The presidential campaign of 2016 has so far been a humdinger. With all of the republic’s most dangerous enemies gathered under the leadership of the Clintons, the race has become a kind of life-and-death match. A Trump win would see him and Governor Pence initiate America’s long road back to prosperity, nationalism, commonsense, social cohesiveness, and a war-avoiding foreign policy. A Clinton win, on the other hand, would force the issue of how dissenting Americans will choose to dispose, with some finality, of what surely will be Hillary’s continuing implementation of tyranny. The building blocks for more tyranny would be Clinton’s naming of Supreme Court justices to codify more legal preference for her party’s various slave colonies; her starting and losing of more unnecessary and bankrupting interventionist wars; her maintenance of a coddled, bribed, and controlled media; her imposition of punitive taxes on working Americans and their employers to support foreigners, migrants, illegal aliens, the Democrats’ slave colonies, as well as to eliminate middle-class jobs via trade deals and the fabricated climate-change crisis; and her party’s final destruction of the Constitution, the idea of equality before the law, the middle class, the primacy of the English language, American history, and the Christianity that always has been and still is a key part of the republic’s social fabric.
In some ways this reality prompts memories of the period between Lincoln’s election in November, 1860, and his inauguration in March, 1861, which historians have termed the “Secession Winter.” Throughout those months, Lincoln publicly argued that the southern states had not been attacked by the national government, and that he had no intention of doing so or of trying to deny the region any of its rights under the Constitution, including the right to own slaves. The southerners nonetheless rebelled and declared themselves an independent state. They acted not because of the existing ominous, though not lethally threatening political environment, but on their fear of what Lincoln, the Republicans, and the abolitionists might do to their liberties and property as 1861 unfolded. They chose to start a civil war — or a war of independence, if you like — and not to wait for a physical or legal attack of some kind by the Lincoln administration. That probably was a poor decision by southern leaders, but it is understandable, perhaps even defensible. Reality, after all, is often based as much on perception as fact, and the southerners’ almost unanimous perception was that Lincoln and his administration directly threatened their liberty and property and so made it time for them to leave the Union.
No such problem will face Americans if Hillary Clinton is elected in November, 2016. If Clinton is elected, Americans who are opposed to her, her party of criminals, thugs, racists, and theorists, and, most important, to tyranny, will not have to wonder, worry, or fret about what she and her administration might do to destroy their history, jobs, wealth, traditions, liberty, Constitution, and religion. Nor will they have to wonder if tens of millions more unborn Americans will be murdered and dismembered for profit, or if tens of thousands more of the republic’s soldier-children will be killed and maimed in unnecessary, Israel-and-NATO-protecting wars. All of these things, Americans will know with a terrible certainty, will be givens.
If Clinton wins, the republic, this time around, will face a much shorter “Secession Winter,” with inauguration day in January rather than March. But even that shorter interregnum is not a problem. Americans will know what is coming from a Clinton administration, and unlike our southern brethren 150 years ago, they will not have to make a decision based on fears about what might to happen to them and their property and liberties. They will know, without any reason for doubt, what is going to happen. The election of Mrs. Clinton means the end of the republic, perhaps not immediately, but soon and conclusively. But, all thanks to God, Americans will be able to deal with that reality on the basis of hard fact and not only fears and assumptions. At that time the die will be cast, and Americans may well confront a reason for rebellion that will require them to execute the duty they were assigned in the Declaration of Independence. “Prudence, indeed,” the Continental Congress wrote as a committee-of-the whole,
will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
So the republic is headed for momentous and perhaps tragic and bloody times. Things may still work out without a repeat of 1861 and all that came in its train. Let us all work and vote for that end, and pray with utmost sincerity all goes well. In the meantime, the following items are worth considering. They are crystal clear auguries of what a Hillary Clinton administration will bring; namely, more lies, corruption, criminality, war, foreign influence and masters, bankruptcy, arrogance, debt, and unconstitutional national-government diktats for what were once the free and independent American republic and people.
A Tale of Heroic Feminism: That increasingly feeble icon of modern, self-reliant, liberated, and independent womanhood, Hillary Clinton, bellied up to the bar at the FBI and stoutly defended herself by telling Comey’s boys, “Colin made me do it.” Yes, Hillary and her aides betrayed their oaths of office, broke espionage and perjury laws, and treated their countrymen and their republic as expendable because of the Machiavellian advice of — a MAN. Mrs. Clinton — posing as innocent little Hillary of Sunnybrook Farm — wants all of us to believe that she resorted to criminality only because of former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who, she said, used a similar e-mail system during his tenure. General Powell’s office quickly released a polite memo claiming that Powell could not recall offering her the guidance she described, but he had sent her an e-mail memo saying he had used an AOL account for non-classified e-mails because the State Department did not have an unclassified e-mail system when he served there, a situation rectified long before Clinton was appointed to the office. General Powell’s office has since expressed some anger that Mrs. Clinton is trying to “pin” her criminality on the General. Nice try, Mrs. Clinton, but the sum of this story is that you lied again and you were called on it by the highly respected General Powell. You probably thought that General Powell would meekly allow his reputation for honor and honesty to be shredded by your lie because of all fine things that you and your party have done for Black people in America. Well, Mrs. C., the good general would not take the fall for you, and he may well be thinking along the lines of Mr. Trump’s question, “What the hell have Blacks got to lose by trying something new?” After all General Powell’s career was based on hard, republic-defending, and life-risking work, and it flourished during the tenure of the very Republicans that you, Mrs. C., and your fellow Simon Legree-like Democratic overseers deem racists. And by the way, Mrs. Clinton, was it not your husband who said of Barack Obama, “he’s the kind of guy we send to get our coffee”? It must be hoped that ol’ Marse Billy sees that General Powell is a decent, brave, and patriotic man and decides that he is at least worthy of stepping out and fetching bagels, maybe even croissants.
