John Bolton’s Policy Speech on the Eve of 9/11

John Bolton is a forceful conservative. Some discount him as a neocon, but that dismissive sobriquet fails to do justice to his principles.

He grew up in Baltimore, the son of a fireman, so Bolton learned early what an aggressive defense is and how to employ it effectively. He is the quintessential tough guy you want on your side. In other words, he is one answer to Barack Obama’s dithering lack of a genuine and robust foreign policy.

Bolton’s principled sense of justice included taking Clarence Thomas under his wing during their friendship at Yale Law School and then, later, offering advice and comfort during the ugly mess that constituted Thomas’ eventual confirmation to the Supreme Court. As Thomas said, what he endured in the bullying during his hearings was a “high tech lynching”.

Bolton’s speech came on the eve of 9/11, and that is not coincidental. America is standing up to globalists and trans-nationalist criminals like the ICC, founded in the year after 9/11. Such thugs are long overdue to be disbanded. Many of us agree with Bolton: the ICC and the UN need to go away, joining the other extra-national groups in a vast political graveyard, interred there along with The League of Nations.

Here is a list of John Bolton’s Ten Rules of Statecraft. They belong to a world neither Obama nor Clinton understands, and these rules are peculiarly American in their sentiments and form:

1.   “My philosophy is not a bean-counting, accounting ‘look at this.’ It is a philosophy that smaller government is better government, and government that is closer to the people is best of all.”
2.   “Our biggest national security crisis is Barack Obama.”
3.   “People say you favor assassination, what do you think war is? Except that it’s assassination on a much larger scale—a much more horrific scale.”
4.   “Diplomacy is not an end in itself if it does not advance U.S. interests.”
5.   “Negotiation is not a policy. It’s a technique. It’s something you use when it’s to your advantage, and something that you don’t use when it’s not to your advantage.”
6.   “My priority is to give the United States the kind of influence it should have.”
7.   “Everybody pursues their national interests. The only one who gets blamed for it is the United States.”
8.   “You could take several stories off the buildings of most U.S. government agencies and we’d all probably be better for it too.”
9.   “As somebody who writes op-eds and appears on the television, I appreciate as well as anybody that… there is a limit to what that accomplishes.”
    And the pièce de résistance:
10.   “There is no United Nations.”

If you would understand John Bolton’s worldview, read this brief book. You’ll grasp the sense of solidarity that is the fundament of conservatives and others on the Right. You may even understand President Trump and those who voted for him.

Meanwhile, this major policy speech is an elucidation of Trump’s ruling philosophy. To understand what Trump’s about, listen to Ambassador Bolton.

Trump’s Visit to the UK: Paul Weston’s Commentary

Paul’s video went up several days ago, so it’s a bit out-of-date for “breaking” news. I so utterly sympathize with his being late to the party. I’m always late; it takes time to consider events, “breaking” or not.

I tried to have this begin just prior to the point where some Brit TV reader “interviews” Sebastian Gorka [you can push it back to the beginning if you like; some good moments there]. As Paul noticed, Gorka was laughing at this fellow…it was almost a ROTFLMAO moment. That is wasn’t moreso is due to Gorka’s self-control since this little beaver isn’t required to listen or think, but his utter lack of self-awareness here is at least of clinical significance. Fascinating for the rest of us. He just rolls on like The-Little-Engine-That-Could. Whadda moron.

I feel sorry for anyone in the UK who has a TV.

RE: Mr. Gorka. He served in the British military as a part-time volunteer, in Intelligence. He also worked for the Hungarian government – and previously, for Viktor Orban, during his time in Hungary. Gorka’s family comes from Hungary, so of course he’s a nationalist. NO, that doesn’t make him an anti-Semite, any more than it does us.

The put-downs and smears of Gorka by the Vast Leftwing Loudmouths are just the price people pay for being part of Trump’s attempts to drain The Swamp.

Elections Have Consequences

How quickly things can change.

America itself is now about to flip, in no small part due to Donald Trump’s presidency.

It’s Dr. Turley (again), this time with background and commentary on the breaking news of the resignation of a Supreme Court Justice:

Trump has already gotten one conservative on the Supremes’ team:
Neil Gorsuch. Adding another will change future generations of law in America. This is huge, guys.

Here is the White House list of possible candidates from the previous so-called “shortlist” used to pick Gorsuch.

