Διεθνής Προβληματισμός: Σύγχρονος Αμερικανικός Πολιτικός Εμφύλιος;
– Σας έγραψα ήδη για τον διεξαγόμενο πολιτικό “εμφύλιο” στις Η.Π.Α. και ουσιαστικά για τον πόλεμο των “ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΚΩΝ”, κατά των “ΡΕΠΟΥΜΠΛΙΚΑΝΩΝ” και ειδικότερα κατά του Προέδρου ΤΡΑΜΠ, με στόχο να τον ρίξουν από την εξουσία και βασικά με στόχο να τον ΕΚΔΙΚΗΘΟΥΝ(!), επειδή τους ΝΙΚΗΣΕ, (ναι, όπως ακριβώς το διαβάζετε), λέγοντας στους γνήσιους ΑΜΕΡΙΚΑΝΟΥΣ πως “θέλω να ξανακάνω τις Η.Π.Α. μεγάλες“!
– Σας έγραψα, θα το θυμάστε, πως ο πατριώτης Αμερικανός Πρόεδρος ΤΡΑΜΠ, δεν ελέγχει ακόμα το Κράτος και σας εξήγησα πως αυτό είναι φυσικό, αφού οι “ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΚΟΙ” ελέγχουν τα πάντα, τα τελευταία 15 – 20 χρόνια και σίγουρα (και μάλιστα “πολύ δυνατά”) τα τελευταία 8!
– Το “βαθύ” -λεγόμενο- “Αμερικανικό Κράτος” ανήκει στους “ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΚΟΥΣ”, οι οποίοι ελέγχουν τις κρίσιμες Υπηρεσίες, όπως την NSA, το FBI, το Πεντάγωνο, την Φορολογική Υπηρεσία του Κράτους, κλπ.
– Βεβαίως, δεν σημαίνει τίποτα η όποια -τυχόν- αλλαγή των Αρχηγικών προσώπων στις όποιες Υπηρεσίες του Κράτους, (η οποία ασφαλώς έχει τη σημασία της, αφού δηλώνει την αλλαγή στην πολιτική τους, με βάση την ιδεολογία της νέας “Administration“), όταν όλοι σχεδόν οι υπηρετούντες, στα υπόψη οικοδομήματα, είναι ψηφοφόροι, οπαδοί, κλπ, των “ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΚΩΝ“!.. Καταλάβατε!
– Επίσης, τα όσα έγιναν από τον Ομπάμα και τους Κλίντον, (ειδικά τους δεύτερους, αυτά τα μεγάλα πολιτικά… χταπόδια, που τόλμησα να ονομάσω απ’ εδώ “πολιτική συμμορία”, εξηγώνας το), κατά του ΤΡΑΜΠ, μετά την εκλογή του, όταν κατέβασαν τους οπαδούς τους στους δρόμους των αμερικανικών πόλεων, μαύρους, άσπρους, κανονικούς και ομοφυλόφιλους, λεσβίες, νόμιμους και παρανόμους μετανάστες κλπ, κλπ, κλπ, ΔΕΝ ΕΧΟΥΝ ΞΑΝΑΣΥΜΒΕΙ ΣΤΟ ΑΜΕΡΙΚΑΝΙΚΟ ΚΡΑΤΟΣ, όπως και ούτε μέσα στην ΑΜΕΡΙΚΑΝΙΚΗ ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ!
– Ακόμα αγαπητοί, δεν ξανάγινε τέτοιος πολιτικός πόλεμος, σαν και αυτόν που δέχεται σήμερα ο Πρόεδρος ΤΡΑΜΠ, από τα διεθνή ΜΜΕ, (αλλά και από τα περισσσότερα των αμερικανικών, το μείζον των οποίων ελέγχουν οι “ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΚΟΙ“), “διεθνή ΜΜΕ“ τα οποία ελέγχουν οι “Διεθνείς Εβραίοι“, οι “Οικονομικοί Κοσμοκράτορες”, αριστεροί, όπως έχουμε πει, στην όποια πολιτική τους σκέψη, η οποία σχετίζεται άμεσα – αμεσότατα με τα παγκόσμια οικονομικά τους συμφέροντα, τα οποία ικανοποιούνταν σχεδόν απολύτως με τους Κλίντον και Ομπάμα!
– Διανοείστε φίλοι μου, ο κάθε τελευταίος δημοσιογραφίσκος, να προσβάλλει από τις ΤV της Πατρίδος του, ή από τις ε-φ, τα ραδιόφωνα, κλπ, (και σε πολλές των περιπτώσεων με αναφορές είτε φτιαγμένων, είτε ψευδών ειδήσεων), τον Αμερικανό Πρόεδρο, και όχι συγκεκριμένα τον Κο ΤΡΑΜΠ, όπως συμβαίνει τώρα, αλλά γενικά μιλάω και εννοώ τον κάθε Αμερικανό Πρόεδρο; Το διανοείστε; Κάποτε όλοι αυτοί οι… Κοι και οι… Κες θα ήταν επαγγελματικά “τελειωμένοι”, αφού ο Πρόεδρος των Η.Π.Α., και ορθώς, προστατευόταν, ως θεσμός, από το ίδιο το αμερικανικό Κράτος!
– Προκαλεί λοιπόν δέος το πού μπορεί να οδηγηθεί και η Αμερική, ως Αμερική, (στο εσωτερικό της), αφού είναι η ισχυροτέρα -θεωρητικά πάντα- των υπαρχουσών σήμερα παγκοσμίως δυνάμεων, αλλά και σκέψεις που τρομάζουν, (όπως σχετικά με την “παγκόσμια ειρήνη”), το γεγονός να προσβάλλεται με σκαιότατο τρόπο ο σημερινός εκλεγμένος Αμερικανός Πρόεδρος ΤΡΑΜΠ, ο οποίος, οφείλουμε να ομολογήσουμε, πως “εν πολλοίς” απεκάλυψε, (από την αμερικανική προεκλογική περίοδο ακόμα), το βρώμικο ρόλο των δημοσιογράφων, (Ο.Κ. όχι όλων, αλλά των περισσοτέρων), Αμερικανών και μη!
– Τώρα “βρήκαν” να τον κατηγορήσουν, λέγοντάς μας, πως ο Πρόεδρος ΤΡΑΜΠ έδωσε στον Ρ/ΥΠΕΞ Λαβρώφ, στην τελευταία συνάντησή τους, στις Η.Π.Α., απόρρητες πληροφορίες σχετικά με τον “İSİS”!
α. Πού το ξέρουν, αλλά και ποιοί το διέδωσαν, το “κυκλοφόρησαν”, ως γεγονός;
Άρα οι Υπηρεσίες του δεν τον “φυλάνε”, αφού έχουμε τέτοιας μορφής… διαρροές. Εξηγούμαι: Ακόμα και αυτό να συνέβη, αν η NSA ελεγχόταν απ’ αυτόν δεν θα διέρρεε ποτέ κάτι τέτοιο! Ή απλώς, ποτέ δεν συνέβη κάτι τέτοιο, και ό,τι ελέχθη εναντίον του Αμερικανού Προέδρου, ΧΑΛΚΕΥΘΗΚΕ από τους εχθρούς του)!
β. Ας δεχτώ τώρα, ως υπόθεση εργασίας, ότι ο Πρόεδρος ΤΡΑΜΠ έδωσε απόρρητες πληροφορίες στη Ρωσία, για τον “ISIS”! Ρωτάω:
– Πού είναι το κακό; Όλοι μας, ως λογική “Παγκόσμια Κοινότητα”, δεν θέλουμε το τέλος των κτηνών του “ISIS”;
– Ακόμα: “Δεν συνεργάζονται, όπως ξέρουμε και όπως οι ίδιες έχουν διακηρύξει, οι Η.Π.Α. και η Ρωσία, για το τέλος της υόπψη τρομοκρατικής Οργάνωσης”; Ναι ή Όχι; ; Άρα, που είναι το κακό; Και,
– Τί είδους τάχα απόρρητες πληροφορίες έδωσε ο ΤΡΑΜΠ, στον Πούτιν; Γιατί δεν μας λένε, να… γελάσουμε; Η μόνη απόρρητη πληροφορία, που θα μπορούσε να έχει δοθεί και να εθεωρείτο απόρρητη, θα ήταν μια αναφορά πως ο “ISIS” είναι αμερικανικό κατασκεύασμα (της Κ-Β Ομπάμα) ή των Ισραηλινών!
