, he would be the last to think in terms of apocalyptic geopolitics. He just wants people destroying America to be identified and dealt with through the proper legal channels.
Now we come to Zagami’s interview with Alex Jones from July 11, wherein he discusses the evil inside Vatican City. This is the segment I saw as it aired:
The following day, Zagami included it in his post ‘St Gallen Mafia Exposed!’ which also includes a video of the aforementioned Cardinal Godfried Danneels from Belgium discussing his time as a member of the St Gallen Mafia (subtitled in English):
The video is well worth watching and has a lot of information, considering it is less than three minutes long.
Zagami tells us that the St Gallen Mafia:
is leading the Church towards a schism pushing the the LGBT agenda into the hearts and minds of Catholics worldwide….
Godfried Maria Jules Danneels a Belgian cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church openly involved with the St. Gallen Mafia wearing a rainbow inspired religious garment to celebrate mass.
On June 30, Pope Francis sacked German Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller from his position as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). Pope Benedict XVI appointed him to that post in 2012 and Pope Francis made him a Cardinal in 2014.
Zagami says that Müller and Pope Francis did not see eye-to-eye:
because he opposes pedophilia and the Jesuits’ liberal agenda for the CDF.
Heading the CDF is probably the most important position next to the pope. Pope Benedict had held that post years ago. It involves ensuring that Catholic doctrine stays unaltered. Of course, that wasn’t exactly the case decades ago when Benedict Ratzinger was pushing forward with post-Vatican II reform, but the principle remains.
Zagami explains the sacking:
The following information that will help us understand more comes from the report of a trustworthy German source, who spoke to the site OnePeterFive, on condition of anonymity. He quotes an eyewitness who recently sat with Cardinal Müller at lunch in Mainz, Germany. During that meal, Cardinal Müller is alleged to have disclosed in the presence of this eyewitness …
According to this report, Cardinal Müller was called to the Apostolic Palace on 30 June 2017, and he arrived with his work files, assuming that this meeting would be a usual working session. The Pope told him, however, that he only had five questions for him:
Are you in favor of, or against, a female diaconate? “I am against it,” responded Cardinal Müller.
Are you in favor of, or against, the repeal of celibacy? “Of course I am against it,” the cardinal responded.
Are you in favor of, or against female priests?
“I am very decisively against it,” replied Cardinal Müller.
Are you willing to defend Amoris Laetitia?
“As far as it is possible for me,” the Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith replied: “there still exist ambiguities.”
Are you willing to retract your complaint concerning the dismissal of three of your own employees?
Cardinal Müller responded: “Holy Father, these were good, unblemished men whom I now lack, and it was not correct to dismiss them over my head, shortly before Christmas, so that they had to clear their offices by 28 December. I am missing them now.”
Thereupon the Pope answered: “Good. Cardinal Müller, I only wanted to let you know that I will not extend your mandate [i.e., beyond 2 July] as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith.”
Without any farewell or explanation, the Pope left the room, leaving Cardinal Müller in utter astonishment. He stood in shocked silence, waiting for the Pope to return, but strangely enough, it was Archbishop Georg Gänswein, who had to force him to leave the meeting, completely shocked by what had just occurred.
One week later, another German Cardinal made the news, Joachim Meisner, who was born on Christmas Day in 1933. Cardinal Meisner died mysteriously on July 5 at the age of 83. Zagami tells us that Meisner was a traditionalist:
He was considered a leader of the conservative wing of the German episcopate, and was one of the four cardinals who orginally presented the controversial letter “Dubia” to Pope Francis in September 2016, seeking up until June 2017, a clarification on the modernization of the Church in matters of faith, and the infamous Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation issued by Pope Francis called, Amoris Laetitia, without ever receiving an answer.
The aforementioned Cardinal Müller spoke to his colleague on July 4:
As the Passauer Neue Presse reports:
Müller had spoken over the phone with the former Archbishop of Cologne [Cardinal Meisner] the previous night [before he died the next morning]; and they also had spoken about the non-renewal of his former position. Meisner had shown himself to be “deeply saddened” by this dismissal. “That moved him personally and wounded him – and he considered it to be a form of damage for the Church,” as the Curial Cardinal [Müller] himself described the reaction of Meisner and 1 well-informed source within the Vatican say[s] that perhaps Cardinal Meisner “died of a broken heart.” Or was he killed in traditional Vatican fashion with a poison coffee? …
Interestingly enough, Archbishop Georg Gänswein, personal secretary of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, and Prefect of the Papal Household very close to Pope Francis, and Obama, and a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith since 1996, also happened to meet Cardinal Meisner shortly before his death. Only a coincidence? Of course not, nothing is a coincidence in the Vatican, but a well orchestrated maneuver.