And this is the infamous Federalist Society, which will have once more have significant input into President Trump’s second selection. The Senate grilling of whoever is chosen will be brutal. Expect every dirty political trick to be pulled out of the Dems’ hats in an attempt to short-circuit the next conservative nominee. The left is seeing its house of cards collapse; leftists never go quietly into that good night – you’ll be able to hear the shrieking from wherever you are.

Just think: these appointments could have been Hillary’s to make. She must be having another meltdown; by now, ol’ Hillary “Fukushima”* Clinton is probably radioactive. Bless her heart.

Next? Look for The Wall/Fence/Barrier to start growing again on our southwest border as Americans increasingly ask for a limit to immigration. With the Supremes’ recent upholding his list of terrorist countries as a valid immigration restriction, The Donald’s on a roll.

Will he gloat?? Does the sun rise in the east?

*edited for accuracy.

Are You a “Subject” or a “Target”?

The second half of this post has been sitting in my drafts folder since the recent fundraiser began. I was finally moved to post it because of yesterday’s news about the FBI raid on President Trump’s lawyer’s office and home. It’s so bad even his lawyer has had to hire a lawyer to protect himself from the vengeful horde who refuse to accept the American voters’ choice.

How do they do manage these incursions? Simple: blue states’ U.S. attorneys and judges are part and parcel of The Swamp. The former can always find a sympathetic latter to sign off on a search warrant… if it’s in aid of destroying the Republicans.

And how does this particular victim, Trump & Assoc., begin making its way through the python? Simple: here’s a former federal prosecutor spilling the beans:

Special counsel Robert Mueller has reportedly advised Donald Trump’s lawyers that the president is a “subject” but not a “target” of Mueller’s investigation. This has resulted in a great deal of triumphal celebration among the president’s supporters. After all, they reason, if Mueller hasn’t by now dredged up enough evidence to designate Trump a “target,” then the president must be in the clear.

Unfortunately, whether someone is a “target” as opposed to a “subject” of an investigation is a distinction without a difference. It’s all a matter of timing, and the “subject” of an investigation can become a “target” in the blink of a prosecutor’s eye. It happens every day…

The manual provides that, before they testify in the grand jury, “targets” and “subjects” are to be given the exact same warnings against self-incrimination, save that a “target” should also be given “a supplemental warning that the witness’s conduct is being investigated for possible violation of federal criminal law.” These designations apply with equal force to interrogations outside the grand jury.

So, what effect do these carefully worded official policy distinctions between “targets” and “subjects” have on actual federal investigations in and out of the grand jury? Absolutely none. Here’s what really happens.

A prosecutor will always want to lure a “target” into giving a statement either to investigators or in the grand jury to pin down his version of events. This foreknowledge will help the prosecutor structure the government’s case to be presented at trial and counter any potential defense.

Moreover, if other evidence can contradict the target’s version, it can be presented at trial as a false exculpatory declaration by the defendant. This would be proof supporting the substantive crimes alleged, on the legal theory that an innocent person wouldn’t try to lie his way out of the charges and that the lies prove consciousness of guilt.

Also, depending on whether the statement was made in an interrogation or under oath before a grand jury, the “target” can be charged either with lying to investigators or with perjury or false swearing.

So, how does the prosecutor get the “target” to voluntarily submit to interrogation or testify before the grand jury? He tells defense counsel that the “target” is merely a “subject” of the investigation. Believe it or not, this frequently causes defense counsel and their clients to think they may have a chance of talking their way out of trouble.

But frequently, after the so-called “subject” has given his version of events, the prosecutor changes the witness’s designation from a mere “subject” to a “target.” This usually takes place about a nanosecond before the “target” is indicted.

Mueller’s reported designation of the president as a mere “subject” of the investigation is not only meaningless, it is a reprise of one of the oldest prosecutorial tricks in the book. He is setting a trap in the hope that the president and his legal team will think he is almost in the clear and, accordingly, should voluntarily submit to interrogation in order to clear up any misconceptions

This move is all the more alarming given that it appears to have been prompted by reports that the president’s lawyers are actually considering whether their client should voluntarily submit to an interrogation by Team Mueller.