– Για μένα αυτό δεν υπάρχει!!! Αλλά και αν πούμε πως υπάρχει ως γεγονός και πως ειπώθηκε κάτι τέτοιο από τον ΤΡΑΜΠ, ρωτάω, “οι Ρώσοι είναι χαζοί και δεν θα έχουν / δεν θα είχαν σκεφτεί μια τέτοια εκδοχή”; Θα μου πείτε, ο ΤΡΑΜΠ, στην περίπτωση αυτή, αν κάτι τέτοιο συνέβη, επιβεβαίωσε κακώς(!) και σίγουρα δεν θα έπρεπε, κάτι που ο μεγάλος τους αντίπαλος (ο Ρώσος δηλαδή), απλώς… υποψιαζόταν!.. Εδώ μόνον υπάρχει ΘΕΜΑ για τον ΤΡΑΜΠ, λέω εγώ, (μόνον αν ο ΤΡΑΜΠ είπε κάτι τέτοιο στον Λαβρώφ), αλλά και οι κατήγοροί του, Αμερικανοί -πιθανώς- πράκτορες, ΗΛΙΘΙΩΣ(!) θα έλεγα (ανεπίτρεπτο για εκπαιδευμένα άτομα ΜΥ), ανακοινώνουν, κάτι που το εκτιμώ ως “100 φορές χειρότερο”, την υπόψη δηλαδή διαρροή (υπαρκτή ή ανύπαρκτη) του Προέδρου και ουσιαστικά ζημιώνουν χειρότερα, με την “απελευθέρωση” του θέματος, (ξαναλέω αν υπήρξε), την αμερικανική ασφάλεια!..
– Και επειδή κάποιοι “έμπλεξαν” με το θέμα, πάλι, τον Τουρκόφιλο Στρατηγό (ε.α.) και πρώην Σύμβουλο του Προέδρου, ΦΛΙΝ και τυχόν πληροφορίες, σχετικές με τον “ISIS”, που πιθανώς ο Στρατηγός να είχε δώσει στους Ρώσους και που είχε πάρει από τους Ισραηλινούς, θυμίζω πως ο μεν Στρατηγός αποπέμφθηκε από τον Αμερικανό Πρόεδρο, ενώ και ο πρώην Αρχηγός της “ΜΟΣΑΝΤ”, ο Ντάνι ΓΙΑΤΟΜ, αν δεν σφάλλω, ανέφερε πως δεν έχει υπάρξει διαρροή προς τους Ρώσους, από τον Στρατηγό αυτόν, προσθέτοντας -ΠΡΟΣΕΞΤΕ(!)- πως η “μεταφορά πληροφοριών” από το… “ΙΝΣΤΙΤΟΥΤΟ”, στις αμερικανικές αντίστοιχες Υπηρεσίες Πληροφοριών, γίνεται κάτω από συγκεκριμένες διαδικασίες, με πολλές “δικλείδες ασφαλείας”!..
– Φίλοι μου!
– Τίποτα ΟΥΣΙΑΣΤΙΚΟ δεν υπάρχει, σας βεβαιώ! Υπάρχει όμως κάτι και είναι αρκούντως σοβαρό! Τί υπάρχει;
– Υπάρχει, όπως βαθιά πιστεύω, “στήσιμο” της όλης υπόθεσης, από το Επιτελείο της Χ. ΚΛΙΝΤΟΝ (αυτούς που αποκάλεσα… “ΚΛΑΝΤΟΝ”, στην εποχή του Γουάϊατ ΕΡΠ), λόγω του ότι η Κα αυτή, η πρώην ΥΠΕΞ των Η.Π.Α., είχε κατηγορηθεί, και ΟΡΘΟΤΑΤΑ(!), για τα κρατικά απόρρητα έγγραφα, που έπαιρνε σπίτι της, για τον προσωπικό Η/Υ της και τα λογισμικά του και όλα τα κρατικά απόρρητα που αυτός ΚΑΚΩΣ περιείχε, αλλά και για τα θλιβερά γεγονότα στη ΛΙΒΥΗ, με τα οποία προσβλήθηκε βαριά η αμερικανική εξωτερική πολιτική, σε ένα συμβάν που είχε νεκρό μέχρι και τον Αμερικανό Πρόξενο, στην αφρικανική αυτήν χώρα, των 100 περίπου… αρχηγικών Φυλών!..
– Έτσι, οι της Κλίντον, του “έστησαν” του νυν Αμερικανού Προέδρου, και το θέμα με την εμπλοκή των Ρώσων Χάκερς, στις αμερικανικές εκλογές του Νοεμβρίου, του 2016, κλπ! Θα το θυμάστε!..
– Ακόμα να σας θυμήσω ότι ο Πρόεδρος ΤΡΑΜΠ, εντελώς ανεξήγητα, κατηγορήθηκε για τον Εβραίο γαμπρό του! Αυτό ειλικρινά δεν το κατάλαβα! Ίσως να μην κατέχω, που δεν νομίζω, το όλον της υπόψη κατηγορίας, το οποίο πιστεύω πως έχει το ίδιο… “Κέντρο”, το ίδιο… “Χαλκείο”, αλλά αν αυτό δεν είναι ΡΑΤΣΙΣΜΟΣ και ΑΝΤΙΣΗΜΙΤΙΣΜΟΣ, τότε ποιός είναι; (Απόδειξη πως οι “ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΚΟΙ” έχουν… ξεφύγει)!..
– Δυστυχώς, η Κα ΚΛΙΝΤΟΝ, (της το γράφω με πολύ σεβασμό), δεν θα ζημιώσει / δεν θα βλάψει με τη συνεχή αυτή υπονομευτική συμπεριφορά της κατά του νυν Αμερικανού Προέδρου, μόνον τον Πρόεδρο ΤΡΑΜΠ, αλλά ασφαλέστατα την ίδια την Πατρίδα της, όπως και ΚΥΡΙΩΣ(!) την παγκόσμια ειρήνη, αφού οι όποιοι αμφισβητίες της αμερικανικής παγκόσμιας κυριαρχίας, θα θελήσουν να επωφεληθούν, “κατά το δοκούν”, από την λογική και σίγουρη ΑΔΥΝΑΜΙΑ, που θα παρουσιάσουν οι Η.Π.Α., ως αποτέλεσμα του ακήρυχτου αυτού σύγχρονου “αμερικανικού εμφυλίου”! Η όποια αρνητική εξέλιξη στο διεθνές πεδίο, για τις Η.Π.Α., λόγω αυτού του “εμφυλίου”, θα αντανακλά αμέσως στο σημερινό Πρόεδρο ΤΡΑΜΠ, και άρα η ΕΚΔΙΚΗΣΗ της Χίλαρυ θα είναι… ΟΛΟΚΛΗΡΩΤΙΚΗ, όπως αυτή σίγουρα θα νομίζει!.. Όμως:
– Η μεν Κα Κλίντον θα πρέπει ΑΜΕΣΑ να λογικευτεί, ώστε να μην γκρεμίσει το αμερικανικό Κράτος, με όλες τις παραπάνω συνέπειες της ανοίκειας στάσης της, που ακροθιγώς ανέφερα!
– Ο δε Κος ΤΡΑΜΠ θα πρέπει να γίνει Πολιτικός ΑΜΕΣΩΣ(!), ει δυνατόν, καταλαβαίνετε τί εννοώ, αντιλαμβανόμενος πως ο κόσμος της πολιτικής είναι δυστυχώς ΑΠΟΛΥΤΩΣ(!) και στην εποχή μας, ΒΡΩΜΙΚΟΣ και πως δεν είναι… αγνές ιδέες και ιδεολογήματα, όπως απ’ εκείνες που τον διέκριναν, όπως αυτές που έδειξε πως τον διακατέχουν, για την Πατρίδα του και ΜΠΡΑΒΟ του(!), αν θέλει να “επιβιώσει” πολιτικά και να προσφέρει και στην παγκόσμια κοινότητα!!!
– Μακάρι, ο σοφός (δυστυχώς όμως και ΜΙΣΕΛΛΗΝΑΣ) Χένρυ ΚΙΣΣΙΝΤΖΕΡ να τον συμβούλευσε στην πρόσφατη συνάντησή τους, σωστά, λαμβάνοντας όμως και πρωτοβουλία, παρά την ηλικία του, “κρατήματος” του… “αφηνιασμένου αλόγου”, που λέγεται Χ. ΚΛΙΝΤΟΝ! (Η οποία -εκτιμώ- πως θα έπρεπε να ασχολείται με το θέμα της υγείας της και με την οικογένειά της πια, που τόσα χρόνια, λόγω της εμπλοκής της στην πολιτική, στερήθηκε)!
