A particularly disturbing point is how [...]]]>
A particularly disturbing point is how America’s elites have lost any loyalty to this country and many look to Beijing for leadership and their future profits. Among the worst of those is the highly corrupt Biden family who are now well placed to accrue more fortunes based on foreign connections built over years.
President Trump recognized the China threat early on and took steps against it. So the ChiCom leadership must be very happy with the 2020 election outcome.
A spare video file is here.
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: Last night, Joe Biden promised to reverse the Trump administration’s foreign policy on the question of China. According to Biden, the U.S. will now follow something called the International Rules of the Road. What does that mean exactly? Well, you can guess what it means. More subservience to the emerging nation of China.
Most people don’t understand how big this is, or how far back it goes, or the implications for them. Lee Smith understands. He’s an author and a journalist. He’s written one of the best pieces of the year on this topic for Tablet Magazine.
The piece is called “The 30 Tyrants.” You’ll have to stop reading midway through because it’s upsetting. But as you read it, you’ll also know it’s true. So we recommend that you do. He joins us tonight to explain. Lee, thanks so much for coming on.
LEE SMITH: Thanks, Tucker.
CARLSON: And for the mental energy required to connect all these dots in the piece, and again, I really hope our readers read it for themselves. But in the meantime, will you summarize your position.
SMITH: Yes, I mean, basically, what I wanted to explain is I wanted to explain why so many things look crazy. Many things, for instance, that you cover on your show all the time, for instance, tonight, why people are coming across — why people are coming across the border in such profound numbers?
It all looks crazy until you realize there’s a reason it’s going on, and the reason is, is because the oligarchy that runs this country now is not primarily loyal to the United States. They do not care about the amount of damage they do to America. They don’t care about the amount of damage they do to Americans — that’s part of the system. Their primary loyalty is to their relationship to the Communist Chinese Party. That is their center of gravity. It’s the source of their wealth, privilege and prestige.
CARLSON: So keep connecting, if you will, and I hope sure that again, people will read this because print is really the only medium that can fully explain a thesis as complex as yours, but I think you’re right. So what else would connect to that point that you just made?
SMITH: Well, I mean, the big thing is starting — I mean, one of the key dates is of course, it starts with Henry Kissinger’s and Richard Nixon’s opening to China.
But really a big date is 1994 when Bill Clinton decided to delink human rights and trade regarding China, right? The ambition — you hear people say all the time, oh, we were hopeful that China would adopt more democratic policies. It was nonsense.
The premier of China at the time was Jiang Zemin — this was the man who was catapulted to power after sending tanks into Tiananmen Square. So the American elite knew exactly what they were getting into. What they looked at, they looked at an enormous cheap labor pool. And they said, we’re going to get rich and that’s precisely what happened, where we are more than a quarter of a century along and that’s precisely what’s happened. Now, one of the interesting things that happened during the Donald Trump presidency because Donald Trump started calling these people out, I think that Donald Trump didn’t even have that clear a sense of how tied in, how extensive this network was.
One of the examples I mentioned is, for instance, whoever would have put Apple CEO Tim Cook and LeBron James in the same family album, but there they are, sure enough, because they both rely — their wealth relies on the two same things: cheap Chinese labor and a growing Chinese consumer market. If you look across, this is not just — it’s not just entertainment. It’s not just tech. It goes into the corporate world. It goes into finance. Unfortunately, it affects our government throughout.
One of the most astonishing revelations was a memo that former D.N.I. John Ratcliffe wrote, regarding the C.I.A. regarding their intelligence analysis, C.I.A. management was apparently bullying analysts saying they didn’t like their analysis of China, because they were worried about the policies that might encourage, meaning Donald Trump’s policies who was hard on China.
Therefore, C.I.A. management was protecting China from solid analysis. It’s astonishing, but take it one step further. Remember who owns the Cloud on which all of the C.I.A.’s information is collected? And that’s Jeff Bezos, who is China’s number one distributor in the United States.
CARLSON: In 10 seconds, does it shock you that the new Defense Secretary has basically said the greatest threat we face is not China, but white supremacists in this country?
SMITH: No, not at all. If you look at the Biden administration, the way it’s staffed, and unfortunately, if you look at the first family, you see that there are deep and extensive ties to the Chinese Communist Party. It doesn’t surprise me at all.
CARLSON: Amazing piece. Lee, I appreciate your coming on tonight.
SMITH: Thank you very much, Tucker.
After a few [...]]]>
After a few minutes he was joined by Victor Davis Hanson who thought this is “the worst field we’ve seen since Walter Mondale lost in a landslide to Ronald Reagan.”
The candidates do seem like the B-team of the D-party, but who else is there? When the leadership of the Democrat party is considered among the serving governors, senators and members of Congress, nobody appealing springs to mind. Over recent years, the whole party seems to have lost track of the major purpose in governing — namely to lead with policies that will help the American people.
Instead the Democrats support bad ideas like open borders, including crazy unaffordable freebies for foreign lawbreakers.
Who can forget the moment in last October’s Democrat debate in which all candidates agreed to support taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal aliens?
When the debate moderator asked Democrat candidates to “Raise your hand if your government plan would provide [medical] coverage for undocumented immigrants,” all responded affirmatively.
How would that policy benefit Americans, many of whom find their own medical coverage to be inadequate? Healthcare polls consistently as a top concern — particularly its high cost — but citizens show no desire to pay for illegal aliens’ medical coverage.
Democrats are united that they want to beat Donald Trump and gain power, but an affirmative message to voters is lacking. For example, over the last two years, House Democrats managed only to impeach the president, with no legislation to advance the well-being of citizens.