So, based on my 20 years of conducting federal and state grand jury and street-level investigations and another 25 representing “subjects” and “targets,” permit me to offer this advice to the president’s legal team. Don’t be encouraged or misled by Mueller’s designation of your client as a mere “subject.” He’s simply baiting the trap and crossing his fingers that you and your client will be dumb enough to grab for the cheese.

Also, be aware that you are not involved in some kind of gentlemanly legal contest with reasonable, high-minded adversaries. These people are thugs with law degrees. If they can get a crack at your client in an interrogation, it won’t end well for him…

So wake up and quit playing footsie with Mueller and his feral band of Hillary Clinton sycophants. While you’re at it, you may also want to buy some brass knuckles.

Yes on the brass knuckles for the remaining Trumpsters in Washington. All the Obama shenanigans were always swept under the rug, particularly his racist, envious fecklessness. When the history of this period comes to be written, Obama will go down as our most divisive, destructive “Commander in Chief”.

Is all this really legal? I guess it depends on what the meaning of “is” is. Last week, Byron York explained how the Trump-Russia investigation fails to align with the rule of law and why we should care about what they’re doing. He also gives us the name for their major weapon (aside from weaponized bureaucracies).

Continue reading

Bodacious Trump: A Germanic Perspective

Many thanks to JLH for translating this op-ed from the influential Swiss daily Neue Zürcher Zeitung:

Bodacious Trump

by Konrad Paul Liessmann
January 23, 2018

The outstanding benefits of Trump doubtless include a new unity in the world. He has become a medium of perception.

A year after Donald Trump became president of the USA, it is time to summarize — not just about his political successes and failures, but also about what Trump, often unintentionally, has contributed to the emotional conditions and intellectual discourse of our time. The outstanding benefits of Trump include a new unity in the world. It is really all against one. Commentary on him has been unanimously negative. The arc of negative reaction to him stretches from Right to Left. Differentiated reports or judgments are scarce. It is the common understanding that he is a catastrophe for the USA and the world, cognitively and morally insufficient. An intellectually limited racist and sexist is the most powerful man in the world.

This knowledge shared by almost everyone not only fosters a strong “we” feeling, but also a profoundly satisfying feeling of superiority. With the picture of Trump the media paints and the revelations from the inner life of the white House we encounter daily, anyone can feel infinitely superior to the American president — more sensitive, more educated, more intelligent, more respectable, more competent and more moral. And not to be forgotten — in dealing with Trump, we become excellent psychologists, who are capable of remotely diagnosing personality disorders, narcissism, infantilism and megalomania.

This feeling of superiority, however, prevents us from recognizing that Trump is equipped to give us a critical view of our revered modern world. Even people who have considered truth to be relative, reality to be a construction and science to be a phallogocentric[1] maneuver by white men, are discovering — thanks to Trump — their love of objective facts. Even people for whom directness and authenticity have been sacred are recognizing, thanks to Trump, what these ideals actually mean, and — after a little self control — begin to yearn for simulated empathy and diplomatic pretense. Even people who saw in the new media the epitome of progress, must admit that the world can be neither understood nor governed by means of Twitter or television. After years of internet euphoria, thanks to Trump, determining that someone does not read books has again become a reproach.

Conversely, Trump makes it possible for many assumptions and convictions lurking in our unconscious, courtesy of prevailing moral and political standards, to be brought into the light of day. The mistrust intellectuals have for the people and for democracy can now be openly articulated. After Trump’s election victory, some are wondering whether the leftist focus on the needs of capricious minorities was not overdone, and are turning back to the needs of the working class.

Continue reading

Warning: You May Be Guilty of BadThink!

We received the following email from Twitter last night. Posting it here may make it more likely that Twitter will suspend our account, but that don’t confront me none — the auto-tweet from our blog quit working last year for some reason, I don’t have time to tweet manually, and Dymphna has lost interest in Twitter since it bottomed out with “shadow-banning” and all that other stuff.

And now this. What’s next in the Twitterverse?

Dear Gates of Vienna,

As part of our recent work to understand Russian-linked activities on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, we identified and suspended a number of accounts that were potentially connected to a propaganda effort by a Russian government-linked organization known as the Internet Research Agency.

Consistent with our commitment to transparency, we are emailing you because we have reason to believe that you:

  • Were following one or more of these accounts at the time the accounts were suspended;
  • Replied to or mentioned one or more of these accounts during the election period; or
  • Retweeted, quote tweeted, or liked content from one or more of these accounts during the election period.