According to the Passauer Neue Presse, Gänswein visited Bad Füssing (near Passau), on the 2nd of July, in order to give a talk at the “Bad Füssinger Gespräche” [Bad Füssing Talks]. Cardinal Meisner had been staying in Bad Füssing for a period of time for vacation, as his health was not considered at all a problem. So the two influential Vatican figures met in person there, but unfortunately, no details have been revealed about their conversation that eventually led to Joachim Meisner’s death, a mystery that needs further investigation, as it seems Pope Francis is clearing up the scene from any unwanted opposition before his summer vacation, and Meisner was on his hit list for a long time.
On July 2 — between Müller’s sacking and Meisner’s death — Monsignor Luigi Capozzi, Secretary of Cardinal Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, was arrested in a raid on what Zagami says was:
a drug-based gay orgy.
Zagami tells us:
The police later proved that Capozzi, who was on his way to becoming bishop, is now being forced to retire in a monastery by the Vatican. Capozzi used a car from the Holy See with a Vatican number plate to bring in big quantities of cocaine to the Holy City. Monsignor Capozzi is a big fan of Pope Francis, as is his boss Cardinal Coccopalmiero, who is one of Bergoglio’s biggest supporters and collaborators, and wrote an important essay on the 8th Chapter of Amoris laetitia, the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation of Pope Francis, on love in the family …
In closing, Zagami offered this insight as to Trump’s lack of concern about visiting the UK:
The liberals are desperate to bring down Trump using any and all means, but now that the CIA and other agencies are finally tackling the pedophilia problem, because of Potus’ orders, he could be risking his life even more. LGBTQ rights advocates should support the president in this endevour, and distance themselves from the pedophilia reality.
In the meantime, President Trump has told Theresa May that he does not want to go ahead with a state visit to Britain, a country that as we know is the driving force of the global Pedophilia Network. UK children in the care of British institutions, are six times more likely to be assessed for abuse, than a child in the general population. Scotland Yard detectives were removed from a pedophile investigation, after naming politicians, so maybe the British public should change their brainwashed attitude and support his visit to the UK.
The world — and the Catholic Church — are in a deep mess right now.
Hence my warning the other day — Michael Crichton’s Gell-Mann Amnesia effect — about paying too much heed to what the media are telling us.
I still intend to write about President Donald Trump’s visit to Paris, even though it happened a week ago.
However, time constraints prohibit me from doing so at the moment.
Unfortunately, Big Media did not cover the trip very well. No surprise there.
On Sunday, July 16, 2017, I saw an interview with ex-CIA man Dr Steve Pieczenik on the Alex Jones Show:
If that does not work, here is another link. The interview is in the first half of the segment.
Pieczenik talked about Trump’s G20 meetings as well as his visit with France’s president Emmanuel Macron.
He said that Trump has been able to find common ground with world leaders even when they disagree on important issues.
Trump was able to negotiate the ceasefire in Syria with Russian president Vladimir Putin at the G20. Pieczenik says that was facilitated by the two men finding common ground in other areas.
According to Pieczenik, both men admire beautiful, accomplished women. Putin is very proud of his daughter who speaks several languages. Likewise, Melania Trump might have been a model but is hardly an airhead. She, too, speaks five languages.
Both Trump and Putin enjoy the closeness of family and like to spend time with them. That would have been a topic of conversation. Angela Merkel wisely sat Putin and Mrs Trump together at dinner, also helpful.
Trump is forging important alliances, even if most of the world thinks he is tweeting all day long.
Besides Putin, Trump made an equally positive impression on Poland’s president Andrzej Duda in Warsaw earlier this month. Whilst there, he participated in the Three Seas Initiative, forging new links with Central and Eastern European countries.
Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia and Israel went swimmingly. For the first time in many years, there is hope that peace in that region could become reality. His meeting with Egyptian president Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi in April was a tremendous success.
