![]() U.S. Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo meets with Chinese Politburo Member Yang Jiechi in Honolulu, HI, on June 17, 2020. [State Department Photo by Ron Przysucha / Public Domain] Democrats Prepare for One-Party State By Cliff Kincaid – June 18, 2020 Karl Rove, the de facto head of the Trump 2020 Campaign, has apparently arranged for his old boss, George W. Bush, to campaign for four Republican Senators in danger of losing their seats this November. All four are either out-of-touch with conservatives or outright liberals. They are Senators Susan Collins (Maine), Cory Gardner (Colo.), Martha McSally (Ariz.) and Thom Tillis (N.C.). The “Save the Senate” move reflects Trump’s declining poll numbers, but the Bush presidency was also a disaster, as the economy was taken down in 2008 by a housing crisis that was used to justify massive federal intervention, leading Bush to declare, “I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.” On foreign policy, Bush was known as an advocate of what his father called a “New World Order,” based on American interventions in the Middle East that failed to resolve age-old conflicts but produced thousands of American wounded warriors. In his retirement, George W. Bush paints pictures of those injured by the wars he started. A book with the paintings, Portraits of Courage Deluxe Signed & Personalized Edition, can be purchased for $350.00. Of the four Senators, Gardner is the most notorious. Calling himself a “common sense conservative,” Gardner was labeled a “pot whore” by drug policy expert Dave Evans because he does anything the Colorado-based marijuana industry demands of him. Collins is a long-time anti-Trump liberal and McSally is a lackluster female candidate that the Republican establishment has tried twice to make into a Senator. McSally lost a race for one Senate seat to Democrat Kyrsten Sinema and then was selected to fill the seat of former Senator John McCain when he died. She tried to attract conservative votes when she called CNN's Manu Raju a “liberal hack.” This led to an appearance on Fox News. She also made a few headlines by questioning Fed chairman Jerome Powell about the central bank using a firm called BlackRock linked to China. Otherwise, she has pursued a “moderate” course. Tillis called Trump Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch “a fair, independent-minded judge with impeccable qualifications” and added that “He will be an outstanding Supreme Court Justice.” All of this talk has blown up in his face. Of course, Gorsuch has betrayed conservative voters with his disastrous ruling, backed by Chief Justice John Roberts and the four members of the Court’s liberal bloc, in favor of LGBTQ rights. The ruling overturned state laws and threatens religious liberty across the land, as many conservatives feel betrayed by Trump and those who backed Gorsuch, including such powerhouse “conservative” groups as the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society. With Trump’s reelection in doubt, Democrats only need to win four seats to take back the Senate, and right now, they claim they are leading in five of the most competitive races. Those races are:
With a Senate takeover, while keeping the House under Nancy Pelosi’s speakership, America would have one-party government under President Biden. And with Justices Roberts and Gorsuch voting with the four liberal members of the Court, this would give the left-wing control over all three branches of government. All of Trump’s appointees to other federal court positions would be of little or no value, as any conservative rulings could be overturned on appeal. Even though most voters believe 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has early dementia, he is leading Trump by big margins, as many as 14 points, in most polls. While some believe Trump’s decline in the polls is not permanent, and that some surveys underestimate his appeal, there can be no doubt that his presidency is in deep trouble. But what is most worrisome to many conservatives is the acknowledged role being played in his campaign -- and the campaigns of Republican Senators and candidates -- by former George W. Bush strategist Karl Rove. He is known as someone who likes to appeal to Democrat voters with “moderate” or liberal platitudes and positions. That is guaranteed to make conservatives stay home. Taking this advice, Trump is pandering to the liberal-left, making favorable comments about the return of anti-cop activist and former football player Colin Kaepernick to the NFL. “Trump softens on Kaepernick” was one headline. The former player once wore socks depicting police officers as pigs and donated $25,000 donation to an activist group, Assata’s Daughters, named after Assata Shakur/Joanne Chesimard, a cop-killer who fled to Communist Cuba. In other liberal moves, Trump has endorsed federal legislation to regulate police forces that are normally under the control of local governments. On the matter of riots that have been spreading across the country, Trump threatens to restore law and order but does nothing, except clear out some protesters across the street from the White House who burned a historic church. Meanwhile, Communist North Korea is starting another crisis with the United States, and Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo met with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Politburo Member Yang Jiechi in Honolulu, Hawaii “to exchange views on U.S.-China relations.” “I’m a little upset with China” over the coronavirus, Trump had said. As of June 18, a total of 117,000 people had died in the U.S. because of the disease and the figure could reach 200,000 by October. At the same time, over 40 million Americans have been thrown out of work because of government economic lockdowns designed to prevent the spread of the virus. The official U.S. State Department release stated that Pompeo stressed “important American interests and the need for fully-reciprocal dealings between the two nations across commercial, security, and diplomatic interactions” and “the need for full transparency and information sharing to combat the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and prevent future outbreaks.” It’s a little late for this kind of pandering and appeasement. The meeting alone demonstrated American weakness. Meanwhile, Trump administration U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer was on Capitol Hill, saying it’s unreasonable to expect that the United States could decouple its economy from China’s. It’s the kind of business as usual approach we would have expected from Obama/Biden and Bush. This is another reason why Trump is in deep trouble.
