Donald Trump’s Victory: Hope for America
What Went Wrong for the Cryptocracy
By Michael Hoffman
www.RevisionistHistory.org
At our family’s Sunday dinner, after we say grace and before we dig in to the repast, we ask each one at our table, “What are you grateful for?” In our home we try to make gratitude king, beginning with gratitude to our Creator, parents and one another.
Because our American First populist movement has suffered defeat after defeat, people in our ranks have become warped; favors small and large from Divine Providence are overlooked; doom and gloom becomes the order of the day; and some sad souls among us like nothing more than to toss a monkey-wrench into even the modest celebration and the smallest expression of gratitude for little victories, small gifts and progressive steps, even if they are baby steps. They have been so wounded by loss and betrayal they can’t see the sunrise, even on a cloudless day.
On Tuesday election eve your editor was too anxious to work and too drained by the repetitive second-guessing and early speculation of the television newscasters, who I knew were forecasting a Clinton victory, that I caught Mel Gibson’s “Hacksaw Ridge” at the local cineplex (the film is a stunning and redemptive affirmation of American values, if you can stomach the combat gore). When I exited the theatre it was only 7 pm. I had to myself vowed not to return home until 7:30 (Pacific) time, so I walked the sidewalks of Coeur d’Alene, feeling in my heart of hearts that Trump would win, though at one point I found myself on my knees on the sidewalk praying to God that Hillary would be defeated. Cars whizzed by, probably wondering who the madman was, but for those few moments I was oblivious as I prayed, “Dear Father Yahweh, in Jesus’ precious name, I ask that my children not grow up in a world where Hillary Clinton is president.” I arrived home at almost exactly 7:30.
The Miracle
I would have preferred that the TV was off, but my wife and one of my sons were glued to it and they reported that it seemed Trump had a significant lead, though not conclusively so. At that point I worked in my office until about 9:30, which was past midnight on the east coast, and by then it was clear that our God had heard the millions of prayers uttered that evening and many before it. Ding dong the presidential hope of that witch, was dead. Should I refrain from using that awful term to describe her? I cannot, for it justly fits any man or woman who, on national television, would defend the partial birth abortion of a dehumanized child in the womb, as a Constitutional right, as Clinton did in her debate with Trump. She had the gall to quote from Scripture in her concession speech on Wednesday. If she will allude to Scripture, I do too: Deuteronomy 18:10.
My wife and I did a dance that election night and while in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho the northern folk here generally don’t caper in the streets, Wednesday and Thursday were like Christmas Eve in these parts: people were happier, more polite and cheerful than normal. As miserable as the Leftists of Oakland, Berkeley and Manhattan NY were, Idaho was smiling, from ear to ear.
There’s an eerie parallel between the true story of the Christian in the movie “Hacksaw Ridge,” and the November 8 election. In both cases one can clearly see the hand of God at work. What Desmond Doss did in Okinawa with the US Army would have been impossible without God. After the war, a Japanese soldier who survived that battle testified that every time he pointed his machine gun at Doss, it jammed. Every time the Cryptocracy’s media pointed their self-fulfilling prophecies known as “polls” at Donald Trump, they jammed.
Some readers have been disappointed that we voted for Trump for president; they imagine we are blind to his negatives, or the more than slim chance that he will serve Israeli interests in the Middle East and the financial power here at home. Personally, I don’t know what Trump will do exactly, though I have some faith in him generally. He has a history of rocketing between different perspectives. He is certainly a presidential phenomenon akin to John F. Kennedy, and he could share JFK’s fate were he to completely embody the hopes and dreams of the people who elected him. The denouement is in God’s hands however, and Mr. Trump should proceed full speed ahead for the restoration of our Republic and the defeat of the New World Order, with absolute faith in the power and efficacy of loyally adhering to the Divine Will. If he does so, he will be a statesman on par with Washington and Jefferson.
The miracle of Trump’s election does not make The Donald a saint or an anointed leader. His victory at this point is above all psychological and symbolic. Many of the people on the radical Right who disparage him forget that we have been suffering defeat for so long that the Trump victory has hugely positive repercussions in terms of the vitally important optimism and hope that it kindles. We wager that nine months from now we will witness a jump in the birth rate among Trump supporters, and nothing could be more significant, assuming those children will be “trained up in the way they should go,” which is the Bible’s direction to godly parents.