Hanson agrees the Democrats have lost track of the big political picture — to win elections, a party has to offer something to voters beyond wokeness and diversity.
Audio version:
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: So over the next few weeks, all the attention will of course be on Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden and maybe Michael Bloomberg. So we want to pause and remember the candidates we lost over the weekend — not permanently, they’re just not in the race.
For all of them, their failure to win the nomination is reason for all of us to feel a little better about ourselves. We’re not as dumb as we thought we were. Tom Steyer disproved that simply because you’re a billionaire doesn’t mean you’re an oligarch. Steyer spent more than $100 million dollars of his own money. And in the end, did an embarrassing dance on stage and then got nothing.
His sad presidential run ought to be encouraging to every person in America, particularly the slower among us. If that guy can make a billion dollars, you can, too.
Pete Buttigieg’s defeat proves that while Americans may be willing to vote for socialists or plutocrats or adulterers, they are pretty open minded actually. They still want their Presidents to be human. Creepy robots with biographies crafted in a Silicon Valley lab are going to have to wait till the 22nd Century to have their chance. Here’s Buttigieg minutes ago backing Biden.
PETE BUTTIGIEG: It is an honor to be here with Vice President Biden. You know, when I ran for President, we made it clear that the whole idea was about rallying the country together to defeat Donald Trump and to win the era for the values that we share and that was always a goal that was much bigger than me becoming President.
And it is in the name of that very same goal, that I’m delighted to endorse and support Joe Biden for President.
CARLSON: I think Barack Obama gave that exact same speech, but I don’t have Google in front of me, but you can check it.
And of course, Amy Klobuchar dropped out as well. Her defeat is good news for anyone who cares about proper comb hygiene. The Democratic race may be smaller tonight, but it’s not more amicable. Why? Because Elizabeth Warren is still running and now she is openly campaigning for a divisive brokered convention next July, which would be really like Christmas day for the rest of us.
Warren’s only reason for staying in the race right now is to sabotage Bernie Sanders, but many Democrats are happy to play along.
The weird neuroses anxieties and just strangers in the Democratic coalition are coming to the surface. It’s like pulling up a rock and all these things crawl away or try to.
We’re learning a lot about what they really care about. So over the weekend, the Boston Globe ran a piece arguing — and this is for real — that it was “disrespectful” for Bernie Sanders to try and win the Massachusetts primary since it would be a “major humiliation” for Elizabeth Warren.
That’s really identity politics taken to its endpoint. It’s the state of the Democratic race right now. If you’re too extreme for the donor class, then it’s sexist to try and win an election.
Victor Davis Hanson, one of the wisest people we know, is a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution out in California. He joins us tonight. Professor, you look on at this and what do you make of it?
VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: Well, this latest dropout group of Klobuchar and Buttigieg is same thing as the first round of dropouts with Kamala Harris and Cory Booker, Julian Castro and how to sum it all up, Tucker, is after a year of all of this wokeness and diversity and white privilege, what do we end up with?
We ended up with three old white guys that are 77 and 78, with a Marxist — Neo-Marxist — as the presumptive leader, and all of them have a history of insensitive remarks about women or things they’ve written.
So it’s a complete antithesis of the whole premise of the Democratic Party and we don’t have anybody who is a charismatic character other than Bernie Sanders, and his criticisms are sometimes legitimate of American society, but his bromides are frightening.
So they are in a real — and then they’ve got this outside billionaire who is coming into save everybody from Bernie Sanders, on the premise that Biden was fading, but Biden is not quite dead yet — his candidacy, I mean that metaphorically — and now Bloomberg is going to be blamed for you know, dividing the moderate vote and handing the nomination to Sanders.
And then this was supposed to be the transparent new reformist party and they’re going to go back to an old 1950s, 1940s brokered convention with guys and cigars in the back room, horse-trading jobs and employment and entitlements to get delegates. It’s completely — the reality is completely opposite to the rhetoric of the whole progressive movement.
CARLSON: So they clearly don’t care about the things they say they care about. So if you could just sum up crisply what they do care about, what do you think that is?
HANSON: What they do care about is they want to control the House and they want to win back the Senate, and they want Supreme Court picks because they’re interested in power. They’re not interested necessarily in diversity or people of color being the new face of the Democratic Party or any of that.
They’re interested in power, and they think they can’t get it with Bernie Sanders, and they’re absolutely right. He’ll be a disaster. This is the worst field we’ve seen since Walter Mondale lost in a landslide to Ronald Reagan, and if they go the Bernie route, they’re going to lose big and they’re desperate and they’re down to the 11th hour, and the only candidates they have that they think they can save the House and maybe win back to Senate are Bloomberg and Biden and they’re pathetic candidates, and it’s kind of a tragedy to watch this thing unfold.
CARLSON: You’re right.
HANSON: It really is.
CARLSON: Oh, but that there’s been — there’s pleasure in it too, Professor, I would say.
HANSON: But it’s about power, and they are losing that and they know it.
CARLSON: Exactly. It’s about power. Great to see you tonight. Thank you so much for that, as always.
But that assessment is not true. Bernie has flipped over to the side of the deep-state globalists who think borders and national sovereignty are obsolete and need to go. [...]]]>
But that assessment is not true. Bernie has flipped over to the side of the deep-state globalists who think borders and national sovereignty are obsolete and need to go. He once supported American workers and understood that excessive immigration drove down wages.
No longer. He has succumbed to the open-borders insanity of the left including free healthcare and college for the invaders. Bernie has also embraced the scary-bad New Way Forward Act that threatens the basic law and order we all expect.
In 2015, he objected to open borders as “a Koch brothers proposal” but the senator is all the way there now.