3 Comments
By Cliff Kincaid
Originally published on April 3, 2017 When the first President Bush nominated David Souter for a seat on the Supreme Court, the nominee was sold to conservatives as a fellow conservative but turned out to be a solid member of the court’s liberal bloc. As such, Souter was labeled a “stealth nominee” to advance the liberal agenda. Could Judge Neil Gorsuch be another Souter? On the surface, such a question seems absurd. Gorsuch was selected by President Donald Trump from a list of 21 “conservative” nominees assembled by the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation, two respected conservative groups. Like most conservatives, inside-the-beltway operative Matt Schlapp of the American Conservative Union fell in line behind the nominee. He called Gorsuch “a reliable defender of the Constitutional rights of every American” and a “self-described originalist who seeks to interpret the Constitution as the Founders intended.” Dr. Robert George of Princeton University said, “In selecting Gorsuch, President Trump has without question fulfilled his pledge to appoint a justice in the mold of Antonin Scalia—a conservative intellectual leader.” But the hearings on Gorsuch’s nomination did produce controversial comments suggesting that, like Souter, he could turn out to be a member of the court’s liberal bloc on issues like gay marriage, abortion, and even gun rights. Pro-life activist Mark Harrington of Created Equal said that he was troubled by the testimony Gorsuch gave during his confirmation hearings on abortion and homosexuality. “Words mean things,” he told AIM. He said “people weren’t listening or watching” if they missed the significance of these remarks by the nominee. In his opinion, he said it appears that Gorsuch “values precedent over the Constitution” given his remarks on abortion and gay marriage. As the Constitution and history demonstrate, there were no abortion or gay marriage “rights” at the time of America’s founding. Those “rights” didn’t exist in America’s founding documents. Indeed, the Declaration of Independence affirmed, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” A product of elite liberal colleges and universities, Gorsuch strongly indicated during his confirmation hearings that the “rights” which now exist are those imposed on the nation by the Supreme Court. He attended Harvard Law School with former President Barack Obama, notes Politico. At the same time, he expresses support for the right to life in his book, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. He is also considered a strong supporter of religious freedom rights. While many conservative groups have endorsed Gorsuch, and liberal groups have opposed him, some reporters of a conservative bent have taken the time to follow the hearings and comment on what Gorsuch actually said. For example, Steve Jalsevac of LifeSiteNews analyzed his statements and observed, “…this man is NOT, as Trump has repeatedly been told, another Scalia,” the conservative justice who passed away last year and whose seat Gorsuch would fill. Paul Bremmer of WorldNetDaily notes that Gorsuch, during his confirmation hearings, labeled as the “law of the land” or “settled law” the rulings on “unlimited abortion” and homosexual marriage. Indeed, Gorsuch called the Supreme Court’s pro-abortion ruling, Roe v. Wade, “the law of the land,” and added, “I accept the law of the land.” That ruling led to the legalization of abortion on demand across the country, striking down state laws protecting the rights of the unborn. His exact words were, “I would tell you that Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is precedent of the United States Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed…So a good judge will consider as precedent of the United States Supreme Court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other.” “To me,” wrote Jalsevac, “there was something unnerving about how far he went in accepting the current realities of that horrendous decision that was based on lies and deliberate misinterpretation of the Constitution.” Gorsuch called the same-sex “marriage” Obergefell v. Hodges ruling imposed on the states “absolutely settled law.” Jalsevac said, “That comment seemed to indicate Gorsuch is not a full constitutional originalist. No originalist would ever make such a comment that appears to betray the Constitution and the intentions of the Founders—considering the travesty of the Obergefell decision.” Pro-life activist Mark Harrington told AIM that while the nominee’s statements were troubling, his remarks on homosexual marriage being “absolutely settled law,” based on a ruling made only eighteen months ago, were even more incomprehensible. Scalia, a real “constitutional originalist,” had called the Court’s gay marriage decision a judicial “Putsch.” By that, he meant that the court had overthrown our democratic Republican form of government by creating rights that didn’t exist in the Constitution and which the people in all 50 states had not voted for. In other little-noticed comments that emerged after the nomination was made or during the hearings, Gorsuch’s former law clerk, John Goodbaum, said Gorsuch was personally supportive of his “gay marriage,” while Gorsuch’s pastor, Susan Springer, was reported to have “proudly” attended the anti-Trump Women’s March in Denver, Colorado. The church he attends is “notably liberal,” The Washington Post reported. Reverend Springer is reported to be in favor of gay marriage and offers blessings to same-sex couples. Mark Harrington of Created Equal had warned conservatives before the hearings to engage in “extreme vetting” of the nominee, and has since concluded that he can’t support Gorsuch. He reminded conservatives, “President Reagan gave us Justice Kennedy. George H.W. Bush gave us Justice Souter. George W. Bush gave us Justice Roberts.” History shows that Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the ruling legalizing same-sex marriage throughout the United States, while Chief Justice John Roberts gave us Supreme Court approval of Obamacare. In the case of Souter, while many conservatives were fooled by White House assurances that he was a true conservative, the late conservative activist Howard Phillips had warned of Souter’s pro-abortion record and predicted he was going to be liberal on other social issues. “We can’t get this one wrong,” Harrington said, referring to the pick of Scalia’s replacement. “We have no margin of error. Getting it wrong condemns millions of preborn children to death. This time around, we will trust but verify.” Despite Gorsuch’s controversial remarks in his confirmation hearings, conservative activist Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network told CBS News that she is confident Gorsuch won’t be another Souter. Her group launched a $10 million campaign to support Gorsuch. Some other columnists who have examined the record are not so sure. While Gorsuch “appears to have everything conservatives would want in a Supreme Court nominee,” New York Daily News columnist Adam Edelman notes that “there is a very thin paper trail when it comes to Gorsuch’s judicial rulings on key conservative issues like abortion and gun rights.” In addition to the Souter case, Anthony Kennedy “had been seen by conservatives as a reliably right-leaning justice,” but over time came to be associated “with the court’s liberal bloc, becoming a critical swing vote on dozens of momentous decisions,” Edelman points out. Gorsuch worked as a law clerk for Kennedy in the early 1990s. In his opening statement for his confirmation hearings, he said he “had the great fortune to clerk for Justice Kennedy” and that Kennedy “showed me that judges can disagree without being disagreeable.” “Justice Scalia was a mentor, too,” Gorsuch said. “He reminded us that words matter. That the judge’s job is to follow the words that are in the law, not replace them with those that aren’t.” But the words he uttered at the hearings about preserving the “rights” that have been made up by a liberal Supreme Court will continue to raise questions about whether he is a “Scalia clone,” as some liberals charge. Will Gorsuch Fool Us Again? by Cliff Kincaid Originally published on April 5, 2017 David French writes at National Review that the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade pro-abortion decision was morally and intellectually bankrupt, and has resulted in millions of children being “poisoned, stabbed, and dismembered.” So what will Judge Neil Gorsuch do to end this carnage? Gorsuch has not ruled on an abortion case, but told the Senate during his confirmation hearings that the Court ruling is “the law of the land,” and “I accept the law of the land.” My column, “Is Gorsuch a ‘Stealth Nominee?,” stands virtually alone in raising questions about these troubling statements from a conservative pro-life perspective. The conservative media are not raising the questions that they should about this nominee. They seem to have accepted the notion that President Donald Trump has nominated a true conservative, backed by the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation, and that nothing more needs to be done or said, except to rubber-stamp his nomination. He has said some things about the value of human life and religious freedom, but is it too much to ask and demand an answer to a simple question: Do you regard innocent unborn human beings as life worthy of life? As a journalist and media critic, I am taught to demand answers. The issue is not ideology or perspective, but information. We knew the Left would reject any nominee