Trump has also been successful in forging alliances in the Far East, particularly with Japan’s president Shinzō Abe. His meetings with China’s president Xi Jinping were productive. The Trump administration is currently conducting sensitive trade negotiations with China.
Steve Pieczenik explained that China fears Japan because of their disputed claims on the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. The United States might have to mediate at a certain point.
So, while Big Media and their lesser left-leaning counterparts continue to discuss Russian collusion in the 2016 election, President Trump is making productive inroads and good impressions on the world leaders he has met thus far.
So it was in France. Prior to meeting with Trump on Thursday, July 13, Emmanuel Macron met with German chancellor Angela Merkel that morning. Then, after Merkel’s departure, Trump came on the scene. Everyone thought the pro-EU Macron would give him a chilly reception.
However, that was not the case, particularly in the 25-second departure handshake on Friday, July 14. Macron couldn’t let go of his new friend.
Instead, Steve Pieczenik said that Trump was able to persuade Macron to also look to the United States. Pieczenik was certain that Trump was able to get Macron to see that the EU was ‘dying’ (Pieczenik’s word) and that focussing on relations with the United States would be more important in the long run.
Pieczenik went further and said that Trump is slowly breaking up the European Union.
On his own website, Pieczenik described what the French and American delegations would have talked about during Trump’s trip. ‘Trump Meets Macron in Paris!’ is recommended reading. Excerpts follow, emphases in the original:
Let me assure you, that these prestigious intelligence/military officers/operatives are not there to watch French planes fly around in the sky or watch soldiers march through the Arc de Triomphe. I would suspect that they have a full agenda that they want to share with Macron and his own chief of the army, the highly decorated General Jean-Pierre Bossier [CEMAT], regarding one very important issue: counter-terrorism!
Obama put thousands of American troops into the Horn of Africa, specifically Djibouti, to help fight terrorism alongside French troops. Trump has maintained US presence in the region. However, Trump’s military advisors have noted that the American troops require more French input on language and culture there:
I am certain that critical strategic/tactical issues regarding present American occupation in the former French colony in Djibouti [Horn Of Africa] at Camp Lemonnier will become a salient issue. France is far more effective in counteracting the tribal/ethnic battles raging in Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Chad, Central African Republic, et. al. than the novitiate Americans. Instead of sending more American troops, the key issue will be the nature of alternative aid to these impoverished African colonies in order to pre-empt the possible rise of terrorist cells.
Also:
Whatever the past histories are of each country, Macron realized thanks to his time as an investment banker at Rothschild & CIE Banque [closely affiliated with Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase] that alienating any American POTUS was neither feasible nor productive.
In conclusion, there are many geopolitical successes going on right now involving President Trump.
Now, as to foreign collusion regarding elections, Pieczenik had interesting information.
Before I get to what he had to say, here is background information from Michael Caputo who worked in Bill Clinton’s administration over 20 years ago. This was his mission:
He explained to Tucker Carlson that he was sent directly by the Clinton White House to Russia where he was able to get Boris Yeltsin successfully re-elected.
Pieczenik — ex-CIA himself — told Alex Jones that Caputo was part of a CIA programme to ensure Yeltsin’s re-election.
So, there: Hillary’s husband ordered — and got — interference in a Russian election.
Pieczenik also said that, on the domestic front, before John Brennan became CIA director in 2013 (he resigned before Trump’s inauguration), he opened an ‘office in Hollywood’ to effect change in film and television storylines to turn people away from American values and ideals.
Now, back to Michael Caputo. Although he worked for the Clinton administration, two decades later, he became Donald Trump’s communications advisor for the 2016 presidential campaign.
Caputo clearly enjoyed his time in Russia during the 1990s, because he met and married a Ukranian. On March 20, 2017, he found out that his wife’s name was mentioned by Jackie Speier, a congresswoman (D-California), during televised Congressional hearings. (Speier, incidentally, was a survivor of the Jim Jones cult in Jonestown. That should tell you something.) Since then, Caputo told Tucker Carlson that he and his family have received many death threats because Mrs Caputo is Ukranian, even though she now has American citizenship.
The interview starts at the 2:25 mark:
Caputo tells Carlson that he had to testify last week as to what he knows about any involvement Russia had in Trump’s campaign and the election. He says there is absolutely no evidence.