– Ας σας θυμίσω τέλος, (διότι έχει την αξία της νομίζω ως αναφοράς), τον πολύ σοβαρό -πράγματι- σχολιασμό του θέματος της δήθεν -πάντα κατ’ εμάς- διαρροής πληροφοριών, για τον “ISIS”, του ΤΡΑΜΠ, προς τους Ρώσους. Ο Πούτιν λοιπόν μίλησε για αμερικανική “πολιτική σχιζοφρένεια”! Παρ’ ότι δεν έχω σε πολύ εκτίμηση τις όποιες πολιτικές… αναλύσεις των Ρώσων, που τους θεωρώ πνευματικά… “βαρείς” και ας μου το συγχωρήσουν, εκτιμώντας την ειλικρίνειά μου, νομίζω ότι αυτήν τη φορά ο Ρώσος Πρόεδρος στόχευσε “κέντρο”, πέτυχε “διάνα”!
– Μην νομίζετε φίλοι μου πως και ο Πούτιν νοιώθει άνετα, όταν βλέπει να… σπαράσσεται το εσωτερικό των Η.Π.Α., όταν βλέπει να διακυβεύονται οι παγκόσμιες ισορροπίες, ακόμα και αν η διασάλευσή τους, φαινομενικά πάντα, δείχνει να τον συμφέρουν, αφού “μιλάμε” για “το… αντίπαλον δέος”! Αλλά αυτό θα το αναλύσουμε κάποια άλλη φορά!..
– Φίλοι μου!
– Όπως και αν έχει, η όποια δικιά μας προσωπική θέαση της σημερινής κακής αμερικανικής εσωτερικής πολιτικής κατάστασης, είναι μια εκτίμηση… “εκ του -γεωγραφικού- μακρόθεν”!
– Προς τούτο αγαπητοί, σας παρουσιάζω μια -κατ’ εμέ- άκρως ενδιαφέρουσα άποψη – θέση, σχετικά με τον… “εμφύλιο” αυτόν, αμέσως παρακάτω και σας προτείνω να την μελετήσετε!..
– “Πάμε” λοιπόν! Σας ΠΡΟ-ΕΙ-ΔΟ-ΠΟΙ-Ω, πως πρέπει να οπλιστείτε με ΥΠΟΜΟΝΗ και ΘΕΛΗΣΗ, διότι το κείμενο είναι μεγάλο!..
“The War of Two Americas“
A New Freedom Center Pamphlet By Daniel Greenfield
Obama Plans to Rule America Outside the White House
- The Civil War is Here
- The “Resistance” Democrats are a Terrorist Party
- #ObamaGate: Exposing the Obama Deep State
- Trump vs Obama
- The Left’s Culture of Contempt
- Winning the Civil War of Two Americas
- How George Soros Destroyed the Democratic Party
1 America is in the middle of a civil war. It’s not just a struggle between political parties. It’s a clash of political civilizations. The totalitarian left has rejected the outcome of two presidential elections and our entire system of government. It doesn’t believe that sanctuary states and cities have to obey the law. But it demands that we obey its will. And if we don’t, its thugs will audit us, boycott us and beat us. It has spied on President Trump and lied about him. It has used every agency of the government, from the IRS to the EPA, to punish its enemies and enforce its radical agenda. The left rules as a shadow government of judges and reporters, bureaucrats and activists. Its tactics range from riots in the streets to subversion in government agencies.
2 And it must be stopped. Today there are two Americas. One has free speech and the other doesn’t. One has elections and the other doesn’t. In one America, the people elect their leaders. In the other they are appointed for life. If the Unamerica of the left isn’t defeated, there will be only one America. And it will be a place without the Constitution, without free speech or free elections. This is the war of the two Americas. And only one America can survive.
3 1. Obama Plans to Rule America Outside the White House Barack Obama has two faces. After Trump’s victory and Hillary’s defeat, the public Obama has been gracious and diplomatic. His condescending lectures to Trump are couched in praise. He echoed the feeling of millions on both sides when he said, “We are now all rooting for his success”. That’s a lie. Or rather a disguise. Obama and his aides had, in one insider narrative, decided to don the “mask of decorum”. The contempt for Trump still seeps through the mask. And the mask hides Obama’s next big move. The next phase of his campaign will not be fought from the White House, but against the White House.
4 The other Obama is emerging in conference calls with his supporters. “One of the challenges that I’ve discovered being president is I’d like to be organizer-in-chief, but it’s hard,” he said in one call. Obama can no longer be commander-in-chief. Instead he’s plotting to become organizer-in-chief. The infrastructure for the organization was put into place long before anyone thought that Hillary might lose. Organizing for Action gave him his own organizing hub. If Hillary had won, it would have been a pressure group. Now that Trump won, it’s an axis to build a personal counterrevolution around. In his post-election conference call with his OFA troops, Obama told them, “I’m giving you like a week and a half 5 to get over it”. Then it would be time to “move forward not only to protect what we’ve accomplished, but also to see this as an opportunity”. What opportunity could there be in Trump’s win? Obama is the only major national figure still standing among the Democrats. After Hillary’s defeat, he’s worked hard to attribute the loss to her shortcomings, not his policies and decisions. If he’s going to dictate the future of his party, he can’t afford to be blamed for its latest disaster. In conventional politics, Obama is done. There’s no way back into the White House. And Hillary’s fate won’t leave much enthusiasm for nominating the uncharismatic spouse of a charismatic ex-president. But Obama is not a conventional 6 politician.
He’s an organizer and a campaigner at the vanguard of a radical movement that seeks to control traditional institutions, but doesn’t feel bound by them. Unlike Bill Clinton, his plans don’t begin and end with the White House. As an organizer, Obama is equipped to build bases of power outside traditional institutions. And that is exactly what he is doing. The demoralization of the Democrats is, as Obama put it, an opportunity. Social chaos is a time for the left to overthrow and undermine traditional institutions. Fear, anger and despair are radicalizing. The left has always operated by throwing bombs and then profiting from the fallout. That’s Obama’s agenda. Having wrecked the country and the Democrats, he sees that not as a setback, but as an opportunity.
7 “The network that you represent, you’re perfectly poised to do that,” Obama told his OFAers. “In other words, now is the time for some organizing.” While the leftist rioters in the streets are garnering the most attention, the real threat comes from the network of staffers dubbed Obama Anonymous which are beginning to organize and coordinate. OFA is Obama’s equivalent of the Clinton Foundation. The Clintons built Clintonworld around staffers, but its goal was harvesting money. Obama Inc. is being built around organizing and activism. It will function like a traditional leftist movement, merging influence operations with crowdsourced mobilization. OFA will be far more dangerous in the wild than the Clinton Foundation ever was. The Clintons hoped to ride back to power on a giant wave of money.
8 Obama is taking a much more radical course. The staffers inside and outside government are being wired into the networks of Obama Inc. They expect Obama to lead them back from the wilderness and into the halls of power. He’s told them so. “I’m going to be constrained in what I do with all of you until I am again a private citizen. But that’s not so far off,” he assured them. “I’m still fired up and I’m still ready to go.” His next comments promised that radical political change could and would take place. Obama isn’t going to retire. He’s not going to spend years puttering around with a presidential library. He’s not even going to set up a Clintonesque slush fund and try to make his wife 9 president. Instead he wants to force radical change from outside the White House by exploiting his radical network. If Obama succeeds, then he gets another shot at picking his White House successor. But beyond that, he’s been handed the keys to an organizing machine that will allow him to set even more of the agenda for his party than ever before. And he has a cause that is sending the party reeling back into his arms. Obama believes that he can rule America from outside the White House. And he might be right. Political norms and old rules have been falling faster than leaves in an autumn wind. If Obama sets out to move the center of power outside the White House and into an organization that will 10 control national politics through the left, it would be dangerous to assume that he can’t and won’t succeed. The Democrats didn’t respond to their defeat, one of a sequence, by trying to move to the center. Instead there is every sign that they are moving further to the left. After losing their presence in much of the country, they are ceasing to be a national party and are becoming a nationalizing party. Their agenda is to move power from local areas to central ones, from towns and suburbs to the cities, from states to D.C. and from locally elected legislators in D.C. to the satellite bureaucracies of the Federal government. Obama sees Hillary’s defeat as an opportunity to burn the last Dem bridges with the larger country and its “bitter clingers”, to double down on nationalizing power and to define the 11 political narrative around the agendas of urban elites. The left crippled the Democrats. Now it wants to utterly consume them. Barack Obama has been coy about his plans to the media, but the “faithful” are getting clearer signals. “You’re going to see me early next year, and we’re going to be in a position where we can start cooking up all kinds of great stuff to do.” The election was a catastrophic disaster for the Democrats, but it opened all sorts of doors for Obama. Hillary’s defeat removes the Clintons, his only real internal rivals, off the stage. Trump’s triumph in working class areas cuts more ties with the traditional Dem base and transforms it into a party of left-wing urban elites and 12 their radical agendas. And the popular figures on the left, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Keith Ellison, lack his national stature, speaking skills and organization. Obama will move to consolidate the left. And then the Democrats. He will function as a president-in-exile heading up the opposition to Trump. When it comes to verbally challenging Trump, Obama will be more likely to be interviewed and heard than Warren or Schumer. And his people will coordinate responses across the left from street level organizing to think tanks and policy moves. Obama believes that he can find the key to beating Trump in the traditional tactics of the left. He is not done transforming America. And America isn’t done with him 13 yet.