from a Republican president. But the supposedly pro-life and conservative side seems content with his controversial comments in favor of “the law” and “precedent.” The status quo means more abortions. From 1973 through 2011, according to available statistics, nearly 53 million legal abortions occurred in the U.S. At that rate, the U.S. is fast approaching the grotesque record of Mao Tse-tung, the communist Chinese leader who is still regarded as history’s greatest mass murderer. In America, of course, the abortions are done in the name of women’s rights and the “right to choose.” “Our democracy has been corrupted to protect abortion charnel houses even from the most basic commonsense regulations,” notes David French. “The precedents and reasoning that created the abortion right have translated into a belief in a ‘living constitution’ that is so deeply embedded into the philosophy of the Left that it now believes that the Court can and should simply decide the correct outcome of any given case and then ‘find’ the right and reasoning in some combination of philosophy, law, precedent, and (sometimes) even selectively chosen foreign legal decisions.” But has this reasoning been “imbedded” in Judge Gorsuch, a product of some of the same elite liberal academic institutions that produced Barack Obama, his nominees, and the “Living Constitution” nonsense? Millions more unborn children have died since another Republican nominee, David Souter, was confirmed to the Supreme Court. Republicans had assured conservatives that Souter was a reliable conservative who would rule correctly on abortion and other issues. They were wrong, and we had reason to know they were wrong. Jeremy Rabkin wrote a Weekly Standard article back in 1995 about how “the entire Washington conservative establishment” was fooled by Souter and his Republican handlers. He said Souter was “supported by conservative groups and unchallenged by conservatives inside the Bush White House.” The late Howard Phillips of the Conservative Caucus saw through Souter and opposed his nomination. Rabkin sort of admitted this, saying, “Only one conservative organization, Howard Phillips’s Conservative Caucus, raised its voice in opposition to Souter at the time of the confirmation proceedings (and then solely on the basis of doubts about Souter’s personal views on abortion).” Actually, Phillips opposed Souter across the board, saying, “The overreaching moral issue in the political life of the United States in the last third of the 20th Century is, in my opinion, the question of abortion…If Judge Souter is confirmed as a Justice of the Supreme Court, he will, in all likelihood, be given the opportunity to address not only the issue of Roe v. Wade, but broader issues involving the sanctity of innocent human life.” Rabkin wrote that Souter became “one of the staunchest liberals on the court—a more reliable champion of liberal causes than Clinton appointees Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.” Phillips came to understand the risks associated with Souter by analyzing his record, as a member of the board of trustees of Concord Hospital in New Hampshire, when “he participated in a unanimous decision that abortions be performed at that hospital.” Phillips concluded, “Advocacy of, or even acquiescence in, such a decision is morally distinguishable from the judicial conclusion, profoundly incorrect, in my view, that women have a constitutional right to destroy their unborn children.” The lobbying on behalf of Gorsuch has been similar to what we saw on behalf of Souter. We are told that Gorsuch is like the late Justice Antonin Scalia. But Scalia was a staunch Catholic who attended a very conservative Catholic church. Gorsuch was raised Roman Catholic but left the church and became a member of the ultra-liberal St. John’s Episcopal Church in Boulder, Colorado, which has come to be known as Jeremiah Wright-lite, a reference to Obama’s longtime radical pastor. Christian scholar Gary DeMar writes that this church is associated with a denomination, the Episcopal Church in the United States of America, that is liberal on many social issues, including abortion, same-sex marriage and “climate change.” Its 48-page “Policy for Action” document calls for “affirming reproductive choice,” which is code for abortion; more foreign aid; national health care; homosexual rights; support for the “Earth Charter;” and the licensing of purchasers of handguns. On another hot button issue, the Episcopal Church believes in a “New Sanctuary Movement,” in order to shield illegal aliens from law enforcement; amnesty for illegals; and cheap college tuition for the so-called DREAMers. Journalist Julia Duin, who previously wrote for The Washington Times, has brought up the issue of Gorsuch’s church membership, noting, “The Episcopal Church, for anyone who’s not been following religion trends in recent decades, has been careening to the theological and cultural left for years and its membership statistics show it.” She says the fact that the judge and his family have remained at St. John’s, rather than going to a more conservative church in the area, “says something,” and adds, “His church choice just may hint at certain leanings.” It’s interesting that the Episcopal Church has a government relations website with a photo of the Supreme Court on it. Perhaps the church knows something about Gorsuch and his “leanings.” But the American people don’t know, and apparently have no right to know. Trump Hires “Bush’s Brain” to Lose to Biden
By Cliff Kincaid – June 15, 2020 Karl Rove, also known as “Bush’s Brain,” is now advising the Trump 2020 presidential campaign and promoting Republican Senator Tim Scott’s push for federal “reform” of local police forces. This is a teaching moment. It tells us how Republicans sell out by pushing a “light” version of what the Democrats are pushing. It’s how the Democrats win by losing. They force the GOP to move left. This is the same Karl Rove who predicted that Donald J. Trump could not win the 2016 presidential election. Republicans like Karl Rove seem to think that capitulating to the revolutionaries, albeit on a slow-motion basis, is the right way to go. Grass-roots Republican who support Trump don’t agree. One of them wrote to me through my website America’s Survival saying, “I live in a St. Paul, Minnesota, suburb and as I watched Minneapolis burn on Memorial Day weekend, I thought that I was watching what Detroit must have looked like in the 60's...And yet, there hasn't been ONE SINGLE Republican or conservative politician who has denounced what has or is currently going on via BLM [Black Lives Matter] or Antifa or whomever these loons are - NOT ONE! I am so sick and tired of the left taking advantage of us with no consequences whatsoever.” A former George W. Bush strategist, Rove should have retired into oblivion after the Bush presidency exploded into America’s financial meltdown in 2008, ushering in the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. But after the disaster of the Bush presidency, the famous GOP strategist lost $300 million betting on a Mitt Romney victory in 2012. That’s the amount of money Rove sucked out of GOP donors to pour into ads for Romney and against Obama. Rove had advised Romney not to call Obama a socialist because there would be a backlash. Perhaps Romney didn’t need to be persuaded. These days he marches with the Marxist Black Lives Matter group. In a challenge to Rove’s status as a political power broker in the Republican Party, conservative political consultants Larry Ward and Carter Clews once wrote an article calling Rove “the political world’s pre-eminent empty-suit analyst” who wasted $300 million that could have been used to defeat Obama, elect real conservatives to Congress, and underwrite the activities of authentic conservative groups. They say Rove’s strategy of moving to the center and the left, in order to appeal to Obama voters, “drove away millions of hardcore conservative activists who form the base of the Republican Party.” From his perch as a regular Wall Street Journal columnist and Fox News contributor, he has now maneuvered his way into the Trump campaign. His latest column in the Wall Street Journal is about “police reform.” While the Republicans attempt a pale imitation of Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats, the real issue in several cities is not “reform” but a lack of police. Jared Taylor of American Renaissance has pictures of the vandalism and damage to historical monuments in Richmond, Virginia, and was told by one officer, “We were told to hold back. You could have burned every car in the city and we wouldn’t have done anything.” In Seattle, the “new nation” of CHAZ, which is a cop-free zone, is in its 8th day. In Minneapolis, where it all started, a police precinct was burned down. Police “reform” is simply one step in the agenda to federalize and even internationalize America's local police. Rather than push back, President Trump keeps repeating “Law and Order,” and his campaign sends messages to his supporters sometimes three or four times a day asking for money. It’s President Trump’s birthday, they say. Send money. “He works so hard for America.” His son Eric Trump bombards one of his wayward supporters with such messages as, “I’m reading over the list of patriotic supporters who stepped forward to help my father’s Senate allies reach their May [fundraising] goal. Even though my brother, Mitch McConnell, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and Karl Rove all reached out MULTIPLE times – you still didn’t help.” The tag line is “We failed.” Well, many