Caputo said — and Trump supporters already know this — the only reason for this accusation, which is now nearly a year old, is to prevent the president from getting anything done.
That, of course, would open the door to impeachment.
I realise that some reading this are hoping for it. I pray to the contrary.
Instead, it is the Democrats who must come clean about their nefarious activities.
Wow.
After a two-week break which was largely free from US news, I return to find that things across the pond are as crazy as ever.
First, a reminder that fake news — then known as yellow journalism — existed a century ago:
The New York World — long since defunct — is the press organ that supposedly came up with the eponymous World Series for baseball. Ironically, Joseph Pulitzer — of the esteemed journalism prize — was the paper’s publisher. The World was a leading national ‘voice’ of the Democratic Party. Enough said.
Now onto the week’s news.
Anyone who is sensitive or easily triggered is advised to avoid some of the material in this post, particularly the first few news items. That said, this entry ends on a positive note.
White supremacy ends with white abortion
I really hope the following article is yellow journalism and nothing more but, with all the madness going on, it is difficult to be sure.
An online magazine, Medusa, has an article called ‘Beyond Pro-Choice: The Solution to White Supremacy is White Abortion’. I hope Tucker Carlson is able to get the author, Nicole Valentine, on his Fox News show.
In response, alternative media journalist and author Jack Posobiec tweeted:
Valentine says that white women are not doing enough:
White women: it is time to do your part! Your white children reinforce the white supremacist society that benefits you. If you claim to be progressive, and yet willingly birth white children by your own choice, you are a hypocrite. White women should be encouraged to abort their white children, and to use their freed-up time and resources to assist women of color who have no other choice but to raise their children. Women of color are in need of financial and humanitarian resources. As this white supremacist society continues to imprison black fathers, women of color are forced to stand alone in their plight to raise the next generation of Americans.
But why is that? It is because the welfare state has benefited single mothers since the late 1960s, discouraging traditional marriage and the family. For nearly 50 years, women have been ‘married’ to the government, not a (or the) father of their children.
Valentine continues:
How about adopting children of color who have lost their parents to the destructive white supremacist society that you have enabled and encouraged?
However, that, too, has been criticised both in the United States and the United Kingdom, especially when a white couple does so.
Valentine concludes:
Of course, the best choice is to act preventatively to ensure that white children are not at risk of being born. But in circumstances in which termination and generation are the options, it is best to take advantage of your right to choose, and abort in favor of assisting women of color.
This is her brief autobiography located beneath the comments (photo supplied):
Nicole Valentine
Not a Christian attitude.
For those wondering what intersectional feminism means, USA Today explains:
If feminism is advocating for women’s rights and equality between the sexes, intersectional feminism is the understanding of how women’s overlapping identities — including race, class, ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation — impact the way they experience oppression and discrimination.
A white woman is penalized by her gender but has the advantage of race. A black woman is disadvantaged by her gender and her race. A Latina lesbian experiences discrimination because of her ethnicity, her gender and her sexual orientation.
The United States has had a plethora of laws on state and federal books, some of which date back 50+ years, that clearly prohibit racial, sexual as well as age discrimination and, in some cases, favour positive discrimination.
White professors should ‘get out the way’
An article on the American Mathematical Society blog says that whites should step aside from teaching. It should be noted that:
The opinions expressed on this blog are the views of the writer(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the American Mathematical Society.
In May 2017, mathematician Piper Harron wrote ‘Get Out The Way’ for the AMS blog. (She wrote a follow-up in June on her own website.) She opened her AMS article with this:
If you are a white cis man (meaning you identify as male and you were assigned male at birth) you almost certainly should resign from your position of power. That’s right, please quit. Too difficult? Well, as a first step, at least get off your hiring committee, your curriculum committee, and make sure you’re replaced by a woman of color or trans person. Don’t have any in your department? HOW SHOCKING.
Remember that you live in a world where people don’t succeed in a vacuum; most success happens on the backs of others who did not consent. You have no idea how successful you would have been if you were still you, but with an additional marginalization (not white, or not male, or not cis gender, or with a disability, etc).
In other words, echoing POTUS 44: ‘You didn’t build this’.
Also:
Remember having white cis women run the world is no kind of solution.
This is because — and she supplies an accompanying chart — 63% of white males and 53% of white females support President Donald Trump.