- The Civil War is Here A civil war has begun. This civil war is very different than the last one. There are no cannons or cavalry charges. The left doesn’t want to secede. It wants to rule. Political conflicts become civil wars when one side refuses to accept the existing authority. The left has rejected all forms of authority that it doesn’t control. The left has rejected the outcome of the last two presidential elections won by Republicans. It has rejected the judicial authority of the Supreme Court when it decisions don’t accord with its agenda. It rejects the legislative authority of Congress when it is not dominated by the left. 14 It rejected the Constitution so long ago that it hardly bears mentioning. It was for total unilateral executive authority under Obama. And now it’s for states unilaterally deciding what laws they will follow. (As long as that involves defying immigration laws under Trump, not following them under Obama.) It was for the sacrosanct authority of the Senate when it held the majority. Then it decried the Senate as an outmoded institution when the Republicans took it over. It was for Obama defying the orders of Federal judges, no matter how well grounded in existing law, and it is for Federal judges overriding any order by Trump on any grounds whatsoever. It was for Obama penalizing whistleblowers, but now undermining the government from within has become “patriotic”. 15 There is no form of legal authority that the left accepts as a permanent institution. It only utilizes forms of authority selectively when it controls them. But when government officials refuse the orders of the duly elected government because their allegiance is to an ideology whose agenda is in conflict with the President and Congress, that’s not activism, protest, politics or civil disobedience; it’s treason. After losing Congress, the left consolidated its authority in the White House. After losing the White House, the left shifted its center of authority to Federal judges and unelected government officials. Each defeat led the radicalized Democrats to relocate from more democratic to less democratic institutions. This isn’t just hypocrisy. That’s 16 a common political sin. Hypocrites maneuver within the system. The left has no allegiance to the system. It accepts no laws other than those dictated by its ideology. Democrats have become radicalized by the left. This doesn’t just mean that they pursue all sorts of bad policies. It means that their first and foremost allegiance is to an ideology, not the Constitution, not our country or our system of government. All of those are only to be used as vehicles for their ideology. That’s why compromise has become impossible. Our system of government was designed to allow different groups to negotiate their differences. But those differences were supposed to be based 17 around finding shared interests. The most profound of these shared interests was that of a common country based around certain civilizational values. The left has replaced these Founding ideas with radically different notions and principles. It has rejected the primary importance of the country. As a result it shares little in the way of interests or values. Instead it has retreated to cultural urban and suburban enclaves where it has centralized tremendous amounts of power while disregarding the interests and values of most of the country. If it considers them at all, it is convinced that they will shortly disappear to be replaced by compliant immigrants and college indoctrinated leftists who will form a permanent demographic majority for its agenda. 18 But it couldn’t wait that long because it is animated by the conviction that enforcing its ideas is urgent and inevitable. And so it turned what had been a hidden transition into an open break. In the hidden transition, its authority figures had hijacked the law and every political office they held to pursue their ideological agenda. The left had used its vast cultural power to manufacture a consensus that was slowly transitioning the country from American values to its values and agendas. The right had proven largely impotent in the face of a program which corrupted and subverted from within. The left was enormously successful in this regard. It was so successful that it lost all sense of proportion and decided to be open about its views and to launch a political power struggle after losing an 19 election. The Democrats were no longer being slowly injected with leftist ideology. Instead the left openly took over and demanded allegiance to open borders, identity politics and environmental fanaticism. The exodus of voters wiped out the Democrats across much of what the left deemed flyover country. The left responded to democratic defeats by retreating deeper into undemocratic institutions, whether it was the bureaucracy or the corporate media, while doubling down on its political radicalism. It is now openly defying the outcome of a national election using a coalition of bureaucrats, corporations, unelected officials, celebrities and reporters that are based out of its cultural and political enclaves. 20 It has responded to a lost election by constructing sanctuary cities and states thereby turning a cultural and ideological secession into a legal secession. But while secessionists want to be left alone authoritarians want everyone to follow their laws. The left is an authoritarian movement that wants total compliance with its dictates with severe punishments for those who disobey. The left describes its actions as principled. But more accurately they are ideological. Officials at various levels of government have rejected the authority of the President of the United States, of Congress and of the Constitution because those are at odds with their radical ideology. Judges have cloaked this rejection in law. Mayors and governors are not even pretending that their actions are lawful. 21 The choices of this civil war are painfully clear. We can have a system of government based around the Constitution with democratically elected representatives. Or we can have one based on the ideological principles of the left in which all laws and processes, including elections and the Constitution, are fig leaves for enforcing social justice. But we cannot have both. Some civil wars happen when a political conflict can’t be resolved at the political level. The really bad ones happen when an irresolvable political conflict combines with an irresolvable cultural conflict. That is what we have now. The left has made it clear that it 22 will not accept the lawful authority of our system of government. It will not accept the outcome of elections. It will not accept these things because they are at odds with its ideology and because they represent the will of large portions of the country whom they despise. The question is what comes next. The last time around growing tensions began to explode in violent confrontations between extremists on both sides. These extremists were lauded by moderates who mainstreamed their views. The first Republican president was elected and rejected. The political tensions led to conflict and then civil war. The left doesn’t believe in secession. It’s an authoritarian political movement that has lost democratic 23 authority. There is now a political power struggle underway between the democratically elected officials and the undemocratic machinery of government aided by a handful of judges and local elected officials. What this really means is that there are two competing governments; the legal government and a treasonous antigovernment of the left. If this political conflict progresses, agencies and individuals at every level of government will be asked to demonstrate their allegiance to these two competing governments. And that can swiftly and explosively transform into an actual civil war. There is no sign that the left understands or is troubled by the implications of the conflict it has initiated. And there are few signs that 24 Democrats properly understand the dangerous road that the radical left is drawing them toward. The left assumes that the winners of a democratic election will back down rather than stand on their authority. It is unprepared for the possibility that democracy won’t die in darkness. Civil wars end when one side is forced to accept the authority of the other. The left expects everyone to accept its ideological authority. Conservatives expect the left to accept Constitutional authority. The conflict is still political and cultural. It’s being fought in the media and within the government. But if neither side backs down, then it will go beyond words as both sides give contradictory orders. The left is a treasonous movement. The Democrats became a treasonous 25 organization when they fell under the sway of a movement that rejects our system of government, its laws and its elections. Now their treason is coming to a head. They are engaged in a struggle for power against the government. That’s not protest. It’s not activism. The old treason of the sixties has come of age. A civil war has begun. This is a primal conflict between a totalitarian system and a democratic system. Its outcome will determine whether we will be a free nation or a nation of slaves. 26 3. The “Resistance” Democrats are a Terrorist Party What does #Resistance really mean? It means the overthrow of our government. In this century, Democrats rejected the outcomes of two presidential elections won by Republicans. After Bush won, they settled for accusing him of being a thief, an idiot, a liar, a draft dodger and a mass murderer. They fantasized about his assassination and there was talk of impeachment. But elected officials gritted their teeth and tried to get things done. This time around it’s “radically” different. The official position, from the Senate to the streets, is “Resistance”. Leftist media outlets are feeding the faithful a fantasy that President Trump 27 will be brought down. There is fevered speculation about the 25th Amendment, a coup or impeachment due to whatever scandal has been manufactured last. This fantasy is part clickbait. Leftist media outlets are feeding the worst impulses of their readers. But there is a bigger and more disturbing radical endgame. The left can be roughly divided into moderates and radicals. The distinction doesn’t refer to outcome; both want very similar totalitarian societies with very little personal freedom and a great deal of government control. Instead it’s about the tactics that they use to get to that totalitarian system. The “moderates” believe in working from within the system to transform the country into a leftist 28 tyranny. The “radicals” believe that the system is so bad that it cannot even be employed for progressive ends. Instead it needs to be discredited and overthrown by radicalizing a revolutionary base. Radicals radicalize moderates by discrediting the system they want to be a part of. Where moderates seek to impose a false consensus from within the system, radicals attack the system through violent protests and terrorism. Their goal is to set off a chain of confrontations that make it impossible to maintain civil society and polarize the backlash and chaos into consolidating the left for total war. That is what “Resistance” actually means. A similar program implemented in Europe, with a covert alliance between Communists and Nazis, led to the deaths of millions, the destruction of much of 29 Europe and the temporary triumph of the left. The radical left’s efforts in America caused death and destruction but, despite the sympathy of many liberals for terrorist groups such as the Weathermen and the Black Panthers, failed to escalate because the majority of Democrats and even liberals did not accept the premise that our system was illegitimate. That began to change this century. 