For a long time, libertarianism seemed to me the political outlook which most closely matched a live-and-let-live view of the world.
This morning in my neighborhood I saw four blonde girls whom I think were sisters: They looked alike, there seemed to be a one- to two-year gap between their ages, and they had been shopping for groceries. They were greeted by a fifth girl, also blonde, who was walking a dog. All five then continued in the direction of a nearby where houses sell for around $400,000, the only neighborhood for miles around in which such a group could possibly live. In the city where I live, I have never seen a group of four blond girls—probably siblings—on a public thoroughfare here.
With little notice anywhere on the political spectrum, this past work week marked the 50th anniversary of the what has been called the “1967 Detroit Riot.” It was one of the most destructive riots in American history, ending with 43 dead and thousands wounded. Unfortunately, it set the pace for the next fifty years of race relations and urban mayhem in this country. What started it is all too familiar. Police raided an illegal, unlicensed bar, the patrons fought with the police, and things escalated quickly. Next thing the country knew, there were days and days of blacks rioting, looting, and setting fires, largely in their own neighborhoods. Things did not even end when Governor George Romney, the chief cuckservative of his day (and father to Mitt), called in the National Guard. It took scallywag Lyndon Johnson calling in the airborne for that.
Given the bravery he showed in stepping out front as the first senator to endorse Donald Trump, Jeff Sessions deserves better from his boss than the Twitter-trashing he has lately received.
The attorney general has not only been loyal to Trump and his agenda, he has the respect and affection of ex-colleagues in Congress and, more broadly, of populists and conservatives nationally.
Trump’s tweets about Sessions are only demoralizing his base.
Yet the president is not wrong to be exasperated and enraged.
A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down.
Trump’s behavior suggests that he sees the Mueller threat as potentially mortal.
How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime.
Foolish, yes; criminal, no. So, again, how did we get to where talk of impeachment and presidential pardons fills the air?
First, Attorney General Sessions, as a campaign adviser and surrogate for Trump who had met with the Russian ambassador, had to recuse himself from the investigation. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein then assumed oversight authority.
Trump then fired FBI Director James Comey and boasted to Russia’s foreign minister about having gotten the “crazy nut job” off his case. His Oval Office comments leaked. Comey then leaked notes of his meeting with Trump. Rosenstein then washed his hands of the mess by naming a special counsel. And he chose a bulldog, ex-FBI Director Robert Mueller.
Hence, where are we? Despite zero evidence of Trump or his aides colluding in the hacking, a counterintelligence investigation is evolving into a criminal investigation. Mueller is now hiring veteran investigators and prosecutors specializing in white-collar crime.
This is not a witch hunt. It is an Easter egg hunt on the White House lawn, where the most colorful eggs are likely to be the tax returns and the financial records of Trump, who built a real estate empire in a town where winners brag about how they gutted the losers.
Every enemy of Trump is going to be dropping the dime on him to Mueller. Moreover, there is no history of special counsels being appointed and applauded by the press, who went home without taking scalps.
Trump understands this. Reports of his frustration and rage suggest that he knows he has been maneuvered, partly by his own mistakes, into a kill box from which there may be no bloodless exit.
What Trump needs is a leader at Justice who will confine the Mueller investigation to the Russian hacking, and keep Mueller’s men from roaming until they hit prosecutorial pay dirt.
Consider now Trump’s narrowing options.
He can fire Jeff Sessions. But that will enrage Trump’s base to whom the senator is a loyal soldier. And anyone Trump nominates as AG would not be confirmed unless he or she pledged not to interfere with Mueller.
He could direct Rosenstein to fire Mueller. But Rosenstein would assume the Elliot Richardson role in the Saturday Night Massacre, when that AG refused to fire Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox, resigned, and was canonized as a martyr by the Never-Nixon media.
Even if Trump finds a Justice Department loyalist to play the role of Solicitor General Robert Bork, who carried out Nixon’s orders and fired Cox, this would only mean Mueller’s departure. Mueller’s staff of prosecutors and investigators would still be there, beavering away.
When Archibald Cox was fired, Nixon ordered his entire office shut down. Yet, within days of the firestorm, it was up and running again with a new special prosecutor. And impeachment resolutions were blossoming in the House.
Another Trump option would be to leave Mueller alone and hope for a benign outcome. But from reports of his rage at the recusal of Sessions and unwillingness of Rosenstein to restrict Mueller to the Russian hacking scandal, Trump seems to sense that an unrestricted investigation represents a mortal threat to his presidency.