It is highly unlikely that (m)any whites teaching in a college or university support Donald Trump. Not long ago, I met with a group of professors (white and Hispanic, male and female). None of them supports Trump.
Next?
More calls for president’s assassination — one arrest
As we know, the calls for President Trump to be assassinated have been incessant.
What that man and his family have to endure every day for no good reason is beyond our ken. Please continue to pray for their safety.
With a rewrite of a Shakespearean play which recently ran in Central Park about a Trump assassination, Kathy Griffin’s sick video of his ‘decapitation’ and the attempt on Republican congressman Steve Scalise’s and others’ lives, Johnny Depp decided to ‘joke’ at the Glastonbury music and cinema festival in the west of England.
USA Today reports:
Speaking onstage Thursday at Glastonbury Festival in Somerset, England, Depp stepped into controversy with jokes aimed at President Trump that addressed presidential assassination.
“Can we bring Trump here?” Depp asked the crowd at the festival.
“I think he needs help,” Depp said, according to video posted online. “This is going to be in the press and it’ll be horrible. But I like that you’re all a part of it. When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?” …
The Associated Press reported that Depp then added it’s “been a while, and maybe it’s time.”
Actor John Wilkes Booth assassinated President Abraham Lincoln in 1865.
Depp’s representative did not immediately respond to USA TODAY’s request for comment about Depp’s jokes.
For Depp fans currently out of the loop:
The actor has been in the headlines this year following his contentious divorce from ex-wife Amber Heard and a lawsuit with his former business managers. Depp sued the Management Group in January for more than $25 million, charging fraud and negligence.
Sad.
Meanwhile, an Edwardsville, Illinois, man was arrested and charged with threatening to kill President Trump. The Belleville News-Democrat reports:
Joseph Lynn Pickett was charged with threatening the president of the United States on June 15.
U.S. Secret Service Special Agent Vincent Pescitelli said Pickett threatened to “take the life of, to kidnap, and to inflict bodily harm” against Trump on Facebook, according to a criminal complaint filed with the charges. The complaint included screenshots of Pickett’s Facebook posts.
Breaking 911 says:
A judge has ordered Pickett be held without bail.
Both articles have his Facebook comments. Fortunately — perhaps, ‘finally’ — the Secret Service reacted.
Like Depp, Pickett also had his personal problems. The Belleville News-Democrat tells us (emphases mine below):
Until about six to eight months ago, Pickett had been working at Lowe’s in Granite City until he was fired for making threats to a coworker, according to the complaint.
Two Lowe’s employees contacted the St. Louis chapter of the U.S. Secret Service and told them that Pickett had threatening posts on his Facebook page. They also said he had bragged about having weapons.
A financial affadavit submitted to the court says Pickett has not been employed since February. He got by with food stamps and financial support from his father.
Pickett will be detained until his trial, according to court documents. A judge ruled that Pickett should be detained because the court couldn’t ensure the safety of other people in the community and because of “mental instability.”
Good on the Lowe’s employees.
Would the Secret Service had done anything otherwise?
One wonders if the Secret Service would have paid Depp a visit if he still lived in the US.
Trump remembers Scalise at Congressional Picnic
On Thursday, June 22, the Trumps hosted their first Congressional Picnic at the White House, which included Ivanka ‘Vanilla’ (see here and here) Trump and her daughter:
The video below is of President Trump’s remarks:
In his short speech, Trump remembered Steve Scalise, in hospital for the foreseeable future, after the shooting on Wednesday, June 14:
On June 22, the Free Beacon reported that 30 Republican congressmen have been threatened or attacked since the beginning of May. There is no excuse for that. Few arrests have been made.
These are the latest two attacks (language alert, emphases in purple mine):
June 22: An Ohio man was arrested for leaving a voicemail threatening the life and family of Rep. Steve Stivers (Ohio).
“We’re coming to get every goddamn one of you and your families. Maybe the next one taken down will be your daughter. Huh? Or your wife. Or even you,” the man said.
The same day, Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz played a threatening voicemail he had received on “Fox & Friends.”
“I suggest you prepare for the battle motherf**ker, and the apocalypse,” the caller yelled. “Because we are going to hunt your ass down, wrap a rope around your neck, and hang you from a lamppost.”
Jeffrey Epstein update
On June 22, federal prosecutors broke their decade-long silence regarding the soft treatment billionaire Jeffrey Epstein — a close friend of Billary Clinton — received after his intimate involvement with teenage girls.