64% of Democrats insisted that President Bush had not been legitimately elected. 49% declared that he was not a legitimate president. 22% vowed never to accept him no matter what he might do. After 9/11, over half of Democrats believed that Bush had known about or 30 been involved in the attacks. Anywhere from two-thirds to a quarter of the Democrats rejected the results of a presidential election, rejected the president and suspected him of conspiring to murder thousands of Americans. The left was winning. Much of its natural “moderate” base viewed our government as illegitimate. The left has declared that President Trump’s victory is illegitimate. The response is “Resistance”. That covers violent anti-government protesters, states declaring that they are no longer bound to follow Federal immigration law and Senators obstructing for the sake of obstruction. It’s easy to get lost in the partisan 31 turmoil of the moment, but it’s important to understand the implications. If two presidential elections were illegitimate, then our entire system of elections might be illegitimate. And indeed the left made exactly that case with its attack on the Electoral College. The left pressed Dems to oppose President Trump for the sake of opposition. The goal wasn’t just spite. It was to break the government. When the left forced Senate Dems to filibuster President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, the filibuster became the first casualty of the fight. The goal of the radicals was to make bipartisan legislative activity impossible. Senate Democrats adopted the position of the radical left that their mission was wrecking institutions to deny them to Republicans rather than governing. 32 Once that was done, the radical left could unveil arguments such as, “The United States Senate is a Failed Institution”. Much like our system of elections and every other part of our government. The radical left’s goal is to convince its natural base that our system of government is illegitimate. It knows that this can’t be limited to the theoretical level of ideology. Instead it must radicalize by demonstrating it. It does not seriously believe that President Trump will be removed from office by the 25th Amendment or any other aspect of the system. Instead it is feeding these fantasies so that when they fall through those on the left who believed in them will be further radicalized by their failure. And Democrats have become 33 complicit in the radical left’s program to bring down the government. They have normalized the radical leftist position that our system is illegitimate. They have moved into the second phase of the left’s program of demonstrating that illegitimacy through confrontation. The final phase is to overthrow the system through actions ranging from protests to terrorism. This is Cloward-Piven institutional sabotage on a whole other scale. The goal is to collapse our entire system of government. And the Democrats have climbed on board with it using President Trump as a pretext. But regardless of which Republican had won, the end result would have been the same. The left makes its opposition to the Constitution, the election process and 34 the rule of law into a crisis. And then it uses that crisis to demand a new system. It has pursued this approach successfully in local areas and in narrower causes. This is not the first time that it has embarked on such a project on the national level. But this is the first time that it has the full support of a major national political party. And that is the true crisis that we face. The left’s endgame is a totalitarian state. Its “moderates” pursue one by peaceful means only so long as they are allowed to hijack the system. When an election fails to go their way, the radicals brandish it as proof that the system has failed and that violent revolution is the only answer. But what was once the obscure 35 behavior of a deranged political fringe has become the mainstream politics of the Democrats. The Resistance theme shows that the radicals have won. The Democrats haven’t just fallen to the left. They have fallen to the radical left which believes in overthrowing our system of government through conflict and confrontation rather than covertly engineering change. The Democrats have become a terrorist party. And their commitment to a radical revolution has plunged our political system into chaos. The left is now exactly where it wanted to be. And a civil war has begun. 36 4. #ObamaGate: Exposing the Obama Deep State After Trump secured the nomination, Obama’s people filed a wiretapping request. As he was on the verge of winning, they did it again. After he won, they are doing everything they can to bring him down. It was always going to come down to this. One is the elected President of the United States. The other is the AntiPresident who commands a vast network that encompasses the organizers of OFA, the official infrastructure of the DNC and Obama Anonymous, a shadow government of loyalists embedded in key positions across the government. A few weeks after the election, I 37 warned that Obama was planning to run the country from outside the White House. And that the “Obama Anonymous” network of staffers embedded in the government was the real threat. Since then Obama’s Kalorama mansion has become a shadow White House. And the Obama Anonymous network is doing everything it can to bring down an elected government. Valerie Jarrett has moved into the shadow White House to plot operations against Trump. Meanwhile Tom Perez has given him control of the corpse of the DNC after fending off a Sandernista bid from Keith Ellison. Obama had hollowed out the Democrat Party by diverting money to his own Organizing for America. Then Hillary Clinton had cannibalized it for her presidential bid through Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Donna Brazile. Now Obama owns the 38 activist, OFA, and organizational, DNC, infrastructure. But that’s just half the picture. Obama controls the opposition. He will have a great deal of power to choose future members of Congress and the 2020 candidate. But he could have done much of that from Chicago or New York. The reason he didn’t decide to move on from D.C. is that the nation’s capital contains the infrastructure of the national government. He doesn’t just want to run the Democrats. He wants to run America. The other half of the picture is the Obama Deep State. This network of political appointees, bureaucrats and personnel scattered across numerous government agencies is known only as Obama Anonymous. 39 Obama Inc. had targeted Trump from the very beginning when it was clear he would be the nominee. Trump had locked down the GOP nomination in May. Next month there was a FISA request targeting him. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court denied the request, and it is still unknown whether the request targeted Trump, or only his associates, but it’s silly to pretend that the submission of such a request a month after he became the presumptive GOP nominee was apolitical. The second, narrower, FISA request came through in October. This one was approved. The reason for getting a FISA request in October was even more obvious than June. October is the crucial month in presidential elections. It’s the month of the “October Surprise” 40 when the worst hit pieces based on the keenest opposition research is unleashed. Obama’s opposition research on Trump involved eavesdropping on a server in Trump Tower. Nixon would have been very jealous. After the election, Obama Inc. began to spread out its bets. Some of his people migrated into his network of political organizations. Others remained embedded in the government. While the former would organize the opposition, the latter would sabotage, undermine and try to bring down Trump. An unprecedented campaign for full spectrum dominance was being waged in domestic politics. Political opposition wasn’t a new phenomenon; even if a past president centralizing control of the organizational 41 and activist arms of his party to wage war on his successor was unprecedented. But weaponizing unelected government officials to wage war on an elected government was a coup. Obama Anonymous conducted its coup in layers. The first layer partnered congressional Democrats with OA personnel to retain control of as much of the government as possible by the Obama Deep State. They did it by blocking Trump’s nominees with endless hearings and protests. The second layer partnered congressional Democrats with the deeper layer of Obama operatives embedded in law enforcement and intelligence agencies who were continuing the Obama investigations of Trump. This second layer sought to use the investigation to force out Trump people who threatened their control over 42 national security, law enforcement and intelligence. It is no coincidence that their targets, Flynn and Sessions, were in that arena. Or that their views on Islamic terror and immigration are outside the consensus making them easy targets for Obama Anonymous and its darker allies. These darker allies predate Obama. The tactics being deployed against Trump were last used by them in a previous coup during President Bush’s second term. The targets back then had included Bush officials, an Iran skeptic, pro-Israel activists and a Democrat congresswoman. The tactics, eavesdropping, leaks, false investigations, dubious charges and smear campaigns against officials, were exactly the same. Anyone who remembers the cases of Larry Franklin, Jane Harman and 43 some others will recognize them. Before that they were used to protect the CIA underestimates of Soviet capabilities that were broken through by Rumsfeld’s Halloween Massacre and Team B which helped clear the way for Reagan’s defeat of the Soviet Union. Under Bush, the Deep State was fighting against any effort to stop Iran’s nuclear program. It did so by eliminating and silencing opposition within the national security establishment and Congress through investigations of supposed foreign agents. That left the field clear for it to force a false National Intelligence Estimate on President Bush which claimed that Iran had halted its nuclear program. Obama broke out the same tactics when he went after Iran Deal opponents. Once again members of Congress were 44 spied on and the results were leaked to friendly media outlets. Before the wiretapping of Trump’s people, the NSA was passing along conversations of Iran Deal opponents to the White House which were used to coordinate strategy in defense of the illegal arrangement with Islamic terrorists. The same wall between government and factional political agendas that Nixon’s “White House Plumbers” had broken through on the way to Watergate had been torn down. NSA eavesdropping was just another way to win domestic political battles. All it took was accusing the other side of treason. And worse was to come. During the Iran Deal battle, the NSA was supposedly filtering the eavesdropped data it passed along. 