And all the talk of impeachment and pardons suggests that this city can also see what lies over the next hill. After all, we have been here before.
From his history, Mueller is not a man to be intimidated by charges of bias. These will only steel his resolve to pursue with his subpoena power every document he wants, including tax returns, until he has satisfied himself.
The president is unlikely to view this process with indulgence, and patience does not appear to rank high among his virtues.
We are headed for a collision between President Trump and Director Mueller.
As soon as the story broke about the Somali cop fatally shooting the pretty white Australian girl in Minneapolis, one of my Muslim fans emailed me a story:
“Re: Hunting in Kuwait as explanation why this Noor guy shot through the car
“I remember being in Kuwait with the president of the investment bank I worked for. We were invited by one of our directors to hunt turtle doves. There were five of us in all and each had a 12-gauge shotgun.
“Instructions were: Only shoot straight and up; shotgun point in air resting on shoulders when not being used. That’s it. I was on the far left, and the fellow on the other end was a Syrian.
“Well, we were out there and no straggling turtle doves were migrating. A half-hour later, not one shot was fired. Then, two birds from a tree ahead darted out, between me and the houses on my left.
“We all looked, but the Syrian turned toward us and began shooting over our heads at the birds. The rest of us hit the ground. Even though our host took his gun away, I gave them mine and went back because, if there is a way to overreact, the Syrian would think it is natural and can’t even consider the consequences.
“You cannot place these people in a position of authority (for example with a gun in their hands). They will always shoot as a default reaction to anything that is instant. Neither training nor thinking can change their natures.
“And that is why he shot. He had a gun.”
Since then, we’ve found out that this is exactly why Officer Mohamed Noor shot the gentle yoga instructor walking toward the police car. He heard a loud noise — or as Powerline blog is calling it, “The Loud Noise Heard ‘Round the World.”
Noor shot from the passenger seat, killing Justine Damond, according to his partner, sitting at the wheel, who is presumably now deaf. Damond had called 911 to report what sounded like a rape in the alley behind her house, and was approaching the responding police car when she was shot.
As usually happens when Muslims attack, the press is consumed with worry about their mental state and well-being.
Somalis on edge after Minneapolis cop named in fatal shooting — The Daily Herald (Everett, Washington), July 18, 2017
Somalis in Minneapolis on defensive after police shooting — St. Paul Pioneer Press (Minnesota), July 21, 2017
Minneapolis shooting brings unwelcome attention to Somalis — Associated Press, July 22, 2017
There are nearly 2 billion Muslims in the world, amounting to a quarter of the world’s population, controlling 50 countries. The English-speaking world is about a fifth that size and constitutes a dwindling majority in about a half-dozen countries. But, somehow, no matter how the story is written, Muslims always get to play the victim, and Anglo-Saxons are cast as the aggressors.
That’s why a Somali cop’s fatal shooting of a pajama-clad Good Samaritan has gone directly into the “Be Nice to Muslims!” file, rather than the “Why Are All These Somalis Here?” file. (Answer: Because of an earlier mistake with excessive Scandinavian immigration.)
I can’t help noticing that it was precisely the “Be Nice to Muslims!” dictate that put this Somali nincompoop on the police force in the first place.
Among Noor’s evident errors the night he killed Justine:
1) Shooting from the passenger seat, the bullet whizzing inches past his partner’s face, through the driver’s side window;
2) Not turning his bodycam on when responding to a 911 call;
3) Shooting to kill because he heard a loud noise;
4) Believing that white women in America pose a threat to a policeman.
A few of the Weather Underground ladies were accomplices to cop-killings, 40 years ago, but even they weren’t lone white women cop-killers.
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, women of any race committed about 10 percent of all murders from 1980 to 2008, and black people committed a majority of all murders. Other than a small child, it’s difficult to think of a demographic that poses less of a threat to a policeman in America than a 40-year-old white woman.
Noor’s African-American neighbor, Chris Miller, said he was shocked when he heard about Damond’s shooting — until he found out it was Noor. Miller told The Daily Telegraph (Australia) that his Somali neighbor was quick to anger and was always going off on women and children. “He is extremely nervous,” Miller said, “a little jumpy … he doesn’t really respect women, the least thing you say to him can set him off.”
Sounds perfect for a police officer!
May we see Officer Noor’s cadet exam? His training reports? Does anyone believe there is the slightest possibility that Noor was not rushed through the Police Academy so that the nice people of Minneapolis could feel good about themselves for having a real Somali on the police force?