This is purely for your own information purposes, and is not related to a security concern for your account. We are sharing this information so that you can learn more about these accounts and the nature of the Russian propaganda effort. You can see examples of content from these suspended accounts on our blog if you’re interested.

People look to Twitter for useful, timely, and appropriate information. We are taking active steps to stop malicious accounts and Tweets from spreading, and we are determined to keep ahead of the tactics of bad actors. For example, in recent months we have developed new techniques to identify accounts manipulating our platform, have improved our process for challenging suspicious accounts, and have introduced new measures designed to identify and take action on coordinated malicious activity. In 2018, we are building on these improvements. Our blog also contains more information about these efforts.

People come to Twitter to see what’s happening in the world. We are committed to making it the best place to do that and to being transparent with the people who use and trust our platform.


The Ballad of the Blue-Collar Billionaire

For a change of pace, our German translator JLH channels Henry Wadsworth Longfellow in this little ditty about the Bumpkin From the Big Apple.

The Ballad of the Blue-Collar Billionaire

by JLH


Come listen my children and you shall hear
A political tale that will bring you good cheer.
On November the eighth in the year ’16,
A man was elected that none had foreseen
Or thought or guessed, let alone, expected
Would be nominated, much less, elected.

He stepped on the stage at that very first meeting,
Expected by all to take a great beating.
The Fourth Estate was in tears of joy:
Here was the perfect whipping boy.
His mouth was so big, his tweets even bigger,
And always good for a snort or a snigger.
Whatever he said — be it false, be it true,
There just was no limit to what they could do.
They prepared to record the brief but wild flare,
Of the man who would be the Blue-Collar Billionaire.

As the Redcoats had massed at Lexington,
So “neutral” moderators first sought to stun,
With fusillades of factoids and lethal spin,
But it all bounced off a fight-toughened skin.
Questions intended to demonize him,
To tear him asunder and limb from limb,
Were seen by the watching multitude
As proof of humanity, if not rectitude.

When interrogators wanted a loyalty oath,
He said that’s alright, but only if both
The party and others said to his face
That they would support him, if he won the race.
There were some opponents who looked down their noses
And made cutting remarks while striking great poses;
Claimed knowledge, experience and comprehension
To smooth over quarrels and lessen dissension.
All versus a man from the building domain,
Whose language was blunt, if not outright profane.

Then there began the chipping away:
His crazy ideas would make taxpayers pay
For impossible schemes that no one could do —
Politically impractical, as everyone (else) knew.
His demeanor was bumptious; his language askew;
How could he know what statesmen should do?
The elegant thinking of political types
Was beyond a man who lived only by hype.

But there also began a most startling display
Of competing in a counterintuitive way.
He played the bully as well as the fool;
He called them all names like a kid after school.
And then he did something that was really unfair —
So embarrassing it was, it was so hard to bear.
He did something that almost seemed underhand:
He proclaimed his unabashed love for this land!
He also had a cap that was red with white letters,
Which he proudly flourished in front of his betters.

Not patriotism, too! For the love of God!
Does he not know that makes him look odd?
And what was that, that he just threw out?
He’s pledging support to those credulous louts,
Evangelical Christians — he’s got their back.
When we already have them! The ignorant hack!

And another religious wave he would make —
He read out the story of Al Miller’s “The Snake.”

Continue reading

The Core Problem, Again

The other day Dymphna posted about the intersection of California’s new law declaring itself a “sanctuary state” and the recent catastrophic wildfires that have devastated areas in the northern part of the state. Earlier today a commenter named NMObserver left the following remarks on that post:

A question that I don’t see being asked is how much money Gov. Brown has accepted from Mexican drug cartels. What other reason could there be for this man to sell out his own country and his fellow citizens? His actions simply further the Mexican colonization of California. The same question needs to be asked about other California officials like Xavier Becerra and Fabian Nunez and Eric Garcetti. And then there are all the California assemblymen that have no trouble voting to turn CA into a sanctuary state. Probably many of them have also been bought with drug money.

The commenter had touched upon one of my pet topics. This was my response:

Yet somehow Governor Moonbeam actually obtained the votes necessary to get elected. The Aztecs and MS-13 members aren’t enough to account for that. Millions upon millions of white, native English speakers voted to have this man as their governor.

