Sign up for our weekly E-Bulletin:
O’Keefe Videos Really Are Clinton’s Watergate—But Corrupt Government Agencies Won’t InvestigateBy John Derbyshire on October 22, 2016, 9:34 pm
Democratic operative (and ex-convict) Robert Creamer.
Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively at VDARE.com.
Watergate, anyone? What brought it to mind was this news story from CNN: Dem[Ocrat] Operative "Stepping Back" After Video Suggests Group Incited Violence At Trump Rallies. [October 18, 2016] Relevant quote from the story: "Democracy Partners called O'Keefe's video a ‘well-funded, systematic spy operation that is the modern day equivalent of the Watergate burglars.’"
What's this all about? Let me take it a piece at a time.
Democracy Partners is a progressive consultancy group. Their website says they offer "cutting edge strategies for progressive values … We tell stories, create narratives, use powerful symbols." The word "progressive" here of course means Cultural-Marxist: Hostile to everything customary and traditional, hostile to law enforcement and national sovereignty, globalist, open borders, anti-white, radical feminist, the whole CultMarx package. Read more >>
“She Wants To Give Amnesty”—Immigration Erupts In Final Trump-Clinton DebateBy Peter Brimelow on October 22, 2016, 1:04 am
VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow writes: It drives immigration patriots crazy that Donald J. Trump won’t prepare for debates, rarely remembers to raise the immigration issue (but I felt the same way about Pat Buchanan) and generally leaves so many immigration policy tricks on the table. But we should not forget how much better and braver Trump is than the wimpish Mitt Romney, who ran away from even the illegal immigration issue in the 2012 debates. There’s been so much progress.
If only America had time…
Below, we post and annotate the immigration section from the third debate, which took place in Las Vegas on October 19. Let the record show that, to his great credit, the issue was raised by Fox’s Chris Wallace. He also asked the devastating follow-up question about Clinton’s leaked assurance to a (foreign) financial audience that "my dream is a hemispheric common market with open trade and Open Borders." [Podesta Emails, WikiLeaks.com]. It would be nice to think that Trump would have thought of these points himself. But we can’t be sure.
Still, Trump did say later “We don't take care of our veterans. We take care of illegal immigrants, people that come into our country illegally better than we take care of our vets.”
And when provoked, Trump did hammer with characteristic brutality at key points: (1) Clinton supports AMNESTY; (2) The wall—Clinton has voted for one but of course it never happened (note that she now says it “was” (not is) “appropriate” only in “limited places”); (3) the relationship between illegal immigration and the drug epidemic; (4) the relationship between immigration and crime; (5) Clinton wants to increase the refugee inflow (Trump was more than usually inarticulate here, but it’s what he meant); (6) Clinton wants “Open Borders.”
(I’ve never particularly liked the term “Open Borders” because the current system is not “open” but perversely discriminatory—against Europe, the historic homeland of America. And this technical detail has enabled some nitpicking about Trump’s use of the term by the Leftist Main Stream Media enforcers who are now apparently allowed to make post-debate debating points in the guise of “fact-checking.” But among immigration patriots generally, Open Borders just means “continued mass immigration.” And on this, even the MSM acknowledges that Trump is right—he and Clinton differ dramatically: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Are Universes Apart on Immigration, by Benjy Sarlin and Alex Seitz-Wald, NBC News, September 2, 2016).
Significantly, Clinton appeared completely unable to respond to Trump’s attack other than sticking to the usual lying PC-speak (“undocumented immigrants,” “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”) and gabbing on about a picture of an injured Syrian child, as if there are not pictures of children killed by Muslim terrorists. Given the inherent power of Trump’s positions, this dogmatic stupidity is a poor lookout for the Ryan/ Clinton Uniparty—if not in 2016, then in 2018 and beyond.
This is particularly true since Trump was very far from deploying the full immigration patriot arsenal in this debate—even though a considerable portion appears in his great position paper and some of his set-piece speeches. For example:
- No mention of legal immigration, although its impact is at least as serious as illegal immigration;
- No mention of the H1-B attack on educated Americans’ prospects;
- No mention of the employment impact of immigration
- No mention of the wage impact of immigration
- No mention of the need for Official English
- No mention of the Democrats’ Electing A New People and displacement of the Historic American Nation
- No mention of the need to end Birthright Citizenship
The issue of immigration patriotism has only just begun to fight.
Excerpted from the October 19 Debate
CHRIS WALLACE: All right. Let's move on to the subject of immigration. And there is almost no issue Read more >>
Is An Age Of Neeras And Humas Upon Us?By Thomas O. Meehan on October 20, 2016, 11:23 pm
See also: Patels From Hell: Importing Fraud From The Indian Subcontinent
The late poet Dylan Thomas had a habit of urinating on the rugs of those unwise enough to invite him to their country homes. Naturally, this brings to mind Neera Tanden.
For those not already enjoying the WikiLeaks view into the catty hell that is the Clinton campaign, Tanden is the advisor who laments the presence of “White Boys” on team Clinton. But let’s let her speak for herself via WikiLeaks.
"I'm not the diversity police but there is grumbling on the 4 white boys running next presidential cycle. So I recommend rolling out some people who look like the rest of America soon!" she urges Podesta on Jan. 14, 2015. [WikiLeaks Podesta Emails 6144, January 17, 2014]
"Really, don't you think I know that?" he responds.