Minnesota’s importation of these stone-age people is a completely self-inflicted wound. It’s as if the state decided to inject itself with Hepatitis C. Hey, you know what? We’re too white and pure. Everyone tie a vein off and give yourself a shot of hep C. We could learn from that!
With Somalis, you get all the social pathologies of Muslims and the American underclass rolled into one package. There’s the terrorism and pederasty — but also the criminality and joblessness!
At least with taxpayer-draining Mexican illegals, you can say, yes, but they provide the rich with such cheap labor! Someone, somewhere in America, gets a benefit. There is absolutely no benefit to the more than 100,000 Somalis brought in by Minnesota, except to feed the Scandinavian ethnomasochism, expressed as arrogant self-regard.
Gosh, they’re good people. R.I.P. Justine.
COPYRIGHT 2017 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY ANDREWS MCMEEL SYNDICATION
We have written frequently about the European “migrant crisis” of 2015: its origins, how the media misrepresent it, and why it is such a threat to Europe. We have profiled the keys personalities, from Angela Merkel, to Geert Wilders, to Viktor Orban, and reviewed several books about different aspects of the crisis. We have also published accounts of how sevral countries are handling the crisis (Italy, Russia, Poland, France), and covered the terrorist attacks this invasion has brought. We have also written about the organizations that have taken a stand to fight for Europe.
Here are some of the most memorable photos of the crisis from the last two years.
More than any other group, whites are maligned, belittled, mocked, and criticized in the mainstream media. (This is different from more direct and personal forms of anti-white behavior, as detailed in these exhaustive collections of minority-on-white crime, and black on white crime.)
Here are some recent examples:
“White men must be stopped: The very future of mankind depends on it,” by Frank Joyce, Salon.com/Alternet.org, December 22, 2015.
The future of life on the planet depends on bringing the 500-year rampage of the white man to a halt. For five centuries his ever more destructive weaponry has become far too common. His widespread and better systems of exploiting other humans and nature dominate the globe.
“Ten Things White People Need To Quit Saying” by Melody Moezzi, Huffington Post, April 27, 2016.
Remember that reverse racism isn’t a thing. Racism is about the abuse of power and privilege. If your race denies you power and privilege, then you can’t be racist. Certainly, you can still be an asshole. Just not a racist . . . . If any of this offends you as a white person, I ask simply that you sit with that discomfort for a while. Really feel it. Now imagine that your distress weren’t the temporary consequence of reading an article, but rather the permanent consequence of living in your own skin.
For the last three years, BuzzFeed has had listicles about things white people have ruined:
“29 Things White People Ruined,” by Tracy Clayton, September 25, 2014.
Number 29 is, “Basically Everything.”
“21 Things White People Ruined in 2015” by Pedro Fequiere, December 3, 2015.
The first sentence is, “Besides everything.”
“17 Foods That White People Have Ruined” by Tahlia Pritchard, November 16, 2016.
The list includes dishes obviously invented by whites in the first place, such as the croissant.
And here is charming sentiment in The Guardian, May 30, 2017 from an article called “Why I’m no longer talking to white people about race” by Reni Eddo-Lodge:
I’m no longer engaging with white people on the topic of race. Not all white people, just the vast majority who refuse to accept the existence of structural racism and its symptoms. I can no longer engage with the gulf of an emotional disconnect that white people display when a person of colour articulates their experience.
Here is a piece called “White people think racism is getting worse. Against white people.” by Samuel Sommers and Michael Norton from the Washington Post of July 21, 2016:
For some whites, the changing—and increasingly less white—demographics of the United States may feel existentially threatening. Indeed, research points to people’s pervasive fear that they will end up on the bottom of the status pile—a fear called ‘last place aversion.’ . . . . If ‘they’ are moving up in the world, ‘we’ must be moving down. Such fears might be particularly pronounced for a group, like white Americans, that has always been at the top of the racial hierarchy and therefore has the furthest to fall.
The very title of the piece is supposed to get a laugh, and it is clear that demographic displacement and a drop in status is exactly what whites deserve.
Note that I have quoted only from publications that are extremely popular on both a national, and international, level. You can find really hair-raising stuff from a lone Marxist professor, or in a small-circulation leftist outlet, or a fancy, insulting book about whites by a black. But Salon, The Huffington Post, BuzzFeed, The Guardian, and The Washington Post are popular and mainstream.
Imagine the articles with just a few tweaks:
“Black migration must be stopped: The very future of my lovely mid-western town depends on it”
“Ten Things Black People Need to Stop Doing on Public Transit”
“21 Things Black People Ruined in 2015”
The first item could be: Two decades of declining crime rates.
