Old Gadfly: Gentlemen, what is intended by President
Trump’s desire to drain the swamp?[1]
IM:
First, it recognizes political corruption in America. Most of this corruption flows from crony
capitalism and a politically emancipated media that has shifted more power to the
central government in Washington DC and has disenfranchised the individual. Second, it recognizes that the progressive
left advances socialism, which is contrary to our self-governing constitutional
republic and the rule of law. This is why
there is such an anti-Trump public narrative--controlled by the mainstream
media in collaboration with the political establishment in Washington (elected
and unelected bureaucracy), academia, and Hollywood.
AM:
Too many voting Americans have
been conditioned to believe what progressives want them to believe. The Soviet Union’s Nikita Khruschev predicted
this outcome in 1957 when speaking to the National Press Club: “. . . I can prophesy that your grandchildren
in America will live under socialism. And please do not be afraid of
that. Your grandchildren will not understand how their grandparents did
not understand the progressive nature of a socialist society” (Nikita
Khruschev before the National Press Club in 1957, cited in J. Edgar
Hoover’s book, Masters of Deceit,
1958, p. 3). America’s ruling elite were
aware of this threat. For example,
Communist goals were published in the Congressional
Record in the 1960s. Of the 45 goals
listed, 28 have arguably been met (see goals 15 through 42). Goal number 40 states: “Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.” Trends reflect this achievement. See the graph below (published in The
Washington Post):
Moreover, in a recent survey,
half of Millennials (the grandchildren predicted by Khrushchev) claimed they
would rather live under socialism or communism than capitalism. An alarming 20% believe Joseph Stalin was a
hero.
Old Gadfly: Do these facts represent pure chance; that is,
do the facts represent an undirected evolution in our culture?
IM:
In my opinion, no. There seems to
be an organizing principle or set of principles that attract collaborating
efforts. While labels are dangerous
because they tend to be pejorative and conducive to the art of smearing (see
for example an essay by Ayn Rand, “’Extremism’
or the Art of Smearing”), we cannot define phenomena (organizing principles)
without using properly defined terms.
For example, most Republicans are called conservative. To a Democrat, this is either “extreme” or “far
right.” Some (maybe even most) Democrats
claim that if you vote Republican, you are a racist (and a xenophobe, Islamaphobe,
homophobe, misogynist, etc.). For
example, because President Trump did not take sides at Charlottesville and
claimed both sides were guilty of bigotry and violence, he is considered a
white supremacist. He was further
excoriated for suggesting there are good people on both sides. What he meant by this is that people can have
differences based on good intentions, while unequivocally stating that there is
no justification for violence. This
position, to the left, is immoral because only the left is moral. For clear evidence of this, read (check it
out from the library instead of purchasing it) George Lakoff’s Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. In a nutshell, Lakoff argues that
conservative views are not only wrong, they are immoral.
AM:
The left has masterfully engineered public sentiment. I am amused (and sobered) when the
left-leaning press produces polls that show how unpopular President Trump is
while constantly and shamelessly attacking him and his associates in their news
presentations. When over 90% of press
coverage is negative and 100% of Democrats in Congress obstruct anything he
does, one would think over 90% of the public would disapprove of Trump’s
performance.
Let’s not forget, Hillary
Clinton was the left’s champion going into this past election. She idolized Saul Alinsky (as indicated by
her Wellseley College Thesis). In his Rules for Radicals, Alinsky provided
rules for taking power away from the powerful.
Rule # 13 said: “Pick the target,
freeze it, and polarize it.” Is it any
surprise that more information seems to be leaking into the public domain about
Hillary’s involvement in the infamous Russian dossier? To the left, Hillary is not “the target”; so,
they have no incentive to shine a light on this actual Russian collusion.
What I find especially
disturbing is how Republicans either get duped into collaborating in efforts
such as this or reveal their true colors.