Democrats used to be represent American working people, but dropped that allegiance when the party discovered that immigrants, particularly hispanics, were more dependable big-government voters than picky citizens.
Under Bernie’s generous plan, why wouldn’t a hundred million foreigners come? Or a billion? Unlimited free stuff from the most desirable nation on earth would be irresistible.
Not to mention the money-making opportunities in a wide open America for drug cartels and other criminal enterprises from abroad.
On Thursday Tucker Carlson examined Bernie’s embrace of extreme open borders:
However, Tucker did not speculate on why Bernie switched to the dark side.
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: All of a sudden, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is the frontrunner in the Democratic race. As of tonight, Sanders has by far the best chance in the whole Democratic Party of getting the nomination. So how should you feel about that?
Well if you’re conservative, it’s probably a little hard to take the whole thing seriously. For one thing it seemed to come out of nowhere — nobody expected it, nobody on TV warned you it was gonna happen.
For another thing, Sanders isn’t half as gut-level offensive as someone like say Elizabeth Warren. Unlike Warren, Sanders is obviously sincere about what he believes; he means it.
He’s got the right enemies too. CNN appears to hate Bernie Sanders every bit as much as they hate Donald Trump. That’s a plus, and unlike everyone else on the left Sanders talks mostly about economics rather than Putin and non-binary bathrooms. And it’s refreshing to hear someone focus on things that matter for once. Plus it’s not like Sanders is gonna win the presidency. You keep hearing people on both sides saying there is no possibility, no chance in the world that Bernie Sanders will get elected president in November, and that sounds right basically.
The guy calls himself a socialist — come on now, this is America. That’s what we’re telling ourselves, but are we absolutely sure that that’s true? But ask yourself this — who was the last candidate they told you on television could never ever win? — oh yeah, the current president. So ignore the people on TV. They’re morons, they lack wisdom, they lack imagination, they’re almost always wrong about everything.
Of course Bernie Sanders could win the general election. A year from now we could be in the first months of a Bernie Sanders administration, and this would be a completely different country. What kind of country would it be?
Well tonight we’re beginning a series on Bernie Sanders’ America. We take Sanders seriously; we think you should take him seriously too.
So we’re starting tonight with Sanders’ views on immigration. It’s a topic that affects this country on every level. For decades Sanders had what would now be considered conservative views on immigration: he cared about higher wages for workers — that was his issue.
Mass immigration lowers wages, so Sanders was against it. It’s that simple. Then Sanders ran for president and his views changed completely. Now Sanders is as radical on immigration as anyone else in the race.
For example, he’s come out against virtually all deportations — all. Watch:
SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: A moratorium on deportations for the 99 percent of the people is nothing to be cynical about. I think that is a significant step forward, and the undocumented community would be very proud of that.
CARLSON: Ending 99 percent of deportations to please the undocumented community. You should know that that number includes violent felons. Sanders went on to say only if an illegal alien commits a quote terrible terrible crime — only then, Sanders quote might consider deporting that person — might.
Now Sanders wouldn’t have to change any laws to do this; he could simply order federal authorities to stop deportations. He could do that day one, and that’s his plan. Imagine what that would mean for this country — foreign nationals commit crimes, and we can’t send them home.
But Sanders wouldn’t stop there. He’s planning to unilaterally enact many pieces of the New Way Forward act — that’s the lunatic piece of legislation we’ve covered on the show extensively. It’s designed to protect criminal aliens — that’s the point of it.
Sanders has pledged to end the ban on deported criminals re-entering the United States. Why is that a good idea? He’s pledged to eliminate expedited removal — that’s the policy that allows obvious illegal aliens to be kicked out of the country swiftly. Over.
He’s promised to give discretion to immigration judges so they can protect any illegal aliens who somehow beat the odds and face actual deportation. Sanders has also vowed to end all workplace immigration raids so that big business will be able to rely on illegal immigrant labor with impunity.
That’s something he spent 30 years attacking — now he’s for it, and ending those immigration raids will be easy since Sanders is planning to abolish ICE.
SANDERS: On day one, through an executive order, we will repeal all of Trump’s racist immigration executive orders. We will end the ICE raids that are terrorizing communities all across America.
CARLSON: Of course businesses will have to import more of that illegal exploited labor that Sanders is suddenly for because Sanders is also promising an amnesty for all current illegal aliens in this country. That’s more than 22 million people.
Of course that’s a move that will change the electoral balance in this country permanently — forever — and that’s the real point, needless to say.
Bringing in new illegal workers won’t be difficult: Sanders plans to decriminalize the illegal border crossings and abolish the Border Patrol.
What is this? This is what radical open borders policy looks like. Sanders is arguing that everyone on earth has the effective right to come to this country anytime and receive the benefits of citizenship.
In the Sanders administration, those benefits would include but will not be limited to free college, free healthcare, and full eligibility for food stamps and welfare.
Now we’re not making this up for partisan reasons or to slam Bernie Sanders because suddenly it looks like he’s gonna become the nominee. This has been out there the whole time, no one’s mentioning it, but it’s all on tape. Sanders brags about all of it. Watch:
SANDERS: I believe that healthcare is a human right.
QUESTIONER: Senator, would you include the 11 million undocumented?
SANDERS: Absolutely. When I talk about healthcare being a human right — last time I heard that undocumented people are human beings as well. We need the best educated population in the world: that means we’re going to make our public colleges and universities tuition-free and open that to the undocumented as well.
CARLSON: So why isn’t anybody talking about this? People are jumping up and down on both sides on television because Sanders praised Fidel Castro, because Sanders is a self-described Democratic Socialist — that’s bad, there’s no doubt. But is it worse than what he believes on policy? It’s not even close.