Contribute now or forever hold your bribe: That felonious couple, Hillary and Bill Clinton, have announced that the Clinton Foundation will no longer accept foreign donations if Hillary is elected president. This is precisely like the national government saying that it will prohibit the sale of beer on 15 September 2016, and no American should dare to buy beer in the run-up to that date. In the latter case, beer would be flying off the shelves and stockpiled. Just so in the case of the Clintons. The Clinton Foundation’s decision to abandon part of its criminal enterprise if Mrs. C. becomes president is simply a message that says, “Hey foreigners! You better hurry up and buy our influence before election day — and, yes, the price has gone up — because if Mrs. C. wins, we are only going to betray America for those of you who have fully paid up before the inauguration.” Rather than a patriotic decision to stop doing the bidding of foreign donors at the expense of America’s national interests, the Clinton Foundation has just decided to launch a slick, intense, and short-duration campaign for massive illegal donations from foreigners, which it will collect at the syndicate’s big meeting in New York City in September 2016. The banner over that meeting’s dais will simply say “Bribe us Now, We Will Play for You Later!”
Israel First is the Republicans’ and the republic’s cancer, Part 1: From the point in the Republican presidential primaries that Donald Trump first showed potential strength, the party’s Neoconservatives and Israel-Firsters have been the core and probably the funders of the never-Trump movement. That group includes Bill Kristol and his crew of fifth columnists, barely disguised as journalists, at the Weekly Standard; the similarly oriented fifth-column staffs at Commentary and National Review; Israel-First buffoons like Michael Bloomberg and Mark Levin; and FOX’s seemingly endless crew of Israel-First shills, Kristol, again, George Will, Charles Krauthammer, the hosts of “The Five”, easily history’s all-time worst television news program, and the network’s team of always wrong on war, but always pro-Israel retired U.S. general officers. Will and Krauthammer are in a class of their own. Each drips personal hatred for Trump; indeed, Will seems half-or-more crazed when dispensing his anti-Trump venom, and not infrequently Brett Baier, host of the fine Special Report program, has had to correct or inject himself into one of Will’s anti-Trump tirades to maintain a bare semblance of “fair and balanced.” This past week, however, it was Krauthammer’s turn to show the ever-bright, always dastardly trademark of Israel First; namely, that U.S. interests can go to either hell or war if that will stop Trump. Mr. Baier’s panel was discussing Mrs. Clinton’s lengthy list of foreign-policy liabilities, when Krauthammer gleefully noted that Trump would be in political trouble if “his friend” Putin invaded Ukraine. Clearly, Krauthammer did not care if the United States became involved in a war with Russia that would have to go nuclear because the rest of NATO has unilaterally disarmed since the fall of the USSR. No, Krauthammer, Kristol, and the rest of the disloyal Jewish-American fifth columnists are willing to run that risk — or any risk — if it would help to get the completely AIPAC- and Israel First-owned Mrs. Clinton elected president.
Israel First is the Republicans’ and the republic’s cancer, Part 2: On 10 August 2016, CNN published a list of twelve U.S. Senators and Congressmen who are not supporting Donald Trump.(1) Having seen Israel-First’s deranged and vicious hatred of Mr. Trump, I thought it might be interesting to see if the anti-Trump Republican members of Congress found on the CNN list are tied to Israel First and have been bidden by their fifth-column masters to oppose Trump, even though it might mean sinking their party, countrymen, and republic by helping to elect a perjurer, influence-peddler, and authoritarian like Hillary Clinton. What I found about the anti-Trumpers, after doing just a small bit of research, follows and speaks for itself. All of the dozen on CNN’s list are recipients of pro-Israel funding — although several sold themselves pretty cheaply — and some also have received one or more free trips to Israel. In essence, Israel First’s leaders said “jump” to the dozen Republican members of the U.S. Congress listed by CNN and those lickspittles eagerly replied “Sure, how high?” while tugging their forelocks.
- Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $112, 310 (2)
- Senator Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $286,350
- Senator Mark Kirk (R-Illinois): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $718,246
- Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $100,354
- Senator Jeff Flake (R-Arizona): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $119,350
- Senator Dean Heller (R-Nevada): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $71,100
- Congressman Scott Rigell (R-Virginia): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $2,000
- Congressman Adam Kinzinger (R-Illinois): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $22,150
- Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen: Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $67,650, and four free trips to Israel valued at $66,794 (3)
- Congressman Charlie Dent (R-Pennsylvania): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $5,750 and one free trip to Israel valued at $17,112
- Congressman Mike Coffman (R-Colorado): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $11,400, and one free trip to Israel valued at $14,624
- Congressman Bob Dold (R-Illinois): Contributions from pro-Israel groups — $118,320, and one free trip to Israel valued at $11,119
- http://maplight.org/us-congress/interest/J5100/view/all. This website provided the contribution totals for each candidate named by CNN. The total for each senator, per the website, covers contributions for the last six years of available data, Apr 1, 2009 — Mar 31, 2015, including contributions to presidential campaigns. The totals for each member of the House of Representatives, per the website, covers contributions for the last two years of available data, Apr 1, 2013 — Mar 31, 2015, including contributions to presidential campaigns.
- https://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2011/09/18/the-list-of-congressional-representatives-who-took-trips-to-israel-do-they-represent-you-or-israel/. This site provided the data for the free-trips to Israel taken by four of the Representatives noted above. The data is from 2011, and the four may or may not have taken more free trips to Israel by now.