The Palm Beach Post reports (emphases mine):
Contrary to claims by attorneys representing two of Epstein’s victims in a lawsuit against the federal government, Assistant U.S. Attorney Marie Villafana said she and her superiors were trying to help the traumatized young women when they agreed to let Epstein plead guilty to state prostitution charges.
The now-64-year-old money manager, who spends most of his time on his estate in the Virgin Islands, served 13 months of an 18-month sentence in the Palm Beach County Stockade. He was allowed to leave each day to go to work.
Hoping to persuade U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra to throw out the lawsuit that accuses the government of violating the federal Crime Victims Rights Act, Villafana said she tried to keep Epstein’s victims informed about the investigation and the eventual plea deal. But, she said, negotiations were sensitive and neither Epstein, his victims nor their attorneys made it easy.
For instance, she said, most of the young women were extremely reluctant — or simply refused — to testify against Epstein, who had paid them to give him sexually-charged massages at his mansion …
Jane Doe 1, who is also suing the government, agreed to testify. But Villafana said one victim wouldn’t have been enough to convict Epstein.
Rather than let Epstein use his considerable influence to evade prosecution, she and top officials at the U.S. Justice Department crafted the plea deal.
In exchange for pleading guilty to charges of solicitation of prostitution and soliciting minors to engage in prostitution in Palm Beach County Circuit Court, Epstein was not charged with any federal counts.
The article says that Epstein’s legal team will file a response at the end of July.
New US ambassador to the UK
In more neutral news, President Trump has appointed a new ambassador to the UK who succeeds Matthew Barzun, an Obama bundler and National Finance Chair for his 2012 presidential campaign.
It would have been nice if Trump had promoted a career diplomat to this plum position, however, the president chose to go down the same route of selecting a big campaign donor.
New York Jets owner Woody Johnson is the new man in London:
Bloomberg reports that, in 2016:
Johnson backed Trump when Bush dropped out of the race. He gave $349,000 to Trump Victory, which split donations between Trump’s campaign, the Republican National Committee and state Republican parties. The committee reported receiving the bulk of the money ($249,000) on Nov. 10, 2016, two days after Trump’s election, according to Federal Election Commission records.
Perhaps Trump thinks that Johnson will be a true ally who can help smooth over the cracks in the US/UK relationship which no one can call ‘special’ right now:
Johnson will step into challenges that have arisen in the six months since Trump took office, notably how to stabilize the U.S.-U.K. relationship in the post-Brexit world and how to win over Britons who have shown open hostility toward the U.S. president.
A planned state visit to the U.K. by Trump still hasn’t been formally scheduled, and no reference to it was made by Queen Elizabeth II during her speech to parliament this week — an omission observers noted as a departure from tradition in advance of state visits.
I hope my fellow Britons will be nice to him. I wish him all the best in his assignment.
I also hope that Mr Johnson enjoys lamb, because its frequency at many British dinners deeply disappointed Mr Barzun, who clearly prefers beef.
And finally …
The notional White House Anon who surfaced briefly on 4chan/pol/ made a second — and, perhaps, final — appearance on June 22 to say:
I’m here to let you know that sometime between right now as I type this, or no later than around 2 pm tomorrow, you will either read about, listen to, or watch a news story. You will probably see it first on Twitter from a few well known conservative (right wing) people. It will break on cable news shortly after. I cannot go in to specifics. I know most of you all support President Trump, so have no worries on the matter. This information will completely shift the narrative away from him and any of his staff. You will all be very happy and excited about this as many of us have and will too. Look forward to many happenings next week. Things are about to shift in a direction Democrats are going to hate. It will be lovely. Big happenings, not just silly things like “Russia” hoax or “Yet another terrorist attack has happened”. Most of you all have been waiting for a happening like this for a year or more, and people will be talking about this for years to come. Stay thirsty my friends. Promises made, promises kept.
I really hope Anon is legit. With only two appearances, it was hard to tell. Even FBI Anon was considered suspect after several lengthy postings, even though it seems he was right on the money.
In closing, The_Donald‘s contributors remind us that June 23 is Britain’s first anniversary of Brexit! Thanks, chaps!
The other day, I posted on the Democratic Party origins of the fake Russian narrative used against President Donald Trump.