Scale it up, and a similar process elected Hussein as president. Twice.

The core problem is not the invaders and the violent Third World masses. The core problem is not even the white traitors who deliberately, proactively import them.

The core problem is the fact that a large proportion of the productive white native English-speaking population assents via the ballot box to what is happening, over and over again. Willingly, even eagerly. With pride in their own virtue for putting these corrupt criminal traitors in charge.

THAT is the core problem. Until it is addressed and dealt with, nothing will change significantly. The bus will continue its trajectory over the cliff.

The same may be said of Western Europe. A different cast of characters — Africans and Muslims instead of Aztecs, and far more socialism than even California has — but the same process is underway.

As satisfying as it is to blame political leaders for our current dire situation, even in the most thoroughly propagandized and socially controlled Western countries (think: Sweden) it is possible to unseat elected leaders via the ballot box. When enough rascals are thrown out, major policy changes will be implemented, and a different political game will begin.

Yes, election fraud can give a particular candidate victory over an opponent, but only at the margin. When dissatisfaction is widespread enough, fraud is not enough. The election of Donald Trump is proof, because his opponent tried every dirty trick in the book (and made up some new ones) in an effort to keep him out of power.

But Trump’s victory is a rarity. It does not change the fact that the electorate is deeply polarized, and came within a hair’s breadth of electing a third term of Obama by putting a pants-suited white termagant in the White House.

How is it that voters throughout the West keep voting for the destruction of their own nations and cultures?

How is it that people keep re-electing the same politicians who ignore their wishes, over and over again?

Continue reading

USA kongresszusi képviselő bizonyítja: Orbánnak igaza volt Sorossal kapcsolatban

Translation of the Hungarian title: “US congressman confirms: Orbán was right about Soros”

On Wednesday we posted a video of Rep. Steve King calling out the Obama administration for interfering in foreign elections, including those in Israel and Macedonia. The most egregious use of taxpayer dollars was for the translation of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals into Macedonian so that it could be distributed by George Soros’ local affiliates before the elections.

Citizens of Israel, the Visegrad Four nations (Hungary, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia), and possibly other members of the East Bloc may be very interested in this video, so we’re subtitling it in different languages. Previously: Polish.

Many thanks to CrossWare for the Hungarian translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

The original English transcript is here.

Hungarian transcript:

Continue reading

Ingerencja administracji Baracka Obamy w kampaniach wyborczych innych krajów

Last night we posted a video of Rep. Steve King calling out the Obama administration for interfering in foreign elections, including those in Israel and Macedonia. The most egregious use of taxpayer dollars was for the translation of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals into Macedonian so that it could be distributed by George Soros’ local Balkan affiliates before the election.

Citizens of the Visegrad Four nations (Hungary, Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia) and possibly other members of the East Bloc may be very interested in this video, so we’re going to subtitle it in different languages.

The first language is Polish. Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, Green Infidel for the Polish title, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

The original English transcript is here.

Polish transcript:

Continue reading

Rep. Steve King on Obama’s Interference in Foreign Elections

The talking heads in the media and Democrats in Congress have been obsessing about supposed Russian interference in last fall’s presidential election. In response to the continuous Trump-Russia-Putin litany, Congressman Steve King (R-IA) came back with his own list of the Obama administration’s interference in foreign elections — including one in Macedonia, which I had forgotten about. Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals translated into Macedonian, paid for by the American taxpayer!

But that evil Vlad Putin, he’s the REAL election meddler who needs to be watched…

For more on Rep. King’s efforts to investigate Obama and the Clintons, see this Sioux City radio report, or The New York Post.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for subtitling and uploading this video:

Video transcript (including footage at the end that was left out of the video above):

Continue reading

Coup d’état

Our Israeli correspondent MC offers an outsider’s perspective on President Donald Trump and the sewer that is the political culture of Washington D.C.

Coup d’état
by MC

There is a group of historians, usually not from the USA, who perceive the Kennedy assassination as a coup d’état, in which Kennedy was replaced by LBJ in order to promote the Vietnam war and the rise of socialism in the nation.

President Trump was elected by a majority in the Electoral College, and maybe more people did vote for her than for him. But that is not the way things work, and next time it may be the other way around. US democracy REQUIRES that Dems and their RINO poodles shut up and get on with making America great because this is what the people voted for.