“Why I’m no longer talking to black people about IQ”
Of course, titles like these will never appear in the mainstream. They would not appear even at dissident websites.
Anti-white racism in the media is very real. I will believe otherwise when you can find me another race that has been accused of ruining no fewer than 17 foods.
Bret Stephens, the newest token “rightist” at the New York Times, sparked outrage across the Right last month with a column called, “Only Mass Deportations Can Save America.” He wrote about American citizens who have children out of wedlock, are dependent on welfare, don’t have jobs, and commit crime, and argued that they should be deported—not the allegedly hardworking, upstanding Catholics pouring in across our southern border.
As Steve Sailer noted, if you didn’t know better, you would think Mr. Stephens was complaining about blacks, who have the highest rates of criminality, bastardy, and welfare use. Alas, Mr. Stephens was clearly talking about poor whites in Appalachia and the Rust Belt, a group that he, like all “Never Trump” Republicans, despises. Indeed, if the New York Times editors had the slightest suspicion that Mr. Stephens was talking about blacks, they would not have published the column.
The most prestigious newspaper in the country thinks it’s fine to “joke” about deporting citizens they don’t like. It also publish opinion pieces by illegal aliens demanding we let them stay.
This column was repugnant enough, but Mr. Stevens wrote a piece two weeks earlier that makes it even worse. In a column on the 50th anniversary of the Six-Day War, he wrote solemnly of Israel’s courage, and the importance of its victory. Savaging Israel’s critics, Mr. Stephens wrote, “For the crime of self-preservation, Israel remains a nation unforgiven.”
In a void, I take no issue with this. I harbor no animus towards Israel. It is a distinct nation, with a distinct people, culture, religion, language, etc. that it is determined to preserve. I admire that. I would rather live in Israel than in any of its antagonistic neighbors. Israel is at a civilizational level well above that of the Arab world surrounding it. I do not begrudge Israel actions it finds necessary for survival.
Mr. Stephens does not apply the same logic to the United States. In fact, he applies the reverse logic. His column on “deportations” assumed that America is just an economic zone, with no people, culture, religion, or language to preserve. If “citizens” of this country are not productive enough, they should be replaced with more productive imports. But Mr. Stephens would never accept this purely economic view of Israelis. Israel has surprisingly high levels of corruption for a developed country. Why not deport corrupt Israelis and replace them with people from less corrupt nations such as Japan, Uruguay, or the United Arab Emirates.
Mr. Stephens, I am confident, would not consider this even as a joke. Corruption is bad, but Israel with corruption is still Israel. Israel with no corruption, but composed of equal parts Arabs, Jews, Hispanics, and Japanese, is not Israel; it’s just an economy.
The same is true of the United States. America has always been a white country. It was founded by whites for whites. That history is utterly unambiguous. When America stops being white, it loses its essence, something intangible but vital. On some level, Mr. Stephens probably knows this. I suspect that when he chooses his co-workers, friends, and neighbors they are a ratio of white-to-non-white similar to America as a whole—America of the 1950s.
Since Mr. Stephens wants to preserve the essence of Israel, why does he not want to preserve the essence of his own country?
He calls himself a “conservative” but what does he want to conserve? Certainly not the founding stock nor the Europeans who came later. Our culture, language, religion, values and essence arise from a certain people. That is true of every country—certainly of Israel—as Mr. Stephens would surely agree.
For America, Mr. Stephens wants to “conserve” abstractions such as free markets and civility in the media. An issue of strange importance to him is stopping government intervention intended to slow climate change. A question for Mr. Stephens: Would he prefer an Israel that adopted his laissez faire approach to climate change—but was 60 percent Hispanic—or a majority-Jewish Israel that meddled in the economy to slow global warming? We know which he would choose, and he is not wrong for making that choice.
Mr. Stephens puts the essence of Israel ahead of everything else, as he should. Why can’t he treat America with the same respect?
Idealists may not like it, but politics is a transaction. I support politicians I think will do something for me and the people I care about. Therefore, I could not be less interested in the endless parade of accusations and speculations about what certain Russians might or might not have done to help elect Donald Trump. No matter what the answer is, I don’t care. J.M. Bernays at The Baffler has convincingly described the liberal frenzy over this:
[A]t this point, the empirical question of whether or not it happened is secondary to the deeper psychological need for media pundits, policy wonks, and the professional-managerial strata to maintain their sense of self when the objective historical conditions in which they flourished are being actively dissolved. For liberals, the continued libidinal investment in the drama of the as-yet invisible Trump-Russia scandal actively blocks any realization that the neoliberal order they are trying to restore is already dead on its feet, and that Trump is the uniquely bizarre American expression of a visible worldwide trend: the virulent, deepening nationalist backlash against a financially-integrated global economy based on the relatively free movement of commodities and people. His ascent is a death knell for an entire era and the basic assumptions about economic and political life that shape the worldview of contemporary liberals.