This post will explain further why the Democrats are opportunistic hypocrites, especially when it comes to Russia.
Last year, I summarised the Clintons’ and Podestas’ close links to Russia: the uranium deal and banking connection, respectively. The latter popped up in the Panama Papers. If you are unfamiliar with either of those topics, please read my post. You can’t get much closer to a warm, comfy relationship with the Russians than the Clintons and the Podesta brothers.
Two prominent Democrats currently braying the most about Trump’s supposed Russian connections — again, a fabrication — are Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (NY) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (CA).
In March 2017, Schumer was intent on finding out the ‘truth’ about Trump’s notional Russian connections. Trump’s director of social media replied with pictorial evidence from 2003 of one of Schumer’s own meetings with none other than the man himself, Vladimir Putin:
Trump had tweeted the same picture that day with this comment:
We should start an immediate investigation into @SenSchumer and his ties to Russia and Putin. A total hypocrite!
Heavy reported on the tweets and Schumer’s love-in with Russia (emphases mine):
The photo originates from September 2003, when Putin visited New York to celebrate the first Lukoil gas station opening in the U.S. after it bought Getty Petroleum in 2000 and began re-branding Getty stations. According to press reports at the time, Putin did not make any public remarks and was only at the gas station convenient store for 10 minutes. That was long enough for Schumer to give Putin a Krispy Kreme doughnut. Lukoil President Vagit Alekperov was also at the meeting.
“When I showed the president of Russia a Krispy Kreme doughnut and he ate it and said it was good, that was one of the more surreal moments I’ve had in politics,” Schumer said at the time.
After Putin left the scene, Schumer told reporters that it was good for the U.S. to have a gas station owned by a company based in a non-OPEC country. “The more competition there is in oil, particularly against OPEC, the better New York will do and the better America will do,” Schumer said.
Schumer also wrote a 2008 Wall Street Journal op-ed, in which he said Russia needed to take a big role in talks with Iran during the George W. Bush administration.
The back-and-forth between the president and Schumer came just a day after Attorney General Jeff Sessions agreed to recuse himself from any potential investigation into Russian ties with the Trump campaign and the election, if one was to happen.
Sessions’s recused himself because:
he met with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak twice in 2016, before the election.
That wasn’t enough for Schumer, though. On March 2, he took the hypocritical high moral ground:
Schumer said Sessions should resign from his post as attorney general. He called on the Trump administration to agree on the creation of an independent counsel to investigate.
On May 17, the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed the independent counsel, former FBI director Robert Mueller.
As for Pelosi:
Politico reported:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Friday that she’s never met with the current Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak …
But a file photo from Pelosi’s 2010 meeting with Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev shows Kislyak at the table across from Pelosi — then House speaker — and Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.). Medvedev had been in the country for a meeting with President Barack Obama a day earlier and stopped in on Capitol Hill to meet with congressional leaders as well.
Note the semantics that Pelosi’s spokesman used:
Asked to square Pelosi’s comments with the photo of the meeting, a spokesman said Pelosi simply meant she never had a solo meeting with Kislyak.
“Of course, that’s what she meant,” said the spokesman, Drew Hammill. “She has never had a private one-on-one with him.”
It’s not wrong for either party to meet with Russian officials as part of their work.
The issue is that Democrats are denying their own meetings with them then piling on Attorney General Jeff Sessions for meeting with Ambassador Kislyak when Sessions was a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee at that time in 2016.
Another reason Sessions felt duty bound to recuse himself — perhaps more pertinent — is that he was also involved with Trump’s presidential campaign at the time. Is it probable that there was overlap in those conversations with Kislyak? We don’t know, but given Sessions’s integrity, it’s doubtful. In any event, he probably did not want to put up with a lot of bloviating, hypocritical Democrats.
Politico also found out that another Democrat, Senator Claire McCaskill (MO), similarly denied meeting with Russians:
Yet, she communicated directly with them in 2013 and 2015.
She was in the same room with them in 2013:
In 2015, McCaskill discussed the situation in Iran with the ambassador:
McCaskill’s denial was an attack on Sessions:
Her claim was designed to underscore what many Democrats view as the impropriety of Sessions’ one-on-one meeting with Kislyak last year, which the Trump administration claims was a routine part of his service on the armed services panel.