45 In its last days, Obama Inc. made it easier to pass along unfiltered personal information to the other agencies where Obama loyalists were working on their investigation targeting Trump. The NSA pipeline now makes it possible for the shadow White House to still gain intelligence on its domestic enemies. And the target of the shadow White House is the President of the United States. There is now a President and an Anti-President. A government and a shadow government. The anti-President controls more of the government through his shadow government than the real President. The Obama network is an illegal shadow government. Even its “light side” as an opposition group is very 46 legally dubious. Its “shadow side” is not only illegal, but a criminal attack on our democracy. When he was in power, Obama hacked reporters like FOX News’ James Rosen and CBS News’ Sharyl Attkisson. He eavesdropped on members of Congress opposed to the Iran Deal. Two men who made movies he disliked ended up in jail. But what he is doing now is even more deeply disturbing. Obama no longer legally holds power. His Deep State network is attempting to overturn the results of a presidential election using government employees whose allegiance is to a shadow White House. Tactics that were illegal when he was in office are no longer just unconstitutional, they are treasonous. 47 Obama Inc. has become a state within a state. It is a compartmentalized network of organizations, inside and outside the government, that claim that they are doing nothing illegal as individual groups because they are technically following the rules within each compartment, but the sheer scope of the illegality lies in the covert coordination between these “revolutionary cells” infecting our country. It is a criminal conspiracy of unprecedented scope. Above all else, it is the most direct attack yet on a country in which governments are elected by the people, not by powerful forces within the government. “We here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain,” President Lincoln declared at Gettysburg. “That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Obama’s shadow government is not just a war on President Trump. It is a war on that government of the people, by the people and for the people. If he succeeds, then at his touch, it will perish from the earth. Obama’s third term has begun. Our Republic is in danger. 48 5. Trump vs Obama Obama is a coward. Trump will call someone a name while Obama will anonymously source a smear through three levels of staffers, political allies and reporters. Trump called CNN “Fake News” on camera. Obama sourced Operation Rushbo, targeting Rush Limbaugh, through a variety of White House people and left-wing allies. Trump will boot reporters he doesn’t like. Obama authorized secretly hacking the emails of a FOX News reporter. Trump had an openly hostile conversation with the Prime Minister of Australia. When Obama wanted to call Netanyahu “chickens__t”, he did it by having one of his people anonymously plant it with a reliable media sycophant, The Atlantic’s 49 Jeffrey Goldberg, before later having a spokesman disavow it. Poultry ordure doesn’t smell any worse than that. But Obama is very careful to launch dirty attacks without getting any on his hands. The insults are anonymously sourced. The retaliation comes out of the bowels of the bureaucracy. And he only finds out about it from the media. That allows him to retain what he cares about most: his popularity. Obama and his people like to think that their dishonesty is a superpower. They pat themselves on the back for stabbing everyone else in theirs. Sometimes their smugness over how well they use the media to lie and smear gets out of control. Like the time Obama’s Goebbels, Ben Rhodes, boasted to the New York Times about how easy it was 50 to fool everyone about the deal to protect Iran’s nuclear program. After Trump won, it was business as usual. Obama put on his best imitation of decency while his people went on preparing to undermine Trump at every turn by smearing him, wiretapping him and doing everything possible, legally and illegally, to bring him down. It was the same phony act that he had pulled for eight years, bemoaning the lack of bipartisanship while ruling unilaterally as a dictator, destroying the Constitution while hectoring us about our values, denouncing racism while organizing race riots, complaining about the echo chamber while constructing one and lecturing us on civility while smearing anyone who disagreed. 51 Trump’s killer instinct lies in understanding that hypocrisy conceals weakness. That is what powered him through the primaries and then through an election. His instinct is to grapple directly with a target. That is also the source of his popularity. Meanwhile the source of Obama’s popularity is his hollow likability. He’s likable only because he is almost always too cowardly to say what he really thinks. Americans have seen the real Trump: because he is, in his own way, always real. Obama is always unreal. When Trump and Obama have appeared together, Obama seemed less real. He is a brand wrapped in all sorts of images that have nothing to do with who he really is. Trump has always understood that Obama’s bravado was hollow. Obama boasted that he would have defeated 52 Trump. Then he went on to try to do that with attacks from behind the scenes routed through government loyalists and media operatives while pretending that he had nothing to do with any of it. But Obama and his people had learned nothing from how Trump had won the election. When Trump is attacked, his response is to go directly for the attacker, no matter what the argument is or how it’s sourced. Trump doesn’t get bogged down in debates or befuddled by media echo chambers that are so totally enveloping that they resemble reality. He just smashes past them to the source of the smear. That is exactly what he did by calling out Obama’s eavesdropping. He bypassed all the layers that Obama had put in place to insulate himself from involvement in the attack, the 53 media echo chamber, the staffers who handed information to the media and the government loyalists who provided the information to the staffers, to strike at the wizard behind the curtain. And, in doing so, he made a mockery of Obama’s bravado. When Obama boasted that he could have beaten Trump, he meant that he could have done so using the same tactics that worked so well against McCain and Romney. Like most of the media, he had failed to understand that these tactics don’t work against Trump because he is a moving target. Trump created his own brand. Unlike most presidential candidates, he doesn’t need consultants, and unlike most Republicans, he isn’t worried at all about likability. That’s why he won an election 54 and still has majority support for his policies, including the most controversial ones, despite poor likability. Obama is obsessed with being liked. In the media space, effective messaging depends on likability. But Trump upended the same formula that had ruled presidential politics since Nixon vs. Kennedy. Instead he casually tosses likability aside to grapple with opponents, rivals and enemies. Trump won this election by forcing opponent after opponent to either fight him on his own terms or back away. This includes the media, which has tried to grapple directly with him, with disastrous results. The Obama machine, a massive propaganda matrix that alternates between lying and gaslighting, is not 55 built to handle Trump. And Obama isn’t built to handle Trump either. Obama’s hipster transgressiveness made him seem cool when up against Romney or McCain, but everything Trump does embodies real transgressiveness. The machine is built on limiting the freedom of action of Republicans by intimidating them with political correctness and potential smears. But Trump doesn’t care about any of that. Trump is willing to throw everything into an attack. Obama’s people build complicated traps that he walks through without thinking twice. Obama plays chess. Trump overturns the board. Obama’s strategy was to create so much chaos that the White House wouldn’t be able to get anything done. Instead it would ricochet from scandal 56 57 to scandal. Similar tactics had proven quite effective in the second terms of Reagan and Bush. But Trump thrives on chaos. Many of his supporters want him to be a disrupter. Chaos translates to effectiveness. The more noise he makes, the more he’s changing things. President Trump has made it clear that in response to these attacks, he will directly challenge Obama. And that breaks down Obama’s entire plan of using proxies to do his dirty work while he gives inspiring speeches. Trump will not let Obama get away with attacking him and then hiding behind phony idealism. And he intends to make the Obama machine into the issue in these attacks. Obama’s plan involved a gradual emergence to deliver more sanctimonious lectures about “who we are”. It did not involve getting directly into a fight with Trump. But, as his other opponents discovered, Trump doesn’t give you a choice. The favorite quote of Clinton’s damage control man Chris Lehane came from Mike Tyson. “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.” Obama’s people like to think that this is what they’ve done to Republicans, Iran Deal opponents, police officers and even President Trump. But Trump is showing them what the expression really means. Obama had a plan. Then Trump punched him in the mouth. The plan to entangle key Trump people in scandals hit a roadblock. Instead the wiretapping accusations have become the issue. And Obama’s people have been forced to come out and offer cautious denials. 58 And Obama and his dirty tricks have been dragged out from behind the curtain. Trump and Obama are two very different men. Their personalities, as much as their politics, will define this conflict. The media routinely accuses Trump of having totalitarian instincts. But the true totalitarians are men like Obama those who hypocritically use the machinery of government to go after their opponents while pretending to be virtuous. President Trump has always fought his fights directly. And the battle for America has only begun. 