You know what’s way worse than anything he’s ever said about Fidel Castro? His belief, his argument that anyone on the planet who sneaks into the United States should get free healthcare and free college tuition. That’s the case he’s making.
So here’s the obvious question — what would that do to our medical system and our universities? How long before they collapse? Not long.
These are some of the best things in our country, what we brag about — gone. How do we pay for all of this, by the way? And if it’s such a great idea, why is no other nation considering doing it? Why has no other nation ever done this?
Sanders has no answers for those questions, the most basic questions, and in fact becomes angry if you ask him. He clearly doesn’t care about the consequences of his plans.
Why? There’s really only one possible answer — because he doesn’t care about the United States or its future. It’s obvious that Sanders hates the country he seeks to lead; there’s no other explanation for it, and that is a very dangerous quality in a president.
The show will continue to bring you a series on what life would be like under a Bernie Sanders administration because there’s a lot there, and none of it’s gotten attention. It’s more than just praising Castro — trust us.
She has a lot of crazy left [...]]]>
She has a lot of crazy left ideas for how she would act as president, one of the worst being gutting the First Amendment with a fascist cadre of speech police.
Fortunately, Warren’s poll numbers are falling, so it’s unlikely she will be the Democrat candidate.
Tucker Carlson opined on Wednesday that candidates tend to become more truthful when they are losing. Maybe, but I tend to think they are just grasping for something different to say, anything that might perk up unimpressed voters.
Democrats weren’t always this horrible — what happened? Is it the constant reaction to 24-7 media where candidates have to one-up whatever was just said, making their responses increasingly extreme?
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: The upside of collapsing political campaigns is they tend to be pretty honest. Once they sense they’re losing, a lot of candidates decide to say what they actually think — what the hell? Why not?
That apparently is where Elizabeth Warren is tonight. With her chances of becoming President having assumed that trajectory of a plane crash, Warren has decided to go full fascist because that’s who she is and has always been.
Today, Warren released a plan that demands criminal penalties for anyone who posts “disinformation online, designed to sway voters.”
Now, try to ignore the redolent irony here. This is the person who for years posted false claims online that she was a Cherokee Indian to sway voters. This is the candidate who pretended she’d lost a job for being pregnant and their kids went to a public school.
Now, this very same person is threatening to send you to prison for telling tall tales. The most florid liar in the race, someone the New York Times once euphemistically described as a gifted storyteller, says she’s going to criminalize lying.
Paging Dr. Freud. That is more than hypocrisy. It’s a sickness.
But let’s take Elizabeth Warren’s plan seriously for a moment. What exactly is this disinformation she intends to ban? If you guess the answer has something to do with Russia, pour yourself another vodka.
According to Warren’s press release today, “The same tactics employed by the Russian government are just as easily accessible to domestic groups seeking to promote or oppose candidates and political or social issues.”
Okay. But what does that mean? Well, it means that when people say things that Elizabeth Warren doesn’t like or that impede her attempts to accumulate power, they should go to jail.
Warren isn’t the first person to fantasize about this, of course, all megalomaniacs dream of running their own ministries of truth. The founders of this country understood that well, and that’s why they protected us with the First Amendment.
Warren doesn’t care. As many on the left have explained, the First Amendment is racist. It was written by slaveholders — shut up and obey! As President, Warren would order tech companies to share information about you so that she can determine who has been saying things she doesn’t want said, and then they can be punished.
Warren has also promised a Global Summit on disinformation so that other fascist governments could coordinate their efforts against speech more efficiently. No word yet on whether North Korea has joined Warren’s budding coalition. Of course, they’re a natural partner in this.
None of this will actually happen, of course, at least not soon. Voters don’t like Elizabeth Warren enough to give her more power.
But what’s amazing is that the press still takes Elizabeth Warren very seriously. They love her. Warren won the New York Times endorsement for President just the other day.
So the question is, are the media on board with her plan to shut down the First Amendment? Don’t take our word for it, see for yourself.
If the media don’t denounce this idea within the next few days, you’ll know they are for it.
Friday’s New York Times front page included an article with the newsprint title Facing Queries [...]]]>
Friday’s New York Times front page included an article with the newsprint title Facing Queries About His Son, Biden Is by Turns Calm or Curt (reprinted by MSN.com). So it appears the elite media is pulling back its support for the 2020 candidate.
What’s notable about the Biden clan is how many family members rode the gravy train to riches on the basis of the name and influence. Schweizer has dug up people beyond Hunter that most Americans have never heard of.
Below, the Biden family alleged crooks include (left to right) Joe’s brother James, son Hunter, son-in-law Howard Krein, brother Frank and sister Valerie Biden Owens.
Lou Dobbs recently interviewed the author to get a taste of the Biden family business. Dobbs seemed amazed and almost amused by the brazen arrogance of the clan.
Spare audio:
Schweizer noted how atypical it is for so many family members to be engaged in corruption-based crime:
“It’s remarkable. I mean the Biden family, you’ve got five family members involved. I call them the Biden Five; they’re like the Jackson Five but they don’t sing, it’s corruption, and I’ve never seen this before. You know we’ve talked many times, Lou, on your show about corruption involving Democrats, Republicans. Maybe there’s one family member, maybe there’s two. . .
I’ve never run across one that has five, and on top of the fact that there are five involved, it’s like a corrupt United Nations. You’ve got Hunter Biden doing deals in Ukraine, doing deals in China with state actors, corrupt old guards; you got the brother James who’s with this construction firm that’s set up by a family friend. They get the contract to build a hundred thousand homes in Iraq they get contracts to do work for the State Department’s. Then you’ve got this other brother Frank meeting with the Costa Rican president for these energy deals, and of course he has no background in energy. It just goes on and on.”