Remember, it was Senator
McCain who delivered the dossier to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Also, when allegations of sexual misconduct
were reported by The Washington Post,
Senator McCain took the allegations as fact and said Judge Roy Moore should
immediately step aside. McCain’s
complicity and hypocrisy are nauseating.
Let me share some other facts about Senator McCain.
First, while celebrated as a
hero who endured years of torture as an American prisoner of war, he signed a
confession that said, “I am a black criminal and I have performed deeds of an
air pirate, I almost died, and the Vietnamese people saved my life, thanks to
the doctors . . ..”[2] Although this is an abbreviated confession,
solid investigative work produced a recording of a lengthier confession that
was first broadcasted on June 2, 1969 as propaganda over the Vietnamese radio
airwaves (listen to the recording here,
in particular 16:05 minutes into the broadcast). Does this make Senator McCain less
honorable? How many Americans, when
subjected to true physical torture (beyond the mere psychological inconvenience
of water boarding), offered similar propaganda confessions? The answer is irrelevant; however, does such
an action diminish any other heroic actions?
If Senator McCain went on to live an honorable life, is it worth
drudging up these confessions decades later?
Yet, Senator McCain was quick to convict Judge Moore for mere
allegations from decades ago.
Second, then Lieutenant Commander
McCain also returned home to discover that his wife had been in a serious car
accident leaving her significantly disfigured and disabled.[3] He soon left her for a wealthy younger woman
(by 17 years) and the glamour of politics (see here
and here). So much for loyalty.
Third, in addition to his
part in delivering the Trump Russian dossier to the FBI, McCain has been silent
in regard to the left’s attempt to scandalize Donald Trump, Jr.’s meeting with
a Russian lawyer. The purpose for the
meeting was to “lobby” America, on behalf of Russia’s Putin, to repeal the
Magnitsky Act. Why is this
significant? William Browder, ironically
the grandson of Earl Browder who ran unsuccessfully for President of the United
States under the Communist Party in 1936 and 1940, is the individual who
championed the Magnitsky Act through Congress.
In trying to consult with Senator McCain, the only way he was able to achieve access was by working through a
lobbyist (i.e., through the crony capitalism venue). Browder explains these details in his book, Red Notice:
A True Story of High Finance, Murder, and One Man’s Fight for Justice. The Act was designed to name 60 individuals
in Russia who were responsible for the arrest, torture, and murder of Sergei Magnitsky,
one of Browder’s lawyers in Russia.
Browder had challenged the Russian oligarchy and Magnitsky’s torture and
murder were the consequence. There are
other lurid details of political resistance in America (such as John Kerry’s
opposition of the Magnitsky Act to avoid complications in becoming the
Secretary of State), but I would encourage you to read the book for more
detail. The point being, McCain was
directly involved in this case. Combined
with his involvement in the Russian dossier, McCain seems to have sided with political
expediency over truth and justice.
Unfortunately, given his most recent medical circumstances, Senator
McCain (and others who are complicit in shaping a dishonest public narrative) may
not have the time to reflect and to seek redemption in the same manner as Jean-Baptiste Clamence in Albert Camus’
novel, The
Fall.
Old
Gadfly: None of this is covered in the mainstream
media. Why should we believe that a
corrupt establishment would address these matters in a noncorrupt manner? Unfortunately, the only way to cover up
corruption is through more corruption. This
is what President Trump (and Judge Moore and others) faces as he tries to drain
the swamp.
[1] For an excellent set of arguments and
evidence, see Ken Buck, Drain the
Swamp: How Washington Corruption Is
Worse than You Think, (Washington, D.C.:
Regnery Publishing, 2017).
[2] See Robert Timberg, The Nightingale’s Song, (New York,
NY: Simon & Schuster, 1995), p. 136. Note, Timberg did not include the entire text
of the confession.
[3] Ibid,
pp. 96, 99, 230-31, 232, 235, 236, 238, 299, 373.
No comments:
Post a Comment