Trump supporters think the president has failed to follow through on his promise to restore “Law and Order.” “Rove said he is friends with Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale, and that Parscale calls him from time to time,” The Hill newspaper reported. Other sources say Rove is helping Trump's 2020 bid by focusing on voter outreach and swing-state strategy. Parscale has been criticized for a lavish lifestyle that includes a $2.4 million beachfront mansion, a yacht, and a Ferrari. For his part, Rove is skilled at blaming others for his own bad advice. After Romney’s defeat, Rove blamed the Romney campaign for not responding aggressively to attacks on the Republican presidential nominee. But his close friend and associate, Ed Gillespie, was a top Romney adviser. Gillespie lost the Virginia Governor’s race in 2017 to Ralph “Blackface” Northam. “II thought Trump was the man who would take charge of this current situation and shut it down,” said one Trump supporter. “Instead, he has dithered the offensive position away and is forever going to be on defense, with no one having his back. Congressional Republicans are the most worthless excuse for spineless jellyfish there ever were.” Such voices do not have much clout in Washington, D.C. circles. They do not read Karl Rove’s column in the Wall Street Journal. But they are the voices of those who elected Trump in the first place. They can arm themselves, install security cameras, and stay home in November. *Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org Offical release:
NRB Members Respond to Killing of George Floyd, Protests, and Racism NRB and its members have been responding to the murder of George Floyd, the protests that have erupted around the nation and the world in the days following his death, and the issue of racism in America. NRB CEO Troy Miller said in a statement, “Our hearts are broken at the unjust killing of George Floyd and we pray for swift justice in this case. We believe this is an opportunity for the Church to be a catalyst for racial reconciliation. Our members are working hard to bring Gospel hope and healing to our troubled nation.” The following are a selection of excepts from NRB member statements related to Floyd’s murder, the protests, and the issue of racism. Editor's note: not one statement condemns communist revolutionaries for exploiting the George Floyd death. Consider: Franklin Graham, President and CEO of The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association This makes me sick to my stomach. What took place Monday on a Minneapolis street, by the Minneapolis Police Department should deeply concern each and every American. It’s inexcusable. The Law and Order President is Failing America
By Cliff Kincaid – June 11, 2020 Conservative Christian broadcaster Brannon Howse told me this week that it doesn’t look like President Trump wants to win the presidential election. “He had better get his act together or else he’s going to lose to a guy that doesn’t even know who his own wife is,” he said. Howse and many other conservatives are frustrated by the (lack of) response of the Trump-Pence Administration to the riots. Other than clear some protesters and rioters out of Lafayette Park across from the White House, in order to hold up a Bible in front of a burned-out church, Trump has done almost nothing except make threats. He Tweets about restoring law and order but does nothing except protect the White House. His Attorney General William Barr and FBI Director Christopher Wray were blindsided by what is happening. It’s clear they don’t have any clue about the Maoist-style communist revolution underway in America. As a result, Trump is quickly losing support from the conservative side of the political spectrum. One citizen wrote to me through my website America’s Survival saying, “Unfortunately, our fearless leader, Trump, is not fearless and is not a leader. Basically, he's useless.” Another said the president and Barr were acting like Abbott and Costello, the comedy duo. But America isn’t laughing, as their lives and businesses and country are increasingly at risk. Meanwhile, the Maoist-style cultural revolution is going full speed ahead, as one professor has been suspended for not giving black students a day off from final exams in honor of Black Lives Matter, the Marxist group that honors cop-killer Joanne Chesimard. Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, a conservative critic of Black Lives Matter and Trump’s response to the revolution, is under attack by Maoists pressuring his advertisers to drop his show one by one. Before too long, he will be off the air, in the same way that “Gone with the Wind” has been dropped by HBO and the shows “Cops” and “Live PD” have been rejected by cable channels and networks. Anybody who thinks independently of the Maoist mob is being targeted. The New York Times, sounding like a modern-day version of the People’s World, calls all of this “the growing movement for change.” Change came to the Times, when an editor resigned after he approved a Senator Tom Cotton op-ed for the paper calling for the deployment of troops to restore order. No dissident voices are permitted in the paper, or society at large, as the Maoists assert control over all sectors of American life. Millions of people depending on Trump’s Twitter feed for the blunt truth are now getting a lot of empty threats. As this column is being written, Trump has sent out another “Law and Order” Tweet demanding that the authorities in Washington State and the city of Seattle restore law and order. In defiance, they told him to return to his White House bunker. Trump looks weak. Trump threatened to restore law and order through the Insurrection Act and when his own Secretary of Defense Mark Esper undercut him, he backed off. Who is in charge anyway? Now, Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark A. Milley has in effect denounced Trump for including him in that photo-op in front of the church. Why does Milley still have a job? This seems like a “Seven Days in May” scenario where the top brass revolt against their Commander-in-Chief. In the movie, the president wins. In real life, who knows? The Trump 2020 campaign has just sent out an email message from the president personally asking for money that declares, “It’s past time for Democrat Mayors and Governors to get tough. Violent thugs are running rampant - these people are ANARCHISTS. While the Fake News has been inciting hatred and chaos, President Trump is working around the clock to restore LAW AND ORDER in these communities where liberal leadership has FAILED.” The words “law and order” were placed in all capitals and underlined. But it’s all talk. It’s absolutely clear that Trump is NOT working around the clock to restore law and order. If so, he would have fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper for insubordination by now. He would have explained to the American people why Attorney General Barr and FBI director Wray were caught unprepared for the riots in Minneapolis and other cities. My friend Trevor Loudon has all the information they don’t have about the communists running this revolution. His article at Epoch Times even documents the involvement of pro-China communist groups. The Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) has posted a video of its leader Eugene Puryear addressing the 100,000 strong crowd in Philadelphia on Saturday, June 6. “This isn’t a riot,” he said. “It’s an uprising! It’s a rebellion! And successful uprisings and rebellions become REVOLUTIONS.” Mr. President, please share that video with Mr. Barr and Mr. Wray, will you? On the Brannon Howse program, I not only questioned Trump’s “leadership” but the tendency by conservatives like Rush Limbaugh to play into the hands of the radicals. He had the black radio host “Charlamagne Tha God” on his show to talk about “while privilege.” Another Brannon Howse guest, Alex Newman, went into detail about where this is all heading – federal and even United Nations control of police forces once considered under the jurisdiction of local communities. Senate Republicans seem to be going along with this. I thank Brannon Howse for doing the programs that need to be done about this unfolding disaster for our country. He’s one of the few commentators honest enough to provide the details that are being withheld from the president by his closest aides. As the author of Marxianity, about left-wing infiltration of the churches, he shows real courage. Tragically, many conservatives remain mum about Trump’s bluster and ineffective response. They suppress conservative views out-of-sync with their own pro-Trump editorializing. But ordinary people with common sense don’t buy it. They will not excuse Trump for failing to take military action to protect people, their lives and homes. I saw one story about whether Trump would benefit from the riots. Is this the political calculation in the White House? I’m told he thinks his political rallies will turn things around. It’s true that a backlash is underway. But waiting for a backlash doesn’t justify inaction by federal authorities as lives are lost and property is destroyed. *Cliff Kincaid is president of Americas Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org ![]() Source of photo: National Park Service By Cliff Kincaid Originally published September 16, 2011 As the official dedication of the Martin Luther King Jr. memorial in Washington, D.C. approaches, liberals in the media are in damage control over a revelation about the civil rights leader from an unlikely source—Caroline