Republicans returned fire:
Republican operatives quickly blasted McCaskill as misrepresenting her record, citing the Democrat’s tweets about a 2013 group meeting with Kislyak and a 2015 call with the ambassador to discuss the nuclear pact with Iran.
“Just like Hillary Clinton, Senator McCaskill has a major problem with the truth,” Scott Sloofman, spokesman for the conservative America Rising PAC, said in a statement. “In her rush to stand with Nancy Pelosi and Elizabeth Warren to score political points, McCaskill exposed herself as both a liar and a hypocrite.”
The Democrats and the media must put this absurd Russian narrative to bed.
Of course, they will not because it serves their purposes in assassinating the character and integrity of the president and members of his administration.
Low information critics of Trump will know only what they read in the papers and see on television news.
What paupers.
Get online: read and watch what Big Media refuse to report.
The other day I wrote about Seth Rich, a DNC employee who was murdered in mysterious circumstances on July 10, 2016 in Washington, DC.
Yesterday, I provided the source for the beginning of the Russian narrative used against President Donald Trump.
Both are WikiLeaks related.
Today, those who do not already know will find out what Hillary Clinton’s campaign had in store for leakers.
That, too, is related to WikiLeaks.
The Podesta WikiLeaks revealed that Hillary’s campaign team and advisers wanted to make ‘an example’ out of ‘leakers’, even if nothing could be proven.
WikiLeaks released this tweet on October 30, 2016:
The source is Podesta WikiLeaks email no. 36082 from February 21, 2015.
That day, the Washington Post printed a story about Hillary Clinton’s campaign branding. Two of the people interviewed were involved with her presidential campaign in 2015:
Ahead of her campaign launch, Clinton has tapped some of the Democratic Party’s star strategists as well as two of corporate America’s branding wizards: Wendy Clark, who specializes in marketing age-old brands such as Coca-Cola to younger and more diverse customers; and Roy Spence, a decades-long Clinton friend who dreamed up the “Don’t Mess With Texas” anti-littering slogan as well as flashy ad campaigns for Southwest Airlines and Wal-Mart.
Clark took an unpaid leave in January from Coca-Cola, where she is president of brands and strategic marketing for carbonated beverages in North America, to help Clinton in what Clark called “a passion project.” Spence is co-founder and chairman of GSD&M, an Austin-based corporate ad firm, and has experience in politics, including with Clinton’s 2008 campaign.
John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, and political operative Joel Benenson discussed their displeasure with the article and with those two people for talking to the press without consulting the campaign managers first.
Podesta wrote (emphases mine below):
… we need a strategy on this that goes beyond internal discipline. This story could have been written without any of these big mouths blabbing …
Benenson agreed:
I think we have to make examples now of people who have violated the trust of HRC and the rest of the team. People going forward need to know there are stiff consequences for leaking, self-promotion, unauthorized talking with the press. No one – literally no one talked to the press in either Obama campaign without clearing it with campaign brass.
Podesta replied in a curious way:
I’m definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it.
Campaign manager Robby Mook, who was copied on the exchange, agreed:
I would love an example being made.
How far did this go in reality?
No one knows, but many suspect — rightly or wrongly — that Seth Rich’s alleged leak of 40,000+ emails to WikiLeaks — the DNC WikiLeaks — might well have led to his death in July 2016.
On Tuesday, May 16, the torchpaper was lit. As Fox News ran with the Rich story, bringing it to the attention of the general public, three new Twitter hastags were busy: #HisNameWasSethRich, #SethRichCoverUp and #SethRich.
Some leftists did take note, primarily those employed at David Brock‘s Media Matters, who now realise they’ve been paid to circulate ‘lies’ online and said so on 4chan.org/pol/. Let’s hope that they do resign now that they know the truth.
Other Americans also doubt the Russian narrative.
With all the law enforcement silence around Rich’s murder and little information to go on over the past ten months, people are naturally suspicious details are being covered up or that nothing is being done:
People following the case since last year do not believe that Rich had no involvement in the DNC WikiLeaks:
Equally, they are disappointed that so much wasted energy is being spent on the Russian narrative and James Comey:
This could be why:
Incidentally, Seth Rich was not the only man to die mysteriously in the summer of 2016:
Pray that the truth comes out about these four men, all of whom had a relationship with the Democrats.