For more details on the family members, see Schweizer’s New York Post article, How five members of Joe Biden’s family got rich through his connections.
The book ranked #1 on Amazon 10 days before release, surely based on Schweizer’s reputation as a thorough investigator. It won’t help Joe Biden’s faltering campaign, that’s for sure. Other Democrats get criticism as well: the table of contents shows chapters on Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.
]]>The latest immigration pitch comes from Bernie Sanders who wants to welcome thousands of “climate refugees” to the US which assumes major suffering somewhere on the planet because of extended bad weather, drought or some other regional hiccup. I remain convinced that climate change is often trotted out as a cause of problems that can more properly be attributed to world population growth. Plus, climate change is a flexible enough problem to allow many government-imposed solutions, definitely a plus for Democrats.
Tucker Carlson examined the ramifications of Bernie’s plan for “climate migrants” on his Monday show.
We humans now number more than 7.7 billion persons, more than double the world’s population on the first Earth Day in 1970 when the number was 3.7 billion — that’s quite an uptick in just under 50 years.
Top Democrats claim to believe in climate change as a big problem that is worsened by the United States, yet they want to increase America’s population substantially by immigration. Go figure.
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: Well a couple years ago, Bernie Sanders described open borders as a Koch brothers proposal because it is literally a Koch brothers proposal — it’s a libertarian idea — he was right. Mass migration reduces wages for low-skilled workers but now Sanders has changed his mind. His campaign has released an immigration proposal that reads like something the Koch brothers would write: it would halt deportation or abolish enforcement of our borders, abolish ICE and create a new category for something called “climate migrants.”
Justin Haskins is a research fellow at the Heartland Institute. He joins us tonight to explain what a climate migrant might be, and more pressingly, Justin, why would a climate migrant have a right to come to my country?
JUSTIN HASKINS: Well apparently climate migrants, which I don’t even think are a real thing, are essentially a category of people from third world countries, from developing nations, who are so supposedly suffering as a result of climate change, man-caused climate change.
Now, I don’t believe that anybody is actually suffering from man-caused climate change, but Bernie Sanders’ proposal would have 50,000 people, 50,000 at minimum, come to the United States from around the world, who are suffering from climate change, supposedly, in just the first year — and over the course of his presidency, hundreds of thousands of people, because supposedly this is good for climate justice or something along those lines.
But the most bizarre part of all of this is that I thought, according to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and everybody else in the socialist left, that human beings are causing climate change, that humans’ CO2 emissions, that that’s what’s causing climate change, and it’s going to be catastrophic.
Well, if that’s true, then why are we bringing people from all over the world where they produce CO2 emissions less per person, in places like Mexico and Guatemala and places like that, why are we bringing them to the United States where we produce CO2 emissions per person at a much higher rate? It doesn’t make any sense.
CARLSON: And also, if you cared about the environment, which I personally do emphatically care, and actually go outside once in a while, unlike most people on the left — why would you want a crowded country?
Isn’t crowding your country the fastest way to despoil it, to pollute it, to make it a place you wouldn’t want to live?
HASKINS: Yeah absolutely. Look, the left is schizophrenic on a lot of issues, and this is one of those issues.
It doesn’t make any sense at all to have an open door, open border policy where you’re bringing people into the United States when people are supposedly destroying the planet, destroying the environment, where we’re we’re talking about population control in some parts of the left right now.
Alexandria Ocasio Cortez says that she stays up at night, and she doesn’t think she can have children because she’s worried about the effect it’s having on climate change, but Alexandria Ocasio Cortez wants to bring in hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of people from around the world into the United States. How does this make any sense?
CARLSON: And actually, I mean this with sincerity, I feel sorry for her because I think she means it. I think that the movement that was started to clean up the environment which most people, again very much including me, totally for that has morphed into this weird cluster of neuroses where people actually think they can’t have children because of climate, and it’s sad. I mean it really is — paging Dr. Freud — I mean these people need help. Well I guess we all need help our society’s going crazy.
Justin, thank you for your part in making it a little bit less crazy.
After all, the Dems have a Deep State to protect and re-empower.
The top-polling Democrat candidates are embarrassingly lame. Once the confident front-runner, Joe Biden has been sliding backwards because of his verbal gaffes, incidents of inappropriate touching and a general lack of sharpness about the issues.
The apparent up-and-comer Elizabeth Warren has problems too: she won’t say how she will finance her top goodie, Medicare For All (including illegal aliens) — because that particular item is so pricey that her proposed tax-the-rich plan comes nowhere close to paying the tab.
Warren is not the only Democrat with poor math skills. When a debate moderator requested of the Democrat candidates, “Raise your hand if your government plan would provide [medical] coverage for undocumented immigrants,” all responded affirmatively.
On Tuesday, Tucker Carlson included clips from lower-tier candidate Cory Booker reciting his “Politics be damned” motto, because Democrats apparently believe they have to keep tap-dancing as fast as they can to obscure their lack of appealing issues for the 2020 election.
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: Good evening, and welcome to “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” Not so long ago CNN President Jeff Zucker gathered his minions on a morning conference call and commanded them to play up the ongoing impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives. Impeachment, impeachment, impeachment — Zucker squeaked. Nothing else matters, yell about impeachment until your throat bleeds, that’s an order.
And with that he slithered off back to his lair, deep beneath CNN’s Center in the ice caves. And of course the minions obeyed. They were afraid not to obey. But we happen to disagree with Jeff Zucker. Now if you’re a committed partisan as he is, impeachment often looks like the most important story there is.