Kennedy, daughter of JFK and Jackie Kennedy. Her new book, Jacqueline Kennedy: Historic Conversations on Life with John F. Kennedy, makes it abundantly clear that Jack and Bobby Kennedy, as well as Jackie, saw through the public façade of the Reverend King and knew him to be a proven liar about his communist connections and a scoundrel in terms of his personal life. Jackie called King a “phony” in the taped conversations that form the basis of the book. This has created a dilemma for the media, who adore the Kennedys and King. So media figures such as Andrea Mitchell of NBC News and Diane Sawyer of ABC News have decided to blame the whole mess on former FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. But the misdirection won’t work. The book stands on its own and constitutes a major indictment of a man considered a national icon. On Monday night, Mitchell was on the NBC Nightly News covering the controversy by claiming that the “phony” comment was because of political games being played by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. In fact, the evidence shows that both JFK and his brother Bobby had themselves obtained and passed on information about King’s extramarital affairs and womanizing. It was information that had been obtained from wiretaps on King authorized by Bobby himself. The book is based on recorded interviews conducted in 1964 by Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. with Jacqueline Kennedy. It quotes Jackie as saying that JFK had told her “of a tape that the FBI had of Martin Luther King…how he was calling up all these girls and arranging for a party of men and women, I mean, sort of an orgy in the hotel, and everything.” Jackie said her response to this was that such conduct was “terrible” and that King was “such a phony.” Jackie adds, “Since then, Bobby’s told me of the tapes of these orgies they have and how Martin Luther King made fun of Jack’s funeral.” Mitchell’s false narrative ignored how the Kennedy brothers, both anti-communist Democrats, were alarmed by King’s communist associations. She explained: “At the time, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover was trying to incite divisions between the Kennedys and Dr. King, telling Bobby Kennedy that Dr. King was overheard on FBI wiretaps making crude comments about Jackie Kennedy kissing her husband’s coffin on the day of Jack’s funeral.” But Mitchell’s talk of Hoover stirring up divisions was nonsense. Hoover targeted King because of high-level concern about his communist connections, with the information about his extramarital affairs coming out as a result of the surveillance of the civil rights leader. The book makes it clear that the report that Jackie said King was a “phony” was not based on something said about a coffin; it was based on revelations provided to Jackie Kennedy by her husband that King, a reverend who quoted the bible, was a notorious adulterer and partier. And Bobby Kennedy, according to the book, shared the disgust for King’s secret sexual perversions. It appears that Mitchell either did not read the book or deliberately misrepresented what was in it. This is the true mark of a liberal journalist worried about besmirching the reputation of a liberal icon. In the September 13 two-hour ABC special on the Jacqueline Kennedy tapes, “Jacqueline Kennedy: In Her Own Words,” there is also an attempt to spin the damaging revelations about King and blame Hoover for them. Diane Sawyer, anchor of the special program, said Hoover “had told the president that King was present at parties involving a lot of sex.” Sawyer said the reported comment about the funeral was “a malicious rumor” planted by Hoover with Bobby. Hence, Sawyer depicted the Kennedy brothers in an unflattering light as mere puppets of Hoover’s FBI. In fact, Hoover was doing their bidding. Michael Beschloss, who wrote the introduction to the book, insisted on the air that “There is dispute on whether it’s Martin Luther King who’s on those FBI tapes or not. But Robert Kennedy thought it was.” It is apparent that Bobby had listened to some of the tapes, read the transcripts, or relied on summaries provided by the FBI. Equally important, Beschloss knows that King was wiretapped by the FBI (and that the wiretaps were approved by Bobby, the Attorney General) because of King’s communist connections and links to the Soviet-funded Communist Party USA. But this, too, is a taboo subject for the liberal media. Rep. John Lewis appeared on the ABC program to blame J. Edgar Hoover for bad opinions of King, saying Hoover despised King and wanted to “destroy the man.” Caroline Kennedy was brought on to say that, despite her criticism of the civil rights leader in the book, her mother admired King. These attempts at spin fly in the face of the evidence in the book and provided even by King’s former associates. For example, Ralph David Abernathy, the president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) in his book, And the Walls Came Tumbling Down, acknowledges King’s extramarital affairs. On the NBC Nightly News, Andrea Mitchell apparently felt obliged to report the explosive “phony” comment about King but decided to ignore the actual evidence in the book and blame it on Hoover. Such conduct is further evidence of the media’s blatant disregard of the facts in order to serve a political agenda. ABC News tried a variation of this strategy. The New York Times at least got the basic facts right, noting that Jackie’s comment about King being a “phony” was based on “electronic eavesdropping” which found King “arranging encounters with women.” But the reason for the wiretaps was not disclosed. And the fact that they were approved by Bobby Kennedy, the Attorney General, was conveniently left out. David J. Garrow explained some of the controversy in his 1981 book The FBI and Martin Luther King, Jr., as well as a 2002 Atlantic magazine article based on it. He notes that Bobby authorized the FBI to begin wiretapping the telephones of King because he “believed that one of King’s closest advisers was a top-level member of the American Communist Party, and that King had repeatedly misled Administration officials about his ongoing close ties with the man.” The associate was Stanley Levison, who had been involved in Communist Party USA financial affairs and was helping to arrange funding of the party by Moscow. Since the Kennedys were among a dwindling number of national Democrats who opposed international communism and wanted to see it defeated, these reports greatly concerned them. But Levison wasn’t the only concern. Garrow writes, “Levison, the FBI told Kennedy and Marshall [Burke Marshall, the assistant attorney general for civil rights], had recently installed as head of the SCLC’s small New York office a young African-American man named Jack O’Dell, whose publicly documented record of affiliation with the CPUSA had drawn the attention of hostile congressional committees just a few years earlier. Kennedy’s inner circle resolved that every Administration aide acquainted with King would warn him fervently but vaguely about the political danger of continuing his association with Levison and O’Dell. King politely accepted and then privately dismissed warning after warning.” (O’Dell would later go to work for King associate Jesse Jackson). Hence, King was deceiving the Kennedys, his allies in the civil rights struggle. In his book, Garrow quoted Marshall as saying that King’s deception on this matter was important and that the wiretaps were therefore justified. “I mean,” said Marshall, “if you accept the concept of national security, if you accept the concept that there is a Soviet Communist apparatus and it is trying to interfere with things here—which you have to accept—and that there’s a national security issue and that taps are justified in that area. I don’t know what could be more important than having the kind of Communist that this man was claimed to be by the Bureau directly influencing Dr. King.” The communists were manipulating the civil rights movement in directions that benefited them, such as by influencing King to be critical of the war against communism in Vietnam and the system of free enterprise capitalism in the U.S. Garrow, who was sympathetic to King and critical of the FBI, explained, “Hence the primary reason behind the decision to wiretap Dr. King was, for Robert Kennedy and Burke Marshall, just as it was for the FBI, honestly held fears about what Stanley Levison represented and why Martin Luther King was remaining in contact with him despite numerous warnings not to and King’s own promise that he would end the relationship.” This information, which has long been on the public record, provides a much-needed perspective on the wiretap controversy. Authorized for the purpose of documenting King’s communist connections, the surveillance turned up evidence of his adultery, which contradicted his stance as a minister of God preaching virtue in public life. But viewers of Andrea Mitchell’s report about Jackie Kennedy calling King a “phony” had no way, based on her broadcast, to understand what the controversy was really all about. Instead, they came away thinking the comment was based on some crazy scheme cooked up by Hoover. It is truly bizarre that Mitchell would so brazenly lie about the matter when the daughter of JFK and Jackie had put it in her book for all to read and see. But the liberal media are not alone in obscuring the facts. On the Fox News Channel, Bill O’Reilly blamed Hoover for the wiretaps. “He felt that the doctor was a communist,” O’Reilly said, ignoring the evidence of King’s communist associates