To work against President Trump by lies and innuendo is the first stage in yet another possible coup. We, as conservatives must take seriously what this means.

Democracy is about losing. It is about acceding to the will of the majority. It is easy to be democratic when you win the election, but the real proof of democracy is the ability to concede to the will of the people as expressed in the polling booth.

So what went wrong?

Throughout the world the media are pushing the same meme, a dangerous totalitarian meme that seeks to remove the idea of ‘good and evil’ and replace it with compliance. To achieve this, all must be reduced to mediocrity and blandness. All must know their place and become mindless drones exploited and entertained in turn and turn about.

Horrid terrorist attacks keep happening, which the media and the government seek to minimalize with a single voice in order to keep the pot simmering without ever actually boiling over.

Essentially, we live in an age of mind control. We are aware of the problems, but we are made to feel that doing anything about them is futile and dangerous. As such we are exactly where the controllers want us to be. As long as we are ineffective we are no threat.

President Trump was obviously not meant to win the election, so now the global monster wants him removed. The in-house elves have their instructions to undermine and accuse at all possible occasions.

One must ask oneself how a President can defend himself against a black op by an organization supposedly signed up for democracy and even bearing its name. The reality is that a POTUS — any POTUS — has to appear to behave in a particular manner, even whilst the reality may be something different. Obama, as a non-white, had a free ride because his political opponents respected, to a great extent, the will of the people, yet the race card was played at all possible junctures. Not so with President Trump.

When a political party loses its sense of morality, when the ends come to justify the means, then that party becomes one of tyranny and of terrorism along with their dogs and bitches, whatever their motives. What is happening to the President is political deception, a type of terrorism which is severely damaging America.

And the President can do nothing about it. He is powerless to defend himself. He has to keep to the rules, whilst his enemies, the dogs, can lie and cheat and steal with impunity.

Continue reading

Bye-Bye, Miss American Pie

Announcing the end of the party is a bit of a soft-shoe routine on reality. What that title means is The Republic is Dead. It was murdered by ugly reality and now everyone wants to point fingers. It may take a while to bury the corpse, and perhaps it will be propped up here and there, with lots of trick lighting to make it seem as though our “democratic process” is still breathing. Decades from now forensic historians will be guesstimating when the life went out. We’ll all be gone by then.

The Baron and I don’t talk politics anymore; it’s too discouraging to watch the predictably interminable pile-on, much less having to discuss it. When I read the other day that come September Trump’s youngest son will be attending an Episcopal day school in the Washington area my first thought was: when will the antifas show up at the school, making an ugly Fellini circus of the boy’s childhood? It’s not his fault his father is president.

I don’t have much hope for Trump’s presidency anymore. There are too many well-connected, rapacious enemies determined to bring him down. Their pyrrhic victory will bring satisfaction to no one but a few fatuous talking heads.

So why this post? Well, during that odious election just past, I was in the habit of reading Scott Adams’ blog, the one place I could be sure to see some realistic overviews of events. Meta-analyses focus on process rather than content; in any discussion, there is more to be learned from the former than the latter. And Adams’ even, reasonable discussions gave me a modicum of hope. Once Trump was elected, I didn’t need any further explanations so I stopped reading Adams’ website. My bad.

Today, for some reason, I recalled Scott Adams’ way of looking at things. I began to wonder what he’d have to say about these shameful attacks on Trump. Ever since the Donald was elected, one could more accurately term “News About The President” as “Gaseous Green Billows Emanating from the MSM Killing Machine (and its deep state sources). It grows ever more depressingly obvious the cabal is out to get Trump, to replace him with what they perceive to be our more pliable vice president (and a pence for any non- American who knows the vice-president’s name). I can’t bear to read those slanted, small-minded outpourings anymore; there’s not even any pretense now about their intentions.

So that’s why you haven’t seen much about American politics here. Unless it concerns the advance of the Ummah, we skip American journalism. However, today was different. I suddenly recalled my favorite meta-analyst during the 2016 presidential election campaign. I hadn’t read Scott Adams in months, so I turned to him for a change, hoping he’d have some insights into this continual beat-down of Trump, our duly elected president.