But if you’re not, sometimes it seems like about the fifth or sixth most important story playing out in America right now. There’s an awful lot else going on. So that’s pretty much how we’ve been covering the story on this show, which is to say not very closely. But tonight, there’s some actual news to report. We want to take a moment to assess what exactly is happening with impeachment.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has announced that later this week, the House will hold a formal vote on procedures that could lead to a formal impeachment of the President at some point. And what exactly does that mean? Why is it happening? What will result from it? All of that, unfortunately, is still opaque tonight. It’s still not exactly clear what high crime the President supposedly committed. There’s some disagreement on that question actually, even on the left.
So to solve the riddle, we are taking you tonight as we often do when cloudy issues demand clarity to the pride of Yale Law School, the oracle of Newark, the single most famous bachelor vegan in the United States Senate. Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Cory A. Booker who will read to us tonight from his newly released spoken word prose poem entitled, “Politics Be Damned.” Dim the lights. Be still and listen to Cory:
SENATOR CORY BOOKER, (D-NJ): Politics be damned. I have a job to do, which is to hold the executive accountable.
Politics be damned. This is our country. This is our Constitution.
Politics be damned right now. This this is a sad day, a sad chapter in American history.
Politics be damned. It’s time to do what is right.
And politics be damned. I just want to get the truth. I want to do my job.
Politics be damned. I swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. I need to do that.
The politics of this be damned.
CARLSON: So there you have it. Politics be damned, more than sorrow than in anger, mister. This isn’t about politics, Cory Booker says. It is about doing what’s right, as it always is in Washington.
And if you’ve got any doubt about that, he will say it again and again and again and again until you are too exhausted or hypnotized to protest, which ought to be a tip off that in fact, the opposite is true.
Actually, this is entirely about politics. There is no real crime behind the impeachment proceedings. Instead, the President’s chief offense appears to be disagreeing with policies set by the bureaucratic state in Washington. How do we know that? Because they’ve essentially admitted it.
Over the past two weeks, the House has heard testimony from a diplomat called Bill Taylor, and then an Army Lieutenant Colonel called Alexander Vindman. Their statements we are told will sink President Trump, maybe.
So what have they said? Well, to start, both Taylor and Vindman are intense Russia hawks, both have testified that they want heavy American aid to Ukraine because they want to weaken Russia. Both have emphasized that they don’t want any debate in the U.S. about these policies. They’ve said that out loud.
In his remarks, Vindman said that he opposed President Trump’s phone call with the President of Ukraine for this reason, quote, “I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Biden’s and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play, which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support. It is thus far maintained,” end quote.
And the implication is, that would be unacceptable. Now Taylor said something almost identical to that. Here it is, quote, “To restore Ukraine’s independence, Russia must leave Ukraine. This has been and should continue to be a bipartisan U.S. foreign policy goal,” end quote.
So in other words, Washington may have two parties, but only one position on Ukraine is allowed here — and Trump doesn’t have it. His phone call was unacceptable because it might prevent America from automatically unthinkingly spending billions of dollars over many years to prop up a country that most Americans could not find on a globe at gunpoint.
There’s just one problem with this arrangement. Voters disagree. We know this because when he ran three years ago, President Trump didn’t hide how he felt about U.S. foreign policy. He told voters that America was involved in too many pointless wars. He criticized the then President Obama for having bad relations with Russia.
The Trump administration, he promised would pursue better relations with Vladimir Putin.
Now, that may sound shocking, but in fact it was not an unprecedented idea. Obama ran on something close to this in 2012, and the public supported it then, too. He won.
But now that same idea isn’t simply unpopular in Washington, a ruling class considers it illegal. Former C.I.A. head, John Brennan put it this way on Twitter, quote, “As in previous times of national peril, we rely on our military, diplomats, Intelligence officials, law enforcement officers and other courageous patriots to protect our liberties, freedom and democracy. May they stay resolute and strong despite corrupt political headwinds they face,” end of quote.
Got that. Unelected bureaucrats uphold — wait for it — democracy. Elected officials subvert democracy. In John Brennan’s Orwellian world, the most pressing and imminent threat to this republic is voters.
As it happens, the incidence of sexual nonconformity is not unknown south of the border. In the 2001 book True Tales from Another Mexico (reviewed by me in The Social Contract), a chapter was devoted to the drag queens of Mazatlan. They were managing reasonably well at that time, with a little drama thrown into the mix.
Interestingly, the English-language Mazatlan Post describing the city’s first carnival in March 2019 observed that “the Sinaloa-lesbian-gay-bisexual-transsexual community had a notable presence.”
So Mexican transgender persons are getting along fine and don’t need to be rescued by Elizabeth Warren.
More importantly, Fox Business host and math advocate Melissa Francis pointed out that the Democrats’ generous Medicare-for-All project — including all 22 million illegal aliens — is simply undoable because there is not enough money floating around to pay for it.
Along the way, Tucker went off the rails regarding his fondness for the millions of foreign invaders. In a discussion of free healthcare for illegal aliens proposed by Democrats, he remarked, “I have always thought and I still think that most illegal aliens are probably nice people. I mean, they came here because they like America. . . And most Americans like immigrants, really like them.”
Illegal aliens don’t come to America because they like this country: they come here to make more money than they could accrue at home, period.
In fact, many immigrants avoid Americans by moving directly into ethnic neighborhoods filled with people from their homeland. Similarly, a recent AP-NORC poll shows voters have noticed that newbies are not assimilating to American culture and values.
Snap out of it, Tucker. Let foreigners stay home and improve their own countries — win, win.
