Will Trump’s Towering Inferno Of Public Outrage Prevail Over Hillary?
By DEXTER DUGGAN
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump tweets attention-getting remarks, but one of his comments on October 11 was so sadly, obviously true, it was boring.
With the exception of Bernie Sanders being cheated of this year’s Democratic presidential nomination, Trump tweeted, “the Dems have always proven to be far more loyal to each other than the Republicans!”
Exactly. No matter how outrageous a Democrat candidate’s record or life, party members unify and lock arms in his defense, but Republican officials scatter and run for cover or collapse if hostile media say bad things about a GOP hopeful.
Of course, these media are a lot less likely to attack their Democrat pals than assault Republicans, so Democrats know they can get away with lots more darned mischief.
Trump’s mentioning Sanders being cheated referred to WikiLeaks revelations of the Democratic National Committee scandal that top party officials worked secretly to ensure the nomination this year for crime-covered Hillary Clinton rather than dreamy socialist theorist Sanders.
Sure enough, Sanders threw his post-primaries support to Clinton despite her knife in his back.
The morning after the story burst that Trump engaged in lewd talk 11 years ago, the October 8 online front page of The Wall Street Journal, while reporting that scared Republicans were stampeding away from Trump, also had a story about Sanders standing firm for Clinton despite a new WikiLeaks embarrassment to her.
Clinton long had refused to release text from her highly paid private talks to big bankers. But new WikiLeaks speech excerpts showed she supported these fat cats’ damaging agenda of international open trade and open markets — even though she campaigned this year as favoring a different view.
Nevertheless, the October 8 Journal headlined, “Bernie Sanders gives Hillary Clinton a pass over speech excerpts,” although a core stand of his campaign strongly opposed unfair trade practices that lacerated U.S. workers.
Martha Raddatz, one of the two moderators of the second presidential debate, in St. Louis on October 9, cited the WikiLeaks revelation about Clinton having conflicting public and private stands.
Clinton answered by comparing herself to Abraham Lincoln, who showed “a great display of presidential leadership.”
Trump replied at the debate by stirring audience laughter against Clinton with his spontaneous observation, “Now she’s blaming the lie on the late, great Abraham Lincoln.”
Sadly, neither Clinton nor Trump seems to measure up to the lanky Lincoln.
The wife and enabler of former president and sex predator Bill Clinton might have about the worst cloud of criminality hanging over her of anyone ever daring to run for the presidency. This is, of course, in addition to her fierce dedication to promoting the immoral leftist culture of degeneracy and death around the world, progressive U.S. “colonialism” at its worst.
Among her secular offenses, she willingly endangered national security in this age of terrorism by exposing highly classified information to scrutiny by hostile actors, then lied about why she did it.
She said she simply wanted the convenience of using only one electronic device for both government and private business — even though she used multiple devices.
Hillary lied to Congress then lied about her lies. She illegally hid her illegal financial shakedowns on a private server then had 33,000 emails secretly destroyed even after she was served a government subpoena.
Still, when Trump began to confront her in St. Louis and said “the people of this country are furious” over Hillary, she lied again and claimed right there in the debate auditorium, “Everything he just said is false.”
Her effrontery started to stir some unfavorable audience sounds — a bad sign of disgust for Clinton — but moderator Raddatz jumped in to hush them. “The audience needs to calm down here.”
There have been rumbles among people around the country that Hillary belongs in an orange jump suit in jail — “Lock her up!”
At the debate, Trump got people’s attention when he said that if he’s elected, he’ll instruct the attorney general to have a special prosecutor look into Hillary’s case.
Hillary replied it’s good that someone like Trump isn’t in charge of this nation’s laws.
Trump shot back, “Because you’d be in jail.”
People in the audience began to cheer Trump, prompting the other moderator, Anderson Cooper, to hush them.
The Manhattan billionaire widely was regarded as scoring a solid victory at this debate, with pro-Trump national radio host Sean Hannity saying on October 10 that Trump had confronted the Clintons as never before by a Republican. They “got called out on everything.”
Is there strong anger building around the nation against Hillary’s own brand of wealthy “white privilege” but being ignored by media?
And is there such rejection of the status quo that the reliably large campaign audiences Trump speaks to indicate he’s on the way to a White House win? Despite the combined power of the dominant media, their pollsters, the national Democratic Party, and considerable parts of the GOP establishment, who all fear that Trump would overturn their cozy turf?
Despite public recognition that Hillary is a toxic mix of deception, defiant lawbreaking, security violations, and dangerous greed best rejected, the official Democratic Party, the dominant media and some establishment Republicans all stand firm for her. There was no rush for the exits by someone saying she’s intolerable.
However, when a recording of Trump talking lewdly in 2005 suddenly was revealed on October 7, a rush ensued by some prominent Republicans to distance themselves or even repudiate his candidacy on the spot. Did they even care if Trump might have repented?