Under Trump it seems likely that at the very least, illegal immigration will be significantly slowed, the Second Amendment will be secure from the gun grabbers, and the Supreme Court will have a pro-life, strict Constitutionalist on the bench. If the aged and ailing Ruth Bader Ginsburg retires in the next four years, we will have two such justices on the highest court. Securing the Supreme Court and the right of the people to keep and bear arms for self-defense and defense of the Constitution, is, in and of itself, a victory. Rebuilding our nation’s factories and infrastructure, and ensuring that poor White and Black and other minority children have unlimited access to ever-expanding charter schools (which the NAACP and Sen. Elizabeth Warren oppose), is most likely also something Mr. Trump may accomplish.
If Russia’s Christian President Vladimir Putin can explain the drastic difference to Donald that exists between Christian-friendly Iranian, Syrian and Lebanese Shiites, and Christian-despising Saudi and Pakistani Sunnis, Trump may choose to reject the Neocon drumbeat for war with Iran and Assad’s Syria, which is so dear to the hearts of John Bolton, Lindsey Graham, McCain, Romney and the other Israeli-first, Republican dual loyalists. It remains to be seen.
Those are the watchwords: remains to be seen. The future has not been decided. We play a part in that decision by our activism and mentality. Too many are almost lusting after the sight of Trump betraying his followers. The mainstream media have been supporting those doubts and pessimism by painting Trump as a compromiser already. They seek to divide his support and undermine our faith in him. Our conceding to him the benefit of the doubt should not be total, but it should at least be present to a significant degree through the January inauguration, and the early spring of 2017, unless he commits an unpardonable blunder.
A wait-and-see attitude reflecting gratitude to God that Lady Macbeth will not be our president, is called for, along with a pause in the relentless darkness that pervades the souls of troubled persons on the radical Right. Mired in negativity and cynicism, no parents can raise a large family. No football or basketball team worth its salt, no matter how outclassed, ever enters a match pervaded by negativity and cynicism. Many of the severe negativists among us have no stake in the future. They are often childless, or alienated from the few children they have; divorced, cut-off from society. We can’t let sad people set the agenda for this war in which we are engaged. They believe it has already been lost because the odds are against us. Well, the odds were stacked against Trump, but his fighting spirit resisted. Can we do less?
This writer has been struggling to gain a national audience for our work for more than thirty years. Our belief is that with God all things are possible, and it may yet happen if we have the heart to soldier on. We march forward into battle with the words of Cyrano de Bergerac inscribed in our heart, “Our enemies have us surrounded. We will not let them escape.”
With Mr. Trump’s victory the enemy’s encirclement is now partially broken; psychologically at least. Apart from whatever weakness or compromise Trump may exhibit, the nay-sayers can no longer deny the working of the hand of God in history, even at what they think is “this late hour.” God shows His hand, if indeed we are correct that Our Lord has done so this November, not to honor or idolize a mere man, be he president or pea-picker, but to glorify His Holy Name and show forth His power on earth, which can be accessed and called upon by His people. At this stage in history our worst enemy is sour, rancid defeatism. Keep far from despairing people for whom defeatism is second nature, and who cannot find it in their souls to utter the words “Thank you Jesus,” even as God’s enemies howl in rage and agony at the spectre of Donald J. Trump inaugurated as our 45th President.
What Went Wrong for the Cryptocracy
Those of you who have not read our review of the recent Hollywood movie “Denial,” about historian David Irving and Deborah Lipstadt, which was published in the November issue of Revisionist History, may not be aware that the supposedly “infallible and invincible” Cryptocracy stumbled badly with that film, which actually benefits Irving and World War II revisionism; and they stumbled again in their attempt to crush Trump.