"Yeah I know you know it. But in case people feel intimidated in making direct comments to Hillaryland, I thought I'd let you know of the grumbling I'm hearing directly. But maybe that was my mistake," Tanden replies. [ John Podesta Asked Hillary Clinton to Court 'Needy Latinos' in WikiLeaks, By David Catanese, USNews.com, October 12, 2016]
Ms. Tanden Isn’t fond of white men but she has been connected to one white woman since 1996—Hilary Clinton. Why all the antipathy? Read more >>
An Establishment in Panic–What If AMERICANS Don’t Accept “Rigged” Election Results?By Patrick J. Buchanan on October 20, 2016, 10:51 pm
Pressed by moderator Chris Wallace as to whether he would accept defeat should Hillary Clinton win the election, Donald Trump replied, "I will tell you at the time. I'll keep you in suspense."
"That's horrifying," said Clinton, setting off a chain reaction on the post-debate panels with talking heads falling all over one another in purple-faced anger, outrage and disbelief.
"Disqualifying!" was the cry on Clinton cable.
"Trump Won't Say If He Will Accept Election Results," wailed The New York Times. "Trump Won't Vow to Honor Results," ran the banner in The Washington Post.
But what do these chattering classes and establishment bulletin boards think the Donald is going to do if he falls short of 270 electoral votes?
Lead a Coxey's Army on Washington and burn it down as British General Robert Ross did in August 1814, while "Little Jemmy" Madison fled on horseback out the Brookville Road?
What explains the hysteria of the establishment?
In a word, fear.
The establishment is horrified at the Donald's defiance because, deep within its soul, it fears that the people for whom Trump speaks no longer accept its political legitimacy or moral authority.
It may rule and run the country, and may rig the system through mass immigration and a mammoth welfare state so that Middle America is never again able to elect one of its own. But that establishment, disconnected from the people it rules, senses, rightly, that it is unloved and even detested.
Having fixed the future, the establishment finds half of the country looking upon it with the same sullen contempt that our Founding Fathers came to look upon the overlords Parliament sent to rule them.
Establishment panic is traceable to another fear: Its ideology, its political religion, is seen by growing millions as a golden calf, a 20th-century god that has failed.
Trump is "talking down our democracy," said a shocked Clinton.
After having expunged Christianity from our public life and public square, our establishment installed "democracy" as the new deity, at whose altars we should all worship. And so our schools began to teach.
Half a millennia ago, missionaries and explorers set sail from Spain, England and France to bring Christianity to the New World. Read more >>
Trump’s Long Path To The White House Based On Patriotism, Not PowerBy Paul Nachman on October 20, 2016, 1:54 pm
At the 1988 Republican National Convention Larry King asked Trump: “Are you a Bush Republican?” "No."
VDARE.com’s John Derbyshire plucked a striking passage—a philosophical and personal highlight—from Donald Trump’s speech in Florida last Thursday, October 13:
This is our moment of reckoning as a society and as a civilization itself. I didn’t need to do this, folks, believe me—believe me. I built a great company, and I had a wonderful life. I could have enjoyed the fruits and benefits of years of successful business deals and businesses for myself and my family. Instead of going through this absolute horror show of lies, deceptions, malicious attacks—who would have thought?
I’m doing it because this country has given me so much, and I feel so strongly that it’s my turn to give back to the country that I love.
(That nugget starts at 34:20 into the video of the speech; the full transcript is at this link.) Read more >>
The Debate: Hillary Has The Media, But Trump Has The IssuesBy Ann Coulter on October 19, 2016, 7:07 pm
Say, does anyone remember when Trump was the lightweight with no "policy specifics"? I have an entire chapter in my book, In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome!, quoting media savants complaining about Trump's lack of "policy specifics," interspersed, by date, with his major policy speeches and papers.
At this point, the only "policy specific" Trump hasn't given us is which company will supply rebar for the wall.
But now, the media's entire campaign against Trump is to prevent him from talking about policy. They would rather talk about fat-shaming than trade, immigration and jobs.
Sometimes, it seems like Trump is cheating by taking the vastly more popular side of every issue.
The official GOP used to send its candidates out with ankle weights, a 75-pound backpack and blinders. But Trump didn't agree to take any staggeringly unpopular positions, however much the Business Roundtable loved them.
He's against amnesty, for building a wall, against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, for Social Security, against the Iraq War and for extreme vetting of Muslim immigrants.
That's why the media have to change the subject to something flashy that will capture the attention of the most down-market, easily fooled voters. Trump is a groper!
The media's interest in sex scandals goes back and forth, depending on their needs at the moment. When the last name of the perp is "Kennedy" or "Clinton," they're not interested. When it's "the Duke lacrosse team": Guilty. Read more >>
When you give a donation to VDARE.com, and we’ll give you a special Christmas present. The pins pictures below are 2’’ circular pin-back buttons that can be worn on clothing, backpacks, etc. Jack’s Christmas, by J. Paige Straley is a stunningly illustrated Christmas book akin to The Night Before Christmas. Its sophisticated rhymed poetry and classic Christmas theme makes it perfect for any family.More items...