and Bobby Kennedy’s role in approving the surveillance. His guest on the program was left-wing historian Kenneth C. Davis, who noted that the Kennedys were “very anti-communist.” Pressed on what was in the tapes, Davis said it apparently had to do with arranging a party with prostitutes. “We know that that’s part of the Martin Luther King legacy,” Davis acknowledged. But O’Reilly would have none of it. “Dr. King was a great man,” he countered, dismissing what the “gossip mongers” say, and “we don’t want to besmirch him in any way, shape or form.” Later, O’Reilly reiterated, “In totality, believe me, ladies and gentlemen, Dr. King was a great man.” One reason for the inability to face facts could be that President Obama is scheduled to preside over the official unveiling of the King memorial in Washington, D.C. on October 16, an event that will lead to tons of coverage about King and his legacy. Telling the truth about King, even though Caroline Kennedy has opened up this can of worms, could ruin journalism careers. Conservative media figures could find themselves accused of racism for talking about the black civil rights leader’s personal indiscretions and far-left associations. The MLK memorial is already mired in controversy because $10 million in taxpayer funds (out of the $120 million cost) and four acres of federal land were donated for a 30-foot tall socialist-type statue of King made in communist China by a Chinese artist with Chinese granite. It would appear that another scandal over King himself has to be avoided so the event can go forward without further embarrassment. One can be sure that the Mitchell method of slanting the news will be in full swing leading up to the King memorial dedication, and Obama and his media allies will strive to make sure that any mention of King’s communist connections and adultery is stricken from the public record. Black Lives Matter Means More Moolah and More Race Hatred
By Cliff Kincaid – June 9, 2020 Black billionaire and New Age thinker Oprah Winfrey is hosting a show on her own network on Tuesday and Wednesday to demand more money for blacks. “What do we want?” the promotional ad says. “What are our demands?” Tune in to find out. Another black billionaire, Black Entertainment Television (BET) founder Robert L. Johnson, has already been on Fox News and CNBC making demands for $14 trillion of slavery reparations for blacks. That’s a lot of moolah. None of this will contribute to unity in America. It will further divide America by generating a white backlash. Many whites resent special black privileges, such as affirmative action and special college scholarships. Jared Taylor, author of the book, White Identity, dares to talk about whites as people with special interests of their own, separate from various minority groups, and his website, American Renaissance, is already welcoming new interest and readers in the wake of the black riots. If President Trump does not condemn the push for reparations, some of his supporters will certainly abandon him. Meanwhile, members of the George Floyd family and their attorney Ben Crump are demanding U.N. intervention in the U.S. criminal justice system over the case. Floyd, a heavy drug user with a criminal record, died in police custody after he was apprehended for allegedly passing counterfeit money. There is an indication he scuffled with police before being pinned to the street by one officer. Nevertheless, the officers at the scene were fired and face charges in Floyd’s death. Some GOP Senators such as Mitt Romney are already bending to the mob, by “trying to craft legislation to change police practices and accountability following the deaths of black Americans at the hands of law enforcement,” as Newsmax put it. Yet police training has always been considered a local responsibility. With demands to defund the police getting traction in some liberal cities, one group, Win without War, is participating in a June 20 “Poor People’s Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival,” while declaring that “The police and the military operate on a shared bedrock of white supremacy that shields them from accountability for their violence and racism.” Hence, the Armed Forces are the next institution to be defunded. Democrat Joe Biden has been campaigning for president, mostly from his basement, as the peace candidate, and many people in the polls seem to think he can somehow bring unity to the country. But how? Other synonyms, just so you get the picture, are: cash, bread, cabbage, dough, notes, and wad. Come on, Mr. and Mrs. America, don’t you want racial harmony in America? More than half a million dead in a Civil War and $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs is apparently not enough. The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports, “The city's first survey of property damage shows that nearly 1,000 commercial properties in Minneapolis were damaged during the riots, including 52 businesses that were completely destroyed and 30 other locations that sustained severe damage.” The damage was estimated to exceed $500 million. With this in mind, the idea of having black billionaires like Oprah and Johnson move their homes and businesses to the Minneapolis inner city has been suggested Perhaps they can hire a few black people now out of work because their businesses were burned down. Minneapolis is one of America’s most liberal cities, the New York Times tells us. The Star Tribune reported that a Minneapolis manufacturing company, 7-Sigma Inc., has already decided to leave the city, “with the company's owner saying he can't trust public officials who allowed his plant to burn during the recent riots.” About 50 jobs are gone from this business alone. The Star Tribune said a $37 million affordable housing development was burned to the ground. It was advertised as a six-story project that included 189 apartments, including 38 affordable apartments available to households earning 60 percent or less of area median income. The project was also supposed to includes 8,600 square feet of ground-floor retail space. It’s all up in smoke. The property is (was) near the Minneapolis Third Police Precinct. That, too, was destroyed. A 23-year-old security guard named Branden Michael Wolfe has been federally charged with aiding and abetting arson at the Third Precinct. He is white. Another white man, 28-year-old Matthew Lee Rupert, has been charged with civil disorder, possession of unregistered explosives and participating in and organizing riots in Minneapolis. He came from Illinois. Perhaps the subject of white agitators exploiting the death of a black man is something Oprah Winfrey will address in her shows. That’s an interesting racial angle. Or perhaps they can discuss the hate crime hoax case of Jerome Kevin Jackson, a 54-year-old black man behind anti-black racist graffiti on the campus of Salisbury University in Maryland. FBI, Maryland State Police and local law enforcement agencies investigated the incident. They could have been used to crack down on black-on-black violence in Baltimore. In Chicago, on May 31, there were 18 murders in 24 hours, described by the Chicago Sun-Times as “the most violent day in 60 years in Chicago.” Oprah Winfrey, whose show was once based in Chicago, has given away some of her money on “philanthropy” but has also spent a significant part of her $2.5 billion fortune on the seven estates she owns. A site devoted to luxury homes says, “…with homes all over the country, from an equestrian estate in Montecito, CA to rural farm property in East Maui, HI and a gorgeous, yet over-the-top $14 million mansion in Telluride, CO, she [Oprah] has plenty of places to call home. However, it’s her large estate in Montecito, often referred to as the Promised Land, where she can most often be found.” This particular home is valued at $90 million. The RLJ Companies, founded by Robert L. Johnson, is headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, with affiliate operations in Charlotte, North Carolina; Little Rock, Arkansas; Los Angeles, California; San Juan, Puerto Rico; and Monrovia, Liberia. Perhaps he will consider moving these businesses to Minneapolis. Come on, Mr. Johnson, put your money where your mouth is. Needless to say, Oprah isn’t going to have any black conservatives on her special programs on Tuesday, June 9, and Part 2 on Wednesday, June 10 at 9 PM ET. Her guests, “leading figures in the Black community,” will include Stacey Abrams, Ava DuVernay, Keisha Lance Bottoms, David Oyelowo, and Rashad Robinson, president of Color of Change, described as the nation's largest online racial justice organization. It is a spin-off from the Citizen Engagement Laboratory, a group heavily supported by the George Soros-funded Open Society Foundations. The latter is now calling for Netflix to remove all cop shows from the streaming platform because they “heroize” police. It says “…we know from what’s going on in our country that police are not heroes.” In response to the announcement from the Minneapolis City Council that they plan to defund the Minneapolis Police Department, Robinson issued a statement in agreement and saying that “Policing is a violent institution that must end.” The long hot summer predicted by the Party for Socialism and Liberation is just getting started. “Nothing short of communist revolution will change society,” says the Progressive Labor Party. Pay up, kneel down, and beg forgiveness, and maybe your life will be saved. The choice is yours, America. *Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org Set Up: Who is "Peace Activist" Martin Gugino?