The New York Times was at the front of the crowded field of aspiring Trump-slayers and now has to eat crow due to their blatant bias and goofball, “scientific polls” which in late October were stating, like a seedy Vegas bookie, that Hillary had a 94% chance of defeating her opponent. Jim Rutenberg was among the most corrupt of the Times’ corps of spin-doctors. The Times’ published on its front page of August 7, his article, “Trump Is Testing the Norms of Objectivity in Journalism.” This was Rutenberg’s disgraceful admonition for reporters to “throw out the textbook American journalism” and become “oppositional” so as to help defeat the Republican nominee. Rutenberg:
“If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?Because if you believe all of those things, you have to throw out the textbook American journalism has been using for the better part of the past half-century, if not longer, and approach it in a way you’ve never approached anything in your career. If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional.”
When NBC’s Matt Laurer failed to mock and execrate Trump in an on-air interview in September, the New York Times shamed him and issued marching orders to journalists never again to do as Laurer did, but rather to savage Trump at every opportunity. In Trump’s second debate, “moderators” Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz submitted to the “advice” from the Times and became debating partners assisting Mrs. Clinton. It was a sleazy circus of palpable partisanship worthy of a Central American banana republic, thanks to pressure exerted by the Times and co-conspirators such as the Washington Post, the three major networks, as well as the Clinton News Network (CNN).
In Rutenberg’s front page instruction to America’s reporters and news editors last August, he reflected Times’ owner Arthur Sulzberger’s shock and awe at Trump’s disdain for NATO and comity toward Putin. After promoting the God-dishonoring revolutionary abomination of legalized homosexual matrimony, which shattered all the Biblical norms of western civilization, which we “deplorables” are compelled to greet with supine submission, Rutenberg reacts in revulsion merely at a reexamination of America’s “sacred role” as World Policeman, and provides the Times’ ominous antidote to this horrific state of affairs:
“If you have a nominee who expresses warmth toward one of our most mischievous and menacing adversaries, a nominee who shatters all the norms about how our leaders treat families whose sons died for our country, a nominee proposing to rethink the alliances that have guided our foreign policy for 60 years, that demands coverage — ‘copious coverage and aggressive coverage,’ said Carolyn Ryan, The New York Times’s senior editor for politics.”
Dare to question the media’s Holy Writ that Putin is the Great Beast, and NATO is the holy army, and you will receive “aggressive” coverage, says the senior political editor. “Aggressive” is coded language for relentless media attack. That’s quite a threat on the front page of the most influential liberal newspaper in the English-speaking world, and they made good on it. Rutenberg concluded his plea for righteous propaganda as follows: “It may not always seem fair to Mr. Trump or his supporters. But journalism shouldn’t measure itself against any one campaign’s definition of fairness. It is journalism’s job to... stand up to history’s judgment.”
And what, pray tell, might that be, Mr. Rutenberg?
When this writer reported for the New York bureau of the Associated Press, albeit mostly murders, car crashes and assorted mayhem, I was under the naive impression that it was my job to relate the facts without fear or favor, letting the chips fall where they may, and with an eye on the people’s right to know, and not some amorphous “judgment of history,” that could as easily be the judgment of Karl Marx or Saul Alinsky.
After Trump won however, in an astonishing upset not seen since Thomas E. Dewey versus Harry Truman, Mr. Rutenberg’s Manhattan media masters had him singing a far different tune on November 9:
“Many had underestimated the strength of the support for Donald Trump. All the dazzling technology, the big data and the sophisticated modeling that American newsrooms bring to the fundamentally human endeavor of presidential politics could not save American journalism from yet again being behind the story, behind the rest of the country. The news media by and large missed what was happening all around it, and it was the story of a lifetime. The misfire on Tuesday night was about a lot more than a failure in polling. It was a failure to capture the boiling anger of a large portion of the American electorate that feels left behind by a selective recovery, betrayed by trade deals that they see as threats to their jobs and disrespected by establishment Washington, Wall Street and the mainstream media.
“It was just a few months ago that so much of the European media failed to foresee the vote in Britain to leave the European Union. Election 2016, thy name is Brexit. Election Day had been preceded by more than a month of declarations that the race was close but essentially over. And that assessment held even after the late-October news that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was reviewing a new batch of emails related to Mrs. Clinton’s private server. Mrs. Clinton’s victory would be ‘substantial but not overwhelming,’ The Huffington Post had reported, after assuring its readers that ‘she’s got this.’...That more or less comported with The New York Times’s Upshot projection early Tuesday evening that Mrs. Clinton was an 84 percent favorite to win the presidency... John King of CNN proclaimed to his huge election night audience that during the previous couple of weeks, “We were not having a reality-based conversation” given the map he had before him, showing Mr. Trump with a clear opportunity to reach the White House... The unexpected turn in the election tallies immediately raised questions about the value of modern polling.” (End quote from Rutenberg).