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: So what’s Elizabeth Warren’s strategy for becoming President? Well, it’s coming into focus slowly. She apparently believes she can win the nomination, and ultimately the President with a simple approach — on every issue, find the most left-wing possible view, and then go even further than that.
So promise Medicare-for-All, but without any tax increases. It’s magic. Use America’s wealth to fund race-based reparations because almost no one is in favor of that.
On the border, it is not easy for Warren to stand out because at this point, almost every other Democrat wants amnesty, no deportations, free healthcare for illegals. So what does she do? Well, she has found a way.
In a new letter to the Department of Homeland Security, Elizabeth Warren demands that all transgender illegal immigrants and she doesn’t say how many there are, but all transgender illegal immigrants caught at the U.S. border must be let into this country immediately.
Warren says that it’s dangerous to be transgender in Mexico. So anyone who claims they were born in the wrong body must be allowed to stay here, no questions asked to receive a taxpayer funded transition. That’s right. It’s a daring gambit by Elizabeth Warren.
She seems to have calculated that she can alienate every normal person in the continental United States and still become President. Will it work? Well, we’re about to find out.
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are both running on a Medicare-for-All plan. And they really mean for all. They promise to give free medical care to everybody who is here illegally. It’s about 22 million people. That number is rising, and of course, it will rise dramatically if this new handout becomes law. But let’s pretend it won’t. Let’s pretend the number stays static at 22 million.
How much would it cost to give free healthcare to the legal immigrants already here? According to a new calculation, by the American Enterprise Institute, Medicare for all would cost about $10,000.00 per person per year. So multiply that by 22 million illegal immigrants and you get to $220 billion every year.
Now, even in an era of supersize numbers, that’s a ton of cash. That is, for some perspective, 10 times the entire budget of NASA. It’s also more than the current Veterans Administration budget, the VA budget, which means America would quite literally be spending more on illegal immigrant healthcare than it does on veterans. That’s their plan.
Melissa Francis is co-host of Outnumbered. She also hosts over at Fox Business and thankfully is a frequent guest on the show. She joins us tonight. So you’re the numbers person. You’re one of the good people who went to Harvard — assess our math. It’s true. There aren’t many, you’re one.
MELISSA FRANCIS: Well, thank you.
CARLSON: Assess our assessment. Are the numbers that we’re throwing out there correct?
FRANCIS: I mean, it’s interesting because the number that you quote on the number of illegal aliens that are in the country. Who knows what that number really is, right?
I mean, there’s no way of knowing. MIT was the latest one to do a study with Yale, but all focus on MIT, because they’re very good at math. And they were the ones that came up with this idea of 22 million people.
But the point is, if you do all that math out, it doesn’t even really matter, because we already can’t pay for Medicare-for-All, and I don’t mean, we can’t pay for it in the sense of, you know, we’d have to tax the middle class.
I mean, like, there isn’t the money at all. And I don’t know why more people don’t press Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, for that matter, on this because even when Bernie Sanders admits that taxes would have to go up dramatically on the middle class — that still wouldn’t do it.
If you confiscated all the money. I told you this before, but if you took away every single dollar that every person who makes more than $200,000.00 a year makes and you threw them into an abyss somewhere to die, and you took all their money, it still would not pay for Medicare-for-All.
So what difference does it make if we add a lot of illegal aliens? Why don’t we add Canada? They’re nice people. I mean, why not?
CARLSON: You know that’s exactly it. They are nice. And by the way, I have always thought and I still think that most illegal aliens are probably nice people. I mean, they came here because they like America. Well, so do I. I get it?
And most Americans like immigrants, really like them. If you want to make Americans hate immigrants, give free healthcare to illegals because that will — I mean, that will engender resentment, why wouldn’t it? Most Americans aren’t able to pay for the healthcare they want. Do you know what I mean?
FRANCIS: Right. No, it’s absolutely true. I mean, the reason why people love Medicare, and if you talk to seniors in Florida, they love it. It’s because they use four times as much in dollar terms as what they’ve paid in.
That obviously can’t work on a larger scale. It means everybody else is supporting this group. They’re the elderly, we love them. We’re happy to do it. You can get the Medicare add-on insurance, but you can’t put the whole population on that.
But you know, it’s amazing to me, Democrats and a lot of people in D.C., including Republicans, I think they think math is a myth. Math is like a vast right wing conspiracy. They’re allergic to math.
I mean, they don’t want to do any of these numbers because it would make everything impossible. And it is depressing when you can’t pay your bills and you continue to rack up credit card debt, who wants to sit down and crunch those numbers? Certainly not the politicians in Washington.
But the truth is that there literally isn’t enough money for Medicare-for-All. It’s not about who can you tax, because if you raise taxes on everyone — everyone — it still wouldn’t pay for it.
CARLSON: They’re liars.
FRANCIS: Yes.
CARLSON: And that’s kind of what it comes down to. Melissa Francis, good to see you tonight.
FRANCIS: It’s immoral.
CARLSON: Yes, it is.
FRANCIS: Good to see you, too. Yes, it’s really disingenuous. See you later.
The formula is simple: when a machine become less expensive than a worker, [...]]]>
The formula is simple: when a machine become less expensive than a worker, then the human will go. And unlike the Great Depression, the jobs won’t come back.
Among the first jobs to go are the low-skilled sort, the employment that illegal border crossers count on getting in America. It’s likely that automation-caused unemployment would be higher without President Trump’s economic leadership.
Andrew Yang was interviewed yesterday on CBS Sunday Morning (the show made famous by Charles Kuralt and his nostalgic patriotism seen on the nation’s backroads).