By Cliff Kincaid Martin Gugino is a “peace activist” and member of the Catholic Worker movement, which was founded by Dorothy Day. He was the subject of one of President Trump’s Tweets. Trump said he might have been an agent provocateur who was challenging the police when he appeared to be pushed down after a slight nudge from an officer. Gugino had refused to move. Two Buffalo police officers following orders given by Deputy Police Commissioner Joe Gramaglia to clear the square were subsequently charged with “assaulting” him. Here’s the full quote from John Evans, president of the Buffalo Police Benevolent Association: “Our position is these officers were simply following orders from Deputy Police Commissioner Joseph Gramaglia to clear the square. It doesn’t specify clear the square of men, 50 and under or 15 to 40. They were simply doing their job. I don’t know how much contact was made. He did slip in my estimation. He fell backwards.” After the two officers were suspended, the special squad on the Buffalo Police Department — the Emergency Response Team — resigned from their posts. Police union leadership wrote: “I know it has been said that the admin won’t back you. After witnessing first-hand how these two officers were treated, I can tell you, they tried to fuck over these guys like I have never seen in my 54 years.” “Don’t put them out there if you don’t want them to do the job,” President Evans wrote in a text to the publication Investigative Post. “This is an example of officers doing exactly what they’re supposed to and then getting charged. It’s so wrong.” Stefan I. Mychajliw, comptroller of Erie County, posted a video, saying “I stand strong behind these Buffalo Police officers. I refuse to let the shining city on a hill that brought my immigrant family here come under attack and destroyed from within. Cops are under attack from agitating, extremist radicals that crave chaos. Lawlessness must end.” Thousands turned out to support the officers. Carol Byrne is the author of The Catholic Worker Movement (1933-1980): A Critical Analysis and knows a lot about this group. It was founded by Dorothy Day, who “had an abortion as a young woman and at one point flirted with joining the Communist Party,” as noted by The New York Times. The Times story was headlined, “In Hero of the Catholic Left, a Conservative Cardinal Sees a Saint.” Day, a major figure in the “Catholic Worker” movement, died in 1980. In a letter obtained by this journalist, then-Virginia State Senator Richard H. “Dick” Black was so disgusted by the push for sainthood for Dorothy Day that he told the Pope on January 7, 2013, that he was “appalled” that “a woman of such loathsome character” would be considered for sainthood. Black, a retired Marine Corps colonel, noted that “Vatican archives are filled with reports of Christians martyred under the regimes that Dorothy Day supported. I am revolted by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ support for the canonization of a woman whose views supported the violent extermination of Christians throughout the world. I ask that these matters be carefully weighed so that the Holy See will not be inadvertently misled when considering the canonization of Dorothy Day.” As a Marine pilot, Black fought the communists. He flew 269 combat missions in Vietnam and was wounded during fierce ground fighting with the 1st Marine Regiment. “I am particularly concerned about her support for Ho Chi Minh,” Black said in his letter. He said that he had recently hosted a group of 12 Vietnamese men, each of whom served as senior officials in the Free Republic of Vietnam during the time when the North Vietnamese Communists overwhelmed Saigon in 1975. “Six of them were imprisoned in concentration camps no less severe than those of the Nazis in Germany,” he explained. Regarding Dorothy Day’s “flirtation” with the Communist Party, as the Times put it, Carol Byrne told this journalist, “…I have provided proof, drawn from archival evidence and other authentic sources, that even after her conversion to Catholicism, Day became a member of several socialist organizations and was actively involved in political groups (including trade unions) whose founders and leaders were predominantly Communist Party members. She also supported the causes of individual Communists who were in the pay of the Soviet Union.” Byrne went on, “This must be considered against the background of successive Popes who condemned communism as ‘intrinsically evil.’ They forbade Catholics from supporting Communists, and in July 1949 Pope Pius XII issued a decree of excommunication against anyone who collaborated with Communists or joined their associations. There is evidence to show that Day simply shrugged off the papal ban: she did not see communism as a real problem, or experience any moral quandary for a Catholic working in coalition with such groups professedly dedicated to ‘Justice and Peace.’” State Senator Black said he was extremely concerned that, for almost 50 years, Day was the editor of a pro-communist newspaper, the Catholic Worker. He noted that the 58l-page FBI file on Day “contains a recommendation that Dorothy Day be considered for custodial detention in the event of a national emergency.” His letter to the Pope went on to say that he was particularly concerned about Day’s “favorable writings regarding Lenin, Castro, Mao, and Ho Chi Minh. As you well know, each of the above dictators ordered the execution of Catholic priests among the millions of other Christians murdered by these regimes.” Carol Byrne confirmed that Day “supported the policies of hostile foreign powers operating from Moscow, Havana, Peking and Hanoi against her own country, the USA. She also wrote favorably about such socialist dictators as Lenin, Castro, Mao and Ho Chi Minh, even though they had all violently persecuted the Church in their respective countries. Nor could she in principle bring herself to condemn the social and economic ideals of Marxism.” Gugino was also identified as a member of the Western New York (WNY) Peace Center. Indeed, he is the Treasurer of the Latin American Solidarity Committee, a taskforce of the WNY Peace Center. It was established to support Communist Nicaragua. The Deep Dark Secrets of the Rich, Famous, and Powerful
By Cliff Kincaid - June 8, 2020 What I find interesting about the spurt of Jeffrey Epstein shows and programs over the last few weeks is the failure to expose his high-level connections in really high society. We learn some old news, such as that Bill Clinton and Donald J. Trump were once considered his friends. But holding Clinton responsible for his associations with Epstein may not be possible anymore, with Epstein six feet under and the FBI unwilling or unable to question his associates. President Trump was once seen palling around with Epstein but then kicked him out of his exclusive Mar-a-Lago club when he was told Epstein was hitting on young girls. Trump knew when and where to draw the line. We can’t say the same about 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate Joseph R. Biden, Jr., an accused rapist, female hair-sniffer, and admitted plagiarist who is famous for boasting at a Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) meeting in 2018 about withholding aid to Ukraine to force the firing of a prosecutor. This open display of corruption in foreign policy was not a big deal for the CFR, as many laughed in approval at the story. It was business as usual. Before we get into Epstein’s high-level connections, through such institutions as the CFR, let’s give currency speculator and hedge fund operator George Soros the benefit of the doubt. I have not found any direct evidence that Soros, a CFR member, was in any way associated with Epstein. Instead, his hedge fund subsidizes the CFR and provides the philosophical foundation for the protests, such as by underwriting Critical Resistance, which was founded by communist Angela Davis to abolish prisons. Davis was a prominent Communist Party USA member. That’s doesn’t bother Soros. The goal is to abolish the prisons and then defund the police so they can’t arrest the criminals. It illustrates the desire by some people with enormous money and influence to destabilize our society. They want to control us, but they don’t want to be controlled – or