The polls were not a case of a “failure to foresee.” They were, and are, a magician’s tool, in a bag of tricks labeled “scientific.” The point of most (though not all) national polls is for the Establishment’s candidate (or issue, as in the goal of defeating Brexit), to be portrayed as possessed of an inevitable victory, with the message that “this is what the majority of your fellow countrymen believe.” This has the effect of pressuring voters to be on the alleged winning side by conforming to the will of the supposed majority of the nation, and of demoralizing opponents and dissenters into staying home. The fact that tens of millions of the American people had the strength of character to resist this stage magic is huge. It scares the pants off the Cryptocrats. Their nightmare is this emerging defiance of System-appointed “scientific experts” by the eternally skimmed victims of the System.
Rutenberg: “What’s amazing is how many times the news media has missed the populist movements that have been rocking national politics since at least 2008. It failed to initially see the rise of the Tea Party, which led to the Republican wave of elections of 2010 and 2014, which was supposed to be the year the so-called Republican establishment regained control over its intraparty insurgency. Then, of course, there was Mr. Trump’s own unexpected rise to the nomination. And after each failure came a vow to learn lessons, and not ever allow it to happen again. And yet the lessons did not come fast enough to get it right when it most mattered. In an earlier column, I quoted the conservative writer Rod Dreher as saying that most journalists were blind to their own ‘bigotry against conservative religion, bigotry against rural folks, and bigotry against working class and poor white people.” (End quote from Rutenberg).
Anyone who thinks the NY Times or CBS and CNN, or the Washington Post, are going to “learn lessons” from Trump’s victory that will transform these “mainstream” media organs into the people’s tribune, is in need of a brain transplant. If we yearn for an honest media we will need to build it ourselves, starting with the Internet. The corporate media are irreformable because they are pimping for an ideology whose tenets they hold with a zealotry that is fundamentally religious in nature, and therefore non-negotiable, no matter what cosmetic changes they institute to deceive the people into thinking the leopard has changed its spots.
What are those tenets? We’ve already cited detestation of Christian Russia and worship of NATO, and the alleged duty of American taxpayers to pay for our military to police the world. Gerald F. Seib of the Wall Street Journal (Nov. 9) mentions another: Trump “shredded the conventional wisdom in both parties, which held that there simply weren’t enough of the white, working-class voters who flocked to his side to win a national election.”
Among these white voters were white women who were supposed to be so stupid they would vote for the devil himself if he made his appearance in the guise of a Democrat, and one who was to be the first woman president, if only her “sisters” would vote for her. White women were too smart to fall for that all too obvious gender blandishment from the script of the identity politics which are sundering our nation.
An honest Leftist, Diana Johnstone, writing for Counterpunch.org, astutely assessed Clinton’s loss:
“The real meaning of this election is not, as bitterly disappointed Hillary supporters still maintain with tears in their eyes and fear in their throats, a victory for racism and sexism. The real meaning of this upset is that Wall Street’s globalization project has been rejected by the citizens of its homeland...To distract from the genuine significance of her candidacy, the Clinton campaign appealed to the desire for respectability of educated city dwellers, portraying Trump supporters as racist yokels motivated by a hateful desire to scapegoat minorities as revenge for their own inadequacies. They were ‘deplorables,’ and you wouldn’t want to be one of them, would you?
“Trump was sexist, because he referred to certain women as “bimbos”. Elizabeth Warren called him out for this, on a platform where Hillary sat listening, mouth wide open in delight – she who had referred to Bill’s girlfriends as ‘bimbo eruptions.’ Sleaze and hypocrisy drowned out policy discussions. The worst the Clinton campaign could come up with was an eleven-year-old locker room exchange – just words, hardly comparable to Bill’s chronic actions.
“Still, millions who were taken in by the Clinton campaign line are devastated, terrified, convinced that the only reason Trump won was the ‘racism’ and ‘sexism’ of that lower caste in globalized society: white heterosexual working class males. But no, Virginia, there were other reasons to vote for Trump. Racism and sexism are surely low on the list.