Their reaction, so rapid and perhaps well-prepared, stirred some suspicions that someone in the anti-Trump GOP had arranged an inside job against him.
Of course, no one had put the lewd words in Trump’s mouth but himself. When questioned at the St. Louis debate, he characterized them as “locker-room talk” and apologized. “I’m very embarrassed by it. I hate it.”
Sometimes too much money and too much power lead to such quicksand, even off the golf course.
The blustery Trump hadn’t been the first choice of millions of GOP primary voters, but he won himself a record-breaking number of ballots on the way to the nomination, apparently having persuaded a towering inferno of the disaffected that he’s their champion and last hope to dismember the deal-making establishment.
Such a candidate hadn’t made his personal morality his major selling point. Thus, the lewd tape, and perhaps more to come. This provided a major target for hostile media who loathe traditional moral values but manipulate a case like this to disarm conservatives and further empower leftists.
However, selecting even an apparently morally impeccable candidate was no answer. As recently as the last presidential election, in 2012, the GOP nominated “Mr. Clean” and “Mr. Moderate” Mitt Romney, a practicing Mormon who, as radio talk host Rush Limbaugh recalled on October 10, was as decent a human being as will be found.
But blood-lusting Democrats including then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nevada) falsely tore into mild candidate Romney as a tax-evading, callous billionaire who didn’t care if people died.
To an audience question in St. Louis about what the candidates would prioritize in selecting Supreme Court justices, Hillary never mentioned the U.S. Constitution but made plain that she wants to protect permissive abortion, “same-sex marriage,” and to “change the balance” on the court.
Trump said he’d want “a great judge” like the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, someone who’ll “respect the Constitution of the United States.” Trump mentioned the Second Amendment but not unborn babies and their moms.
Like many other Republicans, Trump may campaign as pro-life when he has to, without trying to build any case for foreseeable action by giving examples of the massive current abortion injustices. Who knows, Trump might start making pro-life converts if he gave it a try.
Conservative pundit Ben Shapiro recently gave a dramatic talk for protecting babies at his Internet program by showing pictures of 10 little ones, nine of them drawings of unborn babies at different stages of development, and one graphic photo of a baby girl killed late in pregnancy.
Shapiro recalled seeing photos of aborted babies displayed by pro-lifers outside the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte in 2012. He didn’t like the photos and thought them “gauche.” Then it occurred to him, he said, that people didn’t like to see pictures of slaves or Holocaust victims, either, but they needed to learn from them rather than complain about them.
So Shapiro changed his mind and now bravely is trying to change others’.
Hillary started off the second debate by saying she wants to be the president for all Americans, and to heal the country. How differently she talks when she knows she’s facing the public rather than when, as at a private homosexual fund-raiser, she recently condemned half of Trump’s supporters as “a basket of deplorables” and “irredeemable.”
Meanwhile, websites including LifeSiteNews.com and Truth Revolt reported on October 11 that a new WikiLeaks email release shows the Clinton camp mocking conservative Catholics for their supposed backwardness and clumsy attempts to appear sophisticated.
One passage obtained from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s files says these Catholics have “an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.”
Speaking of being unaware, as of October 9 there had been two presidential and one vice-presidential debates but the moderators failed to ask a single question about the Obama administration’s amazing, remarkable, unprecedented marching orders mandating bathroom invasions against women and girls.
Where did worry about the “war on women” disappear to?
Hornets’ nests that are good to stir up against Trump must never, ever be disturbed to Obama’s discomfort.
These media who pretend to be so shocked by Trump’s lewd language are the very same liberals who defend teaching kindergartners that homosexuality is normal, that 13-year-olds should get abortions without their parents even knowing, that unborn babies can be torn apart at the merest whim, and that, of course, strange men should shower and dress with young girls and invite themselves into their sleeping quarters.
What a ghoulish world Barack Obama and his ghoulish media buddies relish thrusting upon the rest of us. And we’re supposed to smile and say thank you.
Hostility To The Media
Readers who’d feared that liberal media flagships had lost interest in reporting political news as years went by while leftist Obama’s lies, threats, and misdeeds were ignored have suddenly discovered reporters full of fury and bug-eyed outrage over Trump.
To take merely one example, The Washington Post’s online front page day after day manages to blaze forth with five or more headlines about Trump’s idiotic, bigoted awfulness. Frantic editors seem incapable of realizing how shameless this reveals them, not Trump, to be.
On October 11 Post political reporter Bob Costa — who actually used to write for the conservative National Review Online — told the Laura Ingraham national radio program that every day he encounters hostility to the press when he asks people questions.
Costa’s voice sounded more tentative than usual. Is he starting to wilt under the pressure of public resentment caused by his bigoted bosses back in the newsroom? Or maybe he was just coming down with one of Hillary’s mystery illnesses. Hack, hack.