59 6. The Left’s Culture of Contempt The Atlantic’s May cover features Alec Baldwin covered in orange makeup holding up a Trump wig. The cover asks, “Can Satire Save the Republic?” What is satire saving the Republic from? Republicans. While making America safe for Socialism. After Bush won, Democrats fought back by doubling down on the ridicule. Before long they were getting their news from Jon Stewart’s smirk. Stewart spawned a whole range of imitators. Today you can find numberless clones of the Daily Show across cable and even on CBS and, soon, on NBC. The left is devoutly convinced that this snickering can save America. That 60 it’s better than the news. The Peabody awards celebrated the Daily Show as “a trusted source of news for citizens united in their disappointment and disgust with politics and cable news”. But the media was the first in line to anoint the politics of contempt, ridicule and disgust as the future of journalism. Now the future is here. The Washington Post, once a paper of record, swarms with snarky Stewartesque headlines like, “Jeff Sessions doesn’t think a judge in Hawaii — a.k.a. ‘an island in the Pacific’ — should overrule Trump”. Journalism is dead. And replacing it with snarky lefty spin hasn’t saved the Republic. Or anything else. But the left’s faith in the power of 61 its contempt has nothing to do with its tactical effectiveness. The left remains convinced that Jon Stewart brought down Bush and Tina Fey brought down Palin because ridiculing the right isn’t just an ugly tactic. Instead it carries an almost religious meaning. Mocking Republicans can save us. Every ideology expresses its superiority through its own triumphalism. Sneering is the left’s own invocation of its own superiority. These are the grown up politics of kids who were convinced that they were better than everyone else because they looked down on them. Much as Allahu Akbar denotes the superiority of the Muslim and the inferiority of the non-Muslim, the knowing smirk, the lifted eyebrow and the braying laugh of the audience when the unironic applause sign flashes is the 62 prayer of the progressive to the cruel little god of his own ego. The ritual is tribal. A lefty dons the mock wig of the hated enemy and is ritually humiliated for the entertainment of the tribes of Manhattan, Berkeley and Marin County. The foe is destroyed in effigy. The video of his destruction is virally spread with titles such as, “Saturday Night Live Destroys Trump”. And yet Trump, like all the other viral subjects of destruction, is never destroyed. The tribal ritual lets lefties vent their anger on a totem that, unlike Trump, can actually be destroyed by liberal laughter. Satire isn’t trying to save the Republic. It isn’t stopping Trump. It’s saving the left. 63 Trump has proven even more indestructible than Bush. It’s hard to think of any insult that the left hasn’t hurled his way. A dictionary of them could run all the way from Abuser to Xenophobe. To no avail. Instead he has proven exceptionally adept at treating the left with as much contempt as it treats him. When lefties bemoans his cruelty and vulgarity, what they really mean is that he is beating them at their own game without wasting time on their pretenses to saving the Republic on Saturday Night Live. Saturday Night Live is still the only place that progressives have been able to beat Trump. Mocking Bush didn’t save the Republic from him. If anything, liberal disdain helped make him a two-term president the way that it helped put 64 Trump in office. Obama won by taking the opposite road. He kept his contempt and arrogance just enough in check to appear aspirational during his original race. Elitist contempt isn’t an effective tactic. American politics is antiestablishment. Stewart, Colbert, Oliver and Bee are only revolutionary to likeminded lefties in lavish condos. To the Tennessee coal miner, the New Mexico checkout girl and the Pennsylvania steelworker they convey the smugness of an establishment in all its insufferable disdain for flyover country, for the working class and for everyone outside that golden circle of the tall towers and hot clubs in the big cities that really, truly matter. Liberals need to believe that even their pettiest acts are ennobling. Their 65 Whole Foods organic avocadoes are saving the planet. Their fair trade yoga pants are saving indigenous tribes. Even their ridicule of the “Other” on TV is the redemptive and salvific process by which they save America. This isn’t idealism. It’s elitism. They’re not spitefully lashing out because they lost an election. Instead they’re saving the country by watching a lefty hack who had become more famous for his credit card commercials, and racist and homophobic slurs do a tepid slurred imitation of Trump. What a piece of work is a progressive. How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty. In action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god. Beneath the Midtown Manhattan sound stages and green rooms, the million 66 dollar contracts of the performers, the Ivy League degrees of the writers and the suave sophisticated five-star restaurants where they rendezvous is the dark and primitive world of the firelit circle in which enemies are bound and destroyed by a magic fed on the anger and hatred of the watchers. The tribal signifiers of power have changed. The totems are class, cool and hip. And much of the country does not recognize their claim to lead the tribe. Each time America dissents, the left wears out its lip sneering at them. Contempt is the final refuge of failed tyrants. If you can’t rule, you can always sneer. The left’s faith in contempt tells us far more about them than it does about the objects of their contempt. Art is a reflection of the artist. Some artists strive 67 to create while others only destroy. The left remains convinced that it can create through destruction, that it can build a fair society through theft, an ethical society by destroying its values and a high-minded society through contempt. It must believe in the redemptive power of its thievery, amorality and hatred. Or face a moral reckoning. When they go low, we go higher, they chant, before laughing as Alec Baldwin snorts through his nose. It’s not funny or meaningful. It’s wish fulfillment. The left gets a Trump they can destroy in a world where they are bound to win because they are naturally superior. For a movement obsessed with the redemptive power of its own power and convinced of the utter truth of its own 68 imaginary visions, what could be more sacred than acting out the destruction of its enemies? Is it any wonder that getting high on snarky delusions of potency and superiority appears so uplifting? Can satire save the Republic? Its fumes are almost as good as actually winning an election. But a better question would be can the Republic save satire? Saturday Night Live’s war on Trump is also a war on comedy as mediocre casts turn to outside performers to portray recognizable political figures, based not on talent, but sheer recognizability. Tina Fey had a passing resemblance to Sarah Palin while Larry David shared an accent with Bernie Sanders and was forty years older than the average SNL 69 cast member. Alec Baldwin is a real life version of what progs think Trump is; angry, dumb and bigoted. A bad man with no self-control. And that is appropriate. The left’s effigy of Trump is a self-portrait. Their hatred of Trump is pure projection. Baldwin’s bad acting won’t save the Republic.. He isn’t funny, but he doesn’t need to be. Funny is surplus to requirements. The point isn’t laughter, it’s barely sublimated hatred. Baldwin understands hatred far better than comedy. He knows that what his prog audience wants is not a good imitation but a contemptible one. One they can despise and feel superior to. And that is what he gives them. Saturday Night Live could not satirize Obama to save its life. It can’t satirize Trump either for the same reason. 70 The façade of humor is falling away from the left’s worship of its ideological idols and fanatical hatred of its enemies. And hatred isn’t funny. It’s clumsy. It’s stupid. And it’s ugly. Comedy is creative. Contempt isn’t comedy. It’s just contemptible. 71 7. Winning the Civil War of Two Americas When John Edwards touted the “Two Americas” during his presidential campaigns before his political career ended in disgrace, it was still a metaphor. It stopped being a metaphor at the end of last year. If you doubt that, you can watch Tom Perez, the head of the Democratic National Committee, yelling that President Trump didn’t win the election. There is a huge difference between opposing the winner of an election and denying that he won it. It’s the difference between opposition and rebellion. Democrats have not recognized a single Republican presidential victory this century. There is no real reason to think that they will recognize a third 72 one. We can safely assume that the third or fourth Republican to win the White House, no matter who he is, will face the same treatment. A two-party system can’t function if one party denies the legitimacy of elections won by the other side. In the Edwards era, the Democrats denied that President Bush had won the election, but they still remained part of the government. That’s no longer the case. Their political mantra is resistance. Their position is that Trump and Republicans are inherently illegitimate and must not be allowed to govern. Instead the government must be defied, opposed, subverted and brought down by any means. The Democrats have become an unelected shadow anti-government that 73 is seeking to bring down an elected government. That is what I described in an earlier article as a civil war. The crisis has its roots in Two Americas. The Democrats artificially created another America. They built it in the elitist urban and suburban enclaves of the left. They drew it with urban welfare ghettoes and with mass immigration. But despite the vast financial, political and cultural power invested in this “New America” it did not represent the majority of the country. And democratic elections dealt repeated setbacks to this Anti-America. Political maps show these alien concentrations of blue amid a vast national sea of red. Democrats have lost much of the country. They have been 74 wiped out at the state level. They retain power only because they have illegally concentrated them in undemocratic political, financial and cultural centers. Democrats responded to the latest string of defeats by denying the legitimacy of the election and calling for the elimination of the Electoral College. The original Americans hadn’t died out on schedule so it was time to further dilute their electoral influence in favor of the left’s cultural and financial centers of power all the while protecting the mass immigration program that was meant to replace them. The Two Americas are now in a state of war. Anti-America lost an election, denied the outcome and is running a separatist shadow government of sanctuary cities and activist judges. 