Candidate Yang mentioned in his CBS interview about how automation has already had an electoral effect: “We automated away four million manufacturing jobs in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, all the swing states that Donald Trump needed to win, and did win.”
That job loss is an important point and a reminder that we are already on the big automation highway with no off-ramp.
One criticism of Yang is that he went rather quickly to his universal basic income plan without explaining the need more thoroughly, although it seems public concern about automation job loss is increasing.
Still, if the billions of poor on earth hear that America is handing out free money to everyone, more serious immigration enforcement is needed.
Hopefully the Democrat debate on Tuesday will give Yang more time to talk, which he has not gotten so far.
]]>Andrew Yang on creating a “trickle-up” economy, CBS News, October 13, 2019
In a park in Los Angeles last month, thousands gathered to hear the Democrat perhaps least likely to be running for president. “I am the ideal candidate for that job, because the opposite of Donald Trump is an Asian man who likes math,” said Andrew Yang.
In Yang’s world, MATH stands for “Make America Think Harder,” and Yang is mostly thinking about dire economic times ahead.
[. . .]
Andrew Yang, in fact, calls himself an entrepreneur. His parents immigrated from Taiwan: His father, a physicist, and his mother, with a master’s in math and statistics. Yang grew up in Schenectady, New York. His first big success was running a college test-prep company, and then he founded Venture for America, a non-profit that helps train entrepreneurs in struggling cities.
He thinks jobs – or rather, the loss of them – are why Donald Trump won the presidency.
“The numbers tell a very clear story,” he said. “We automated away four million manufacturing jobs in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, all the swing states that Donald Trump needed to win, and did win.”
And Yang believes robots and artificial intelligence will accelerate the loss of all kinds of jobs. “Now, what we did to those jobs, we’re doing to the retail jobs, the call center jobs, the fast food jobs, the truck driving jobs, and on and on through the economy,” he said.
Thompson met Yang along the campaign trail, as he took a break for some tea (“Duke of Earl Gray”), and then discovered a foosball table, where he naturally talked about economic theory, and another of his big ideas: reforming how we calculate Gross Domestic Product, or GDP.
“If you want to see how out-of-whack GDP is, all you have to do is look at my family,” Yang said. “My wife is at home with our two boys, one of whom is autistic. And what is her work every day, included at in GDP? Zero. And we know that her work is among the most important work being done for our society.” (Continues)
Democrat 2020 candidates may come to regret their enthusiasm for taking Trump out in a non-election manner so close to the actual voting event. They seem not to have confidence in winning without disrupting the system with their scam: as early impeachment enthusiast Rep. Al Green remarked, “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach the president, he will get reelected.”
It doesn’t help that several 2020 Dems also want to impeach Justice Kavanaugh, among them Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Julian Castro, Bernie Sanders and Beto.
You might get the impression that Democrats are incapable of losing graciously, and “impeach” has become their new favorite strategy of dealing with the opposition. Integrity in elections — trusting governance to those darn unpredictable voters — is just too chancy for today’s Dems. Also, Hillary Clinton’s continuing complaints about the election she lost nearly three years ago reinforce the public perception of Democrats as Poor Losers, which they certainly are.
On Tuesday, Speaker Pelosi announced the House would hold an impeachment inquiry — but the legislators would not vote on formal impeachment proceedings.
Here’s the New York Times article explaining how Democrat candidates would “promote a clear and exciting agenda” rather than concentrate on impeaching Trump — good luck with that!
]]>Democrats’ 2020 Campaign Message: Not Impeachment, They Insist, New York Times, September 28, 2019
After the 2016 election, Democratic leaders reached an all but unanimous conclusion: To defeat President Trump in 2020, they would have to do more than condemn his offensive behavior and far-right ideology, as Hillary Clinton had done. They would need, above all, to promote a clear and exciting agenda of their own.
They took that lesson to heart in the midterm elections and afterward, capturing the House of Representatives with a focus on health care and then attempting to impress the electorate by passing legislation on matters like campaign finance reform and the minimum wage. As Democratic presidential contenders pushed campaigns built on big ideas, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi resisted a chorus of calls for impeachment, even from some of her party’s leading 2020 candidates.
Yet 13 months before the next election, Democratic leaders are now steering into a protracted, head-on clash with Mr. Trump. By seeking the Ukrainian government’s help in tarring former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Mr. Trump left them no choice, they say, but to pursue an impeachment inquiry that could consume the country’s attention for months.
Ms. Pelosi has indicated she aims to move the process along with haste, in part to avoid an election-year conflagration, but the exact course of the inquiry is impossible to foresee.
All 19 Democratic presidential candidates now support the impeachment inquiry, and many Democrats are optimistic that voters will as well, because Mr. Trump is so unpopular and the allegations against him are grave and easily grasped. For now, Republicans are the party on the defensive, flummoxed by the cascading disclosures about Mr. Trump that have threatened to upend his re-election campaign.
But there is also a general recognition, at every level of the Democratic Party, that impeachment could complicate their candidates’ efforts to explain their policy ideas to the country and persuade voters they have a vision beyond ousting Mr. Trump. The party has been disappointed too many times, its leaders say, by betting that Mr. Trump’s violations of political and cultural norms would bring about his downfall.
On Friday evening, Ms. Pelosi declared at a conference of New Jersey Democrats in Atlantic City that she would not allow the 2020 election to become a campaign about impeachment. Insisting the inquiry “has nothing to do with the election,” she said the campaign would be fought on other terms.
“That’s about facts and the Constitution,” Ms. Pelosi said of the impeachment process. “The election is about all of the issues and policies that we have a difference of opinion with the Republicans on, and they are very drastic — and they have nothing to do with impeachment.” (Continues)