“Trump voters were scandalized by Hillary’s lies and corruption. Many of them would have voted for Bernie Sanders if they had the choice. That choice was taken away from them by Democratic Party manipulators who were sold on their own advertising campaign to elect “the first woman President.” A brand new product on the Presidential election market! Be the first to vote for a woman President! New, improved!
“Bernie’s success already showed that millions of people didn’t want that woman. But the Democratic Party manipulators and their oligarch sponsors went right ahead with their plans to force Hillary Clinton on an unwilling nation. =They brought this defeat on themselves.
“Contrary to what you could believe by reading the New York Times, there were even intellectuals who voted for Trump, or at least refused to vote for Hillary, for the simple reason that Trump appears less likely to lead the world into its third and final Great War. He said things giving that impression, but such statements were ignored by mainstream media as they worked overtime to inflate the ogre image. No war with Russia? You must be a Putin puppet!
“...racism is the only motive recognized by the globalized elite for rejecting globalization. British citizens who voted to leave the European Union in order to recover their traditional democracy were also stigmatized as ‘racist’ and ‘xenophobe.’ Opposition to racism and xenophobia is the natural moral defense of a project of global governance that deprives ordinary citizens of any important power of decision.” (End quote)
Kristi Stone Hamrick writes, “Isn’t it interesting that it is clearly bullying if someone is mocked for their looks or sexual orientation but it’s ‘commentary and analysis’ if they are mocked for their faith, or the region of country they live in or their support for a candidate they have every right to choose.”
To Hamrick’s observation we add one of our own: the anti-white racism of the media and the Democrats is made spectacularly degenerate when we consider that some white Republicans like Mitt Romney and many white corporate leaders execrate the white working class. They want to inhabit a mostly white world reserved for the privileged, but will sell out this nation’s still white majority on the basis of class. They are traitors. Like the word “witch,” it is a descriptive that should be applied prudently, and in the case of Romney, the Bush dynasty and the hierarchy of the Republican Party with which Trump must now deal, it is accurate and fully deserved. After Mr. Romney lost in 2012, the “Never Trump” GOP grandees were contentedly preparing, together with their Democrat partners, for a future where whites would no longer be the majority in the country their ancestors planned and conceived. As Walter Russell Meade has noted, this is “a declaration of war.”
The gratitude the patriot experiences in contemplating the daring of the men who in 1776 signed the Declaration of Independence against the world’s mightiest military empire, and the genius of the plan of government of the Constitution and Bill of Rights instituted by Madison, Monroe and the other America whites who framed it, is nowadays submerged in a sea of ingratitude strongly anchored in the primeval race hatred approved and fomented by fabulously wealthy whites who call us haters when we stick up for our rights and heritage, as every other race is encouraged to do.
Saddling heterosexual whites with the low self-esteem which it is a hate crime to impose on homosexuals and non-Whites, is a genocidal act that deserves resistance as our human right. Trump’s victory validates defying the sinister, organized inculcation of low self-esteem in white people. It does not make white people partakers in the primeval pot of race hatred if we confront hate when it targets us. That this even needs to be said is testimony to the degree of indoctrination operant today.
The issue of reverse racism against Whites is something that can be properly addressed without succumbing to racism against Blacks, some of whom have been in this country for 300 years, and are as American as anyone. They’re not going anywhere and White Americans need their good will, as they need ours. Trump knows it. Let’s pray he stays true to that knowledge for the sake of racial peace founded on the truth that the Communist dogma of “White skin privilege” is a lie with regard to working and middle class whites. My book They Were White and They Were Slaves establishes a groundwork for the hidden history of the white laboring poor.
It is on this contested ground that our enemies proclaim their inestimable love and our nefarious hate. In rarefied precincts of plutocracy it is asked, why can’t the yokels love the Syrian refugees as we do, and welcome them by the tens of thousands to our shores?
Perhaps because, as reported by Nina Shea, this simplistic hectoring about loveless refugee skeptics, belies a particular suppressed reality. A half-million Christians have fled Syria. Where are the Christian-Syrian refugees in America? Shea writes that of “12,587 Syrian refugees to the U.S. in the fiscal year that ended September 30, only 68 were Christians.” Shame on Obama and the churches in America that have failed to make his criminal neglect an issue.