exposed. One has to be amazed at the hysteria gripping the country, including Rush Limbaugh, over alleged police racism. The way things are going, the July 4th holiday will be transformed into a national day or mourning. I submit the elites have something to hide, and this may be a factor in Jeffrey Epstein’s demise and the failure by the media to explore his high-level contacts. His victims describe how their sexual encounters with the rich and famous were taped for blackmail purposes. Do the Russians and the Chinese have those tapes? Soros mouthpiece Michael Vachon sent an email the other day entitled, “Soros Does Not Pay Protesters,” complaining about conservatives using Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms “to spread the now familiar and thoroughly debunked conspiracy theory that George Soros and the Open Society Foundations are paying people to protest, in this case over the murder of George Floyd.” I have not seen any direct evidence of Soros paying protesters. That part may be true but irrelevant. The other part of the story is far more important. Soros, an atheist, is a major funder of the Democratic Party, and much of Soros’s wealth has been put into causes such as abortion rights, gay rights, drug legalization, voting rights for felons, euthanasia and rights for immigrants and prostitutes. In other words, Soros doesn’t need to directly fund the protests; he finances the groups providing the protesters. What’s far more significant is the motivation. Rachel Ehrenfeld of the American Center for Democracy described it this way: “Pretending to support an ‘open society,’ Soros uses his philanthropy to ‘change’ or more accurately deconstruct the moral values and attitudes of the Western world, and particularly of the American people.” That helps explain why one of my own family members could show up at a protest with a sign saying, “Jesus Died For Black Lives.” She doesn’t understand what Black Lives Matters is all about. The Black Lives Matter group honors the communist terrorist Assata Shakur, who fled to Communist Cuba after killing a New Jersey cop. This betrays their real agenda – slavery for blacks and whites. Now the question becomes why someone who finances the Marxist destruction of our society should also be a member of a high-class organization such as the Council on Foreign Relations, which also counted Jeffrey Epstein among its prominent members. One answer is that it diverts the attention away from the immorality and rot and corruption in the establishment itself. Billionaire Bill Gates, a main cog in the coronavirus scare, which has suddenly faded from view, is not listed as a CFR member in the current membership roster. But his wife gave a speech to the organization in 2008 and his foundation has contributed to a CFR “Global Health and Foreign Policy” project. He was a close friend of Epstein and issued a statement trying to excuse that association. An interesting analysis of what is happening in America can be found in the letter to Trump from former U.S. Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Viganò, who said, “It will not be surprising if, in a few months, we learn once again that hidden behind these acts of vandalism and violence there are those who hope to profit from the dissolution of the social order so as to build a world without freedom…” That has to be the case, since the drug-addled career criminal George Floyd is not worthy of all this attention, as black conservative Candace Owens has so eloquently noted. There are conspiracies in the world, some of them operating quite openly, such as international communism. I am a signatory to the “Appeal for Nuremberg Trials for Communism,” designed to hold the communists accountable for killing 100 million people. Part of the appeal states, “Communism did not fall with the Berlin Wall. This ideology is still alive in the world, in states and parties that are openly communist and in political and cultural thought that minimizes and tries to erase the crimes of communism, as if it were a good idea which only happened to coincide with the rise of one brutal regime after another across decades and continents.” We know that one of the leading lights of the CFR, Alger Hiss, turned out to be a Soviet agent who co-founded he United Nations and worked at the side of President Franklin Roosevelt. Why is an organization like the CFR still in business? Why would someone like Soros join such an organization? Why would Jeffrey Epstein and Bill Gates do so? The answer has to be that it is considered a headquarters for those who are running the show but who may have a lot to hide themselves. Since many in the media belong to it, the public is kept in the dark about what happens behind closed doors in the members-only meetings. Trump was never a member of this club, the CFR, but he may have incriminating information about various members, stemming from the time when he knew Epstein and had commented publicly about Epstein’s attraction to young girls. He has a megaphone, Twitter, now reaching over 81.9 million people. This is why Trump’s Tweets are now being carefully scrutinized and even censored. He knows a lot more than he is telling.
Appeal for Nuremberg Trials for Communism
https://appeal.nurembergforcommunism.org/ Press inquiries: [email protected] The thirtieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall presents us with a valuable opportunity. We can not only make a desperately-needed contribution to historical memory, but also develop and support an anti-totalitarian culture, broad-ranging and forward-looking. We take this opportunity to propose the creation of Nuremberg Trials for Communism. The Nuremberg Trials, held from 1945 to 1946, tried and condemned the crimes of National Socialism and its leaders, handing down a definitive judicial, moral, and political judgment on that instance of totalitarianism. The trials made clear to the world that Nazism was evil and destructive to its own people, and would not be accepted anywhere in the world again. Communism, which has caused more deaths and mass suffering worldwide than Nazism for much longer, has never been called to account in a global court such as Nuremberg. Since 1917, communist or socialist dictatorships around the world have caused more than 100 million deaths. Not only are they responsible for widespread suppression of individual liberties and incitement of class hatred, but also for the genocide and mass killings inevitable under communist regimes. As we all know, genocides and massacres are universally recognized as crimes against humanity. Today, after the catastrophic results of so-called "real socialism" and of all the other dictatorships over time rooted in communist ideology (as today in places like Venezuela or Cuba), both historic and current events beg for a similarly final judgment – not only a verdict on the actions of individuals, but also a political and moral judgment on the inevitable results of this ideology. Communism’s crimes against humanity must be broadcast and punished. Communism did not fall with the Berlin Wall. This ideology is still alive in the world, in states and parties that are openly communist and in political and cultural thought that minimizes and tries to erase the crimes of communism, as if it were a good idea which only happened to coincide with the rise of one brutal regime after another across decades and continents. To push back against these apologist influences, we urge the creation of Nuremberg Trials for Communism, a global trial that scrutinizes the very real crimes of this ideology, assigns political and institutional responsibility for them, punishes its moral degeneracy, and makes clear to all communism’s intrinsic inhumanity and incompatibility with free societies. We are well aware that such a project would encounter practical difficulties and legal limitations. Even so, we believe that such barriers will not be able to stand in the way of a historic political, ethical, and cultural trial, which we see as a duty to humanity imposed upon us by historical conscience. In the name of millions exterminated in the past, and to safeguard future generations from a recurrence, Nuremberg Trials for Communism must be enacted as soon as possible. Thanks to Chiara Brown for the translation from Italian. |