75 The various attacks on the Trump administration and Congress are expressions of “patriotism”, not to America, but to the alternate AntiAmerica that they are truly loyal to. This is not just a power struggle. It’s a clash between two Americas. And only one America can survive. The left had meant for their Anti-America to replace America. If America is to survive, Anti-America must be destroyed. Unlike America, Anti-America is an artificial entity. Its vulnerabilities are easy to spot by the policy priorities of the left. AntiAmerica lives by mass migration and campus brainwashing. It requires a huge infrastructure of government employees maintained by taxes and regulations. Its segregated cities depend on a complex hierarchy of political identities that 76 provide access to everything from subsidized housing to jobs based on intersectional caste membership. Republicans stand against everything that keeps Anti-America alive. So a conflict was always inevitable. Anti-America is far more vulnerable than America. And that’s the good news. America can win. Anti-America is based on concentrations of power. Decentralization is its nemesis. Anti-America needs to constantly control people because it is a totalitarian system. Totalitarian systems need a lot more infrastructure and are far more vulnerable. That is why they are so intolerant of individual freedom. Drain the swamp and you eliminate its breeding grounds. And that of the 77 lobbyists, consultants and reporters who swarm around it like flies. What the left does best is organize. But organizations are complex systems. And the more complex a system is, the more vulnerable it is. Fighting the left for control of the systems they created and inhabit like hives is a losing proposition. The last few months were a thorough demonstration of that. You don’t fight an ant colony by going inside it. You attack it from the outside by burying it in the dirt. The left governs by taking a public interest agenda and building an infrastructure of unions, consultants and industries around it. That’s what it did with essentials like education and medicine. Eliminate the organization and you cut expenses, improve services and wipe out the left. That’s why the left 78 panics so badly over education reform and socialized medicine. Those are the sources of much of its money and power. Cut immigration and the demographic replacement that the left has bet its entire “right side of history” on gets choked off. That’s why the left is more worked up over plans to cut migration than anything else. It doesn’t actually care about Syria or El Salvador. It just knows that Anti-America depends on importing large numbers of people with high birth rates who have no allegiance to this country. Portland won’t do it. Pakistan might. Leftist beliefs defy common sense. It takes a whole lot of indoctrination to make anyone believe them. End the centralization of education, roll back the endless expansion of higher education and take a hard look at the corporate 79 culture monopolies of the entertainment industry and the Berlin Wall will fall again. Without a fresh supply of zombies, the left goes back to being a marginal movement. And the left knows it. The Two Americas have come to a dangerous crossroads. The policy agenda of the Democrats would destroy America. That of the Republicans would destroy Anti-America. American culture, economics and religion can’t survive the rule of AntiAmerica. That is what we saw in the Obama years. But Anti-America would do even worse if Republicans got serious about a reform agenda. That’s one reason why Democrats are beginning to engage in a political secession. Immigration enforcement, school 80 choice and big government cuts frighten them worse than anything. The left reshaped the culture until an ideological conflict became a culture war. The Two Americas have less in common than the North and the South did. The divisions accelerated sharply throughout the last century. In this century, the division is becoming an irresolvable political conflict. A civil war. The Democrats are abandoning the pretense of acting as an opposition party within a unified country. If Republicans wish to preserve America, they must be prepared to use government power to destroy the infrastructure of AntiAmerica. A conflict is underway that will determine whether America survives. There are Two Americas. In the end there can only be one. 81 8. How George Soros Destroyed the Democratic Party It was the end of the big year with three zeroes. The first X-Men movie had broken box office records. You couldn’t set foot in a supermarket without listening to Brittney Spears caterwauling, “Oops, I Did It Again.” And Republicans and Democrats had total control of both chambers of legislatures in the same amount of states. That was the way it was back in the distant days of the year 2000. In 2016, Republicans control both legislative chambers in 32 states. That’s up from 16 in 2000. What happened to the big donkey? Among other things, the Democrats decided to sell their base and their soul to a very bad billionaire and they got a 82 very bad deal for both. It was 2004. The poncho was the hottest fashion trend, there were 5 million new cases of AIDS and a former Nazi collaborator had bought the Democrat Party using the spare change in his sofa cushions. And gone to war against the will of the people. This was what he modestly called his own “Soros Doctrine”. “It is the central focus of my life,” George Soros declared. It was “a matter of life and death.” He vowed that he would become poor if it meant defeating the President of the United States. Instead of going to the poorhouse, he threw in at least $15 million, all the spare change in the billionaire’s sofa cushions, dedicated to beating President 83 Bush. In his best lisping James Bond villain accent, Soros strode into the National Press Club and declared that he had “an important message to deliver to the American Public before the election” that was contained in a pamphlet and a book that he waved in front of the camera. Despite his “I expect you to die, Mr. Bond” voice, the international villain’s delivery was underwhelming. He couldn’t have sold brownies to potheads at four in the morning. He couldn’t even sell Bush-bashing to a roomful of left-wing reporters. But he could certainly fund those who would. And that’s exactly what he did. Money poured into the fringe organizations of the left like MoveOn, which had moved on from a petition site 84 to a PAC. In 2004, Soros was its biggest donor. He didn’t manage to bring down Bush, but he helped buy the Democratic Party as a toy for his yowling dorm room of left-wing activists to play with. Soros hasn’t had a great track record at buying presidential elections. The official $25 million he poured into this one bought him his worst defeat since 2004. But his money did transform the Democrat Party. And killed it. Next year the Democracy Alliance was born. A muddy river of cash from Soros and his pals flowed into the organizations of the left. Soros had helped turn Howard Dean, a Vermont politician once as obscure as this cycle’s radical Vermont Socialist, into a contender and a national figure. Dean 85 didn’t get the nomination, but he did get to remake the DNC. Podesta’s Center for American Progress swung the Democrats even further to the left. And it would be Podesta who helped bring Hillary down. The Democrats became a radical left-wing organization and unviable as a national political party. The Party of Jefferson had become the Party of Soros. And only one of those was up on Mount Rushmore. Obama’s wins concealed the scale and scope of the disaster. Then the party woke up after Obama to realize that it had lost its old bases in the South and the Rust Belt. The left had hollowed it out and transformed it into a party of coastal urban elites, angry college crybullies and minority coalitions. Republicans control twice as 86 many state legislative chambers as the Democrats. They boast 25 trifectas , controlling both legislative chambers and the governor’s mansion. Trifectas had gone from being something that wasn’t seen much outside of a few hard red states like Texas to covering much of the South, the Midwest and the West. The Democrats have a solid lock on the West Coast and a narrow corridor of the Northeast, and little else. The vast majority of the country’s legislatures are in Republican hands. The Democrat Governor’s Association has a membership in the teens. In former strongholds like Arkansas, Dems are going extinct. The party has gone from holding national legislative majorities to becoming a marginal movement. And the Democrats don’t intend to change course. The way is being cleared 87 for Keith Ellison, the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus with an ugly racist past, to head the DNC. Pelosi will oversee the disaster in the House. And Obama will remain the party’s highest profile national figure. There could hardly be a clearer signal that the left intends to retain its donkey herding rights. Soros and his ilk have paid for the reins. That is why Pelosi, with her access to donors, will retain her position. The left had recreated the Democrat Party and marginalized it. Much of this disaster had been funded with Soros money. Like many a theatrical villain, the old monster had been undone by his own hubris. Had Soros aided the Democrats without trying to control them, he would have gained a seat at the table in a national party. Instead he spent 88 a fortune destroying the very thing he was trying to control. George Soros saw America in terms of its centers of economic and political power. He didn’t care about the vast stretches of small towns and villages, of the more modest cities that he might fly over in his jet but never visit, and the people who lived in them. Like so many globalists who believe that borders shouldn’t exist because the luxury hotels and airports they pass through are interchangeable, the parts of America that mattered to him were in the glittering left-wing bubble inhabited by his fellow elitists. Trump’s victory, like Brexit, came because the left had left the white working class behind. Its vision of the future as glamorous multicultural city states was overturned in a single night. 89 The idea that Soros had committed so much power and wealth to was of a struggle between populist nationalists and responsible internationalists. But, in a great irony, Bush was hardly the nationalist that Soros believed. Instead Soros spent a great deal of time and wealth to unintentionally elect a populist nationalist. Leftists used Soros money to focus on their own identity politics obsessions leaving the Dems with little ability to interact with white working class voters. The Ivy and urban leftists who made up the core of the left had come to exist in a narrow world with little room for anything and anyone else. Soros turned over the Democrats to political fanatics least likely to be able to recognize their own errors. His protégés repeated the great self-destruction of the 90 Soviet Union on a more limited scale Soros fed a political polarization while assuming, wrongly, that the centers of power mattered, and their outskirts did not. He was proven wrong in both the United States of America and in the United Kingdom. He had made many gambles that paid off. But his biggest gamble took everything with it. “I don’t believe in standing in the way of an avalanche,” Soros complained of the Republican wave in 2010. But he has been trying to do just that. And failing. “There should be consequences for the outrageous statements and proposals that we’ve regularly heard from candidates Trump and Cruz,” Soros threatened this time around. He predicted a Hillary landslide. 91 He was wrong. As Soros plowed more money into the left, its escalating radicalism alienated more of the country. Each “avalanche” was a reaction to the abuses of his radicals. It wasn’t Trump or Cruz who suffered the consequences. It wasn’t even his own leftists. Rather it was the conservative and eventually the moderate wings of the Democrat party who were swept away by his left-wing avalanches. The left did not mourn the mass destruction of the moderates. Instead it celebrated the growing purity of the Democrats as a movement of the hard left. It did not notice or care that it was no longer a political force outside a limited number of cities. It anticipated that voters would have no choice but to choose it over the “extremist” Republicans. 92 It proved to be very, very wrong. George Soros spent a fortune to turn a national party favorable to the left into an organization that has difficulty appealing to anyone not on the left. He wanted to control a country he did not understand. And, as the left so often does, he achieved his goals and in doing so destroyed them. Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center and a writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century. 93