Mr. Bernays is wordy, but he’s right. Liberals want the verdict to be treason because Mr. Trump would be removed and, they hope, things would go back to normal. Just like Republicans who wanted to believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya, they think that by revealing this one key truth the damage of the last election will be undone!
If it will help the media and liberals get over this delusion, let me be clear: I and the overwhelming majority of Trump-supporters don’t care at all about this Russia business. Even if—and it sounds unlikely—Russia undermined American democracy to help elect Mr. Trump, I still don’t care.
Mr. Trump and Russia do not want to bring hordes of Muslims into our cities. They will not pass “hate speech” laws that could put me in prison. A President Trump elected by Russians is still better than a Hillary Clinton elected by “Americans.” I want my grandchildren to live in a country where they are not a despised and oppressed minority. A President Clinton would have done everything to ensure that happens.
Should we set aside our petty differences since we are all Americans and we all believe in the democratic system?
No. It’s only by inertia that is still one country. If each state, or even each region, magically became a sovereign nation tomorrow, there would be no movement to unite into one bigger nation. The only thing that keeps us together is that secession is messy.
At the American Renaissance office, we sometimes get phone calls and email from folks threatening to kill us. They are never from Russians. They are almost always from blacks, and sometimes from white ethno-masochists. I would rather not live in the same country with those people; the United States should have dissolved long ago.
Conservatives talk about “civic nationalism” or “patriotism,” but what do those words even mean? I would rather my children went to a public school in Moscow as the only American, than to a public school in Washington DC or Los Angeles as the only white. In the current year, “citizenship” is just a social construct.
Maybe the next time a liberal complains about Russians stealing the election, I should say, “Boy I hope they did. It’d be comforting to know there’s a powerful white nation looking out for us.”
Ever since Trump was elected President, the Left has been throwing a collective fit, marching and protesting nonstop. And the media has been having a complete meltdown. (How could the electorate not follow our advice?)
This is exactly what children do when they don’t get their way: throw a tantrum.
(The Right didn’t throw this kind of tantrum when Obama got elected. Two years into his Presidency, after he showed his true colors, the Tea Party emerged. They held some quiet, orderly rallies, and that was pretty much it.)
The Left uses any excuse to riot. They are currently doing it in Hamburg, at the G-20 summit. They set cars on fire, smash store windows, throw Molotov cocktails, throw things at policemen, and in general just wreak as much havoc as they can.
This is the behavior of juvenile delinquents. (Though JD’s aren’t vain enough to attribute their destructive impulses to a higher purpose.)
The Left prevents conservatives from speaking on campus.
Children scream over you so you can’t be heard, or cover their ears and screech, “I can’t hear you!”
Since many on the Left seem incapable of logical argument, they resort to name-calling instead. (“Racist!” “Sexist!” “Homophobe!”)
That’s exactly how children argue, by name-calling.
Various members of the Left will sporadically threaten to leave the country if the Republican is elected President.
This is what spoiled children do: say they’re going to hold their breath until they turn blue if they don’t get their way.
The Left expects the government to provide them a decent living in return for doing nothing.
Sorta like a child getting an allowance.
The Left does an awful lot of virtue-signaling. They recite the correct beliefs, so as to communicate how good they are. (And they always seem to beam with pride as they do so.)
This is exactly how a teacher’s pet acts.
The Left, more than anything else, conforms. They are terrified at the thought that they might say something politically incorrect and someone might accuse them of being racist or sexist or homophobic.
Children are said to be particularly vulnerable to peer pressure.
Various members of the Show Biz Left have talked about bombing the White House, or shooting Trump, or have symbolically decapitated him. They don’t actually mean it; Trump was in no danger from any of these Hollywood loudmouths. But they did love to playact.
This is what children do: play make believe games, like GI Joe, or cops and robbers.
The Left has tried to portray Donald Trump as the second coming of Adolf Hitler.
Children create bogeymen whom they can be afraid of.
The more you think about it, the clearer it becomes that many on the Left simply got stuck in infantile mode.
They need to grow up.