He didn’t disappoint. In a post entitled “The Slow Motion Assassination of President Trump”, Scott Dilbert was his cogent, contrarian self. I realized how much I’d missed his point of view when he opened with:

I saw this quote on today: “The episode is the latest woe for Trump, whose administration is engulfed in a series of scandals linked to Russia.”

A “series of scandals linked to Russia”? Would it be equally accurate to characterize it as a series of stories manufactured by the media, none of which have been confirmed to be a big deal?

Do you see what I mean? None of the MSM is saying this, but it’s true — we’ve had dozens of “media-manufactured” stories since Trump took office. They’ve been ceaseless Cassandras.

Adams’ analysis is short. He says:

Continue reading

The First 100 Days of a US President

The original of the following article was written in German by an Austrian who is well-acquainted with the American political scene. JLH, who translated the piece, includes this prefatory note:

This article is the kind of fact-based, sober analysis of President Trump’s performance that is sadly lacking in the European, and certainly the German press.

It also does something else that the MSM hacks do not. It attempts to explain and demystify our system for those who only see its grossest manifestations and, through the filter of our own system and of their “lying press” (a.k.a. Lügenpresse).

The translated article from Journalisten Watch:

The First 100 Days of a US President

by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
May 4, 2017

So now they are past — the first 100 days of Donald Trump as President of the United States of America. Critics and media worldwide longed for this moment, so serious Trump-bashing could begin. And so it came to pass, in America as well as in Europe — a Niagara Falls of “I told you so” about the President from Trump opponents. On balance, President Trump’s first 100 days are many things, but surely no more chaotic than Bill Clinton’s start in the 1990s. For Trump and his circle, the results thus far may be more ambiguous than they hoped or expected. Ultimately, this judgment is inconclusive. After 100 days, there remain another 1,350 days in office, before he runs again. There will be enough time to analyze hard facts and statistics and make a judgment.

No one is surprised that Trump praises his accomplishments in the first 100 days, nor that the opposition vigorously criticizes his actions. What should be of interest to the European observer are the facts, rather than the emotional reactions to the undeniably most powerful man in the world, whose decisions, after all, even encompass those whose nationality did not allow them to vote in the November 2016 election. And the facts have a different story to tell. The nationwide daily paper USA Today recently compared the first 100 days of the last six presidents — Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump, including their successes and their setbacks.

Surprisingly, Donald Trump is in good company here. For example, by the cut-off date of April 21st, 24 of his nominees for cabinet and other positions were confirmed by the Senate. For Obama, it was 69 of 190 nominees; for Clinton, 49 of 176; for Reagan, 80 of 128. Among significant Trump successes are the nomination and Senate confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, the reversal of several executive orders from the Obama administration and, with some reservations, his military reaction to the poison gas attack in Syria, although as yet the proofs of Assad’s agency are sparse. We might also mention his reaction to the provocations of the North Korean dictator and the elevation of China’s importance in the conflict.

And note should be taken of the failure of the Republican-majority House, which left Trump in the lurch during the effort to replace the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Leader of the House Republicans, Paul Ryan, who was (is?) a proven enemy of Trump, was not able to find a majority for Trump’s project. Counter-intuitively, it was the “Freedom Caucus,” the conservative Republican group in the House, who threw obstacles in the way of proposals of the president they had supported, contributing to one of his most significant defeats — failure of “Repeal and Replace.” And this was one of Trump’s central campaign promises. The bill (proposed law) did not go far enough for the Freedom Caucus, while the “moderate” Republicans also withheld support because of concessions to the Freedom Caucus, so the Republican majority remained unavailable.

Attempting to enact another campaign promise brought one more defeat which could have unfortunate results for the security of the American public. Trump promised a moratorium on immigration from majority Islamic countries already judged by his predecessor, Barack Obama, and the Congress to be problematic for security. Critics and civil rights organizations were not slow in seeking to have judges cancel the president’s decrees. This was never a “travel ban on Muslims.” It was always about the immigration of citizens of majority Muslim countries. And it was also not a permanent travel ban, but a moratorium until certain questions could be cleared up. There are no discussions of the obvious amateurism in carrying out the two executive orders. However, according to former US Attorney Andrew McCarthy, it is the task of the president under the US Constitution to govern international affairs. Further, the entry and/or immigration laws assign the president the right to issue temporary entry provisions for the maintenance of national security.

Continue reading