Furthermore, the American people ought to be informed of the identity of the majority of the 12,500 Syrian “refugees” who did make it to our shores. Many are Christian-hating Sunni Muslims. Refugee camps in Jordan and Iraq are not safe for Syrian Christians and they refuse to enter them. According to the Chaldean Catholic Archdiocese of Erbil, Iraq, and the Pontifical Aid to the Church in Need at the Zaatari refugee camp, in Jordan, “no Christian dares shelter” in those camps. The people who terrorize them are invited by “love-filled” American liberals to come to the U.S. to settle, and conservatives who resist this travesty are branded “hateful dregs of redneck reaction.”
The double-standard of the affluent White supporters of Hillary Clinton is breathtaking. Eloquent testimony of the hypocrisy is found in the following letter written to the New York Times a few days ago by Janet, a woman living in New England:
“Today I received notice that my rent is going up another 5% in January, a now-annual event, largely because my town and the ones surrounding it have become home to tens of thousands of illegal immigrants and their children, and vacancy rates are virtually zero. That means I’ll be paying around 50% of my income on rent for a very modest apartment. The state I live in has welcomed illegal immigrants for several decades now and settled them exclusively in poor and working class towns, while the wealthy liberals who support and enforce this policy live happily among their own kind in their own segregated towns, and send their children to perfect schools where the only disadvantaged kids allowed to attend are bused in after being excruciatingly vetted for native talent and polite behavior. As a public service, these liberals, and our likewise knee-jerk liberal regional newspaper, keep a very close eye on those of us living in working class towns, and scream ‘bigot!’ when we dare to point out the hypocrisy of this set-up.”
Our antidote to Janet’s dilemma and those of millions of Americans like her, is as follows: immigrants from Syria, Somalia and Mexico should be settled by the tens of thousands in Westchester County, New York; in Ridgefield Connecticut, and in Tiburon, Mountain View, Menlo Park and Walnut Creek in California, and all other millionaire-liberal enclaves. Then we will see how quickly the ‘love-filled’ Leftists flee in panic from their own creation. Who can respect these pixilated phonies who want the common people alone to bear the burdens of their self-extinguishing lunacy?
A place for hope
We all need a haven, a retreat, where we can go from time to time and recharge our spiritual and psychological batteries. Some of us, however, work jobs that require hours so long and vacations so short (or non-existent), that our only respite is on Sunday, and then only in the interior of our minds in contemplation. A President Trump may turn out to be a fool or a dismal disappointment; or something far better and more noble. If anyone knows for certain, then they possess a clairvoyance which we envy.
Let us for the time being, between now and the new year, savor with hope the victory at hand. Families are nurtured, youth is educated and a nation restored through hope. Let us celebrate this precious time when hope has been reborn among our people, plagued as we have been by self-hatred and suicidal behavior.
Demonic forces will always seek to slay the dreamer (Genesis 37:19-20), and those forces play on fratricidal vices, so that it is the dreamer’s brothers who are seduced to betray him, and serve as his slayers.
Enough with blaming most of our woes on “the Jews,” or other races. Only we can defeat ourselves. It is our own brethren alone who possess the full capability to destroy us. All other enemy forces are merely ancillary.
To raise a family or restore a nation, we must have hope, which begins with giving thanks for that which we have received this November, not the least of which, for all his foibles and myopia, is Mr. Trump and the family who stood by their man under heavy fire.
What are you grateful for?
The author is grateful to the following nine donors who made today’s essay possible: Arnold E., Richard L., Philip J., Ed W., and B.L. (in the U.S.); in Canada: J.D. in Ontario; and in England: Anthony B., Michael D., and S.R. We gathered research totaling about six hours of reading, and spent the morning today crafting this column. Perhaps we work slower than others, but without the compensation from the financial contributions received from those generous souls, we could not have put aside our other work to make this effort. We hope we have met your expectations. Thank you.
Michael Hoffman writes from Coeur d’Alene, Idaho where he serves as editor of the periodical, Revisionist History.
______________
Posts
