Please purchase "Trump the Press" through Create Space.

The book is on Kindle. Order here.

Friday, July 15, 2016

Fascists call Trump fascist

Justice Ruth Ginsburg openly engaged in presidential politics in three interviews as she became the first Supreme Court in memory to launch personal attacks on a candidate. Fred Hiatt, editorial page editor of the Washington Post, said that is OK because Trump brings out the worst in us.

The justice's unprecedented and certainly unprovoked attack shows just how comfortable those in Washington are with destroying the man, even if they destroy the nation in the process. Hiatt's column gave Justice Ginsburg cover for shattering judicial canons. Oddly enough, it was Trump's temperament, not hers, that Hiatt questioned.

Here we have a woman in her dotage acting bizarrely unjudicial, and Hiatt blamed the victim:
As the idea of a President Trump has evolved from laughable to unlikely to oh-my-god-this-might-actually-happen, a debate has raged in Washington.
The debate is not over the man’s fitness for office — few people privately will make the case that Donald Trump is qualified or temperamentally suitable to be commander in chief — but over how much damage he might do.
Some say that Trump could be more disruptive than any previous leader, including propelling the nation toward fascism.
There is an irony in the fascist meme that the Washington Post pushes; it even got Mike Godwin of Godwin's Law fame to say it is OK to call Trump "Hitler." The irony is, the media spreading unfounded fears of the opposition party is part of any fascist plan.

I am not saying there is a fascist plan behind the Hillary Clinton forces, but I am saying if we were honest about politics in this country, we would acknowledge that the 21st century Democratic Party is the closest we have come to a fascist regime. Certainly the abuses of power -- from the FBI to the IRS -- should alarm one and all. Black Lives Matter is quickly devolving into shock troops. Already police are on their heels in municipality upon municipality, not wanting to deal with the physical intimidation of BLM mobs nor the legal intimidation of the DOJ's Civil Rights Division. Hiatt calls Trump a fascist ("some say...") while ignoring the very disturbing developments of this regime.

As a country we are splitting because those in power in Washington are corrupt. All of them. Left-wing media, right-wing media, the lobbyists, Congress, the White House, the bureaucracy, and now, of course, the Supreme Court. Americans have lost faith in these institutions, and for good reason.

When someone like Hiatt calls Trump a fascist, I realize it is the cry of a powerful man who sees his own power in peril. This election is looking more like the "Lord of the Rings" by the hour. The corrosive nature of power has seldom been so vividly on display as it is right now.

--

"Trump the Press: Don Surber's take on how the pundits blew the 2016 Republican race," is now on sale.

Steve Hayward of Power Line, and Austin Bay at Instapundit gave it glowing reviews.

Please purchase "Trump the Press" through Create Space, as I get a larger royalty. It is a subsidiary of Amazon.

The book also is on Amazon.

And its Kindle release is on July 25. Pre-order here, please.

Autographed copies are $20 each. Please email me at DonSurber@gmail.com 

Regardless of how you purchase this must reading for Trump supporters and media critics alike. Please post a book review on the Amazon site. That helps attract other readers.

12 comments:

  1. "FASCISM: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."

    Hmmm... That sounds a lot like the Obama administration to me. - Elric

    ReplyDelete
  2. "As a country we are splitting because those in power in Washington are corrupt. All of them. Left-wing media, right-wing media, the lobbyists, Congress, the White House, the bureaucracy, and now, of course, the Supreme Court. Americans have lost faith in these institutions, and for good reason."
    The first time I have agreed with Surber since his call for the resignation of the Kentucky clerk - Kim Davis - who refused to carry out her sworn state constitutional duties to issue marriage licenses.
    Too bad Trump is going for a career politician as a running mate. Trump has shown a true for-the-people candidate is possible to which I stand and applaud. Wildly unconvinced he can actually see it through though. Here's hoping in four years, Americans actually have more than one for-the-people candidates to vote for.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Some of this ends when the racial agitator finally goes away.

    Or at least out of any real power.

    The public's sense of disgust will take care of the rest.

    It took about 8 years before the cops stopped being pigs.

    ReplyDelete
  4. As always, there are two sets of rules -- one for far left anti-American elitist liberal weasels like RBG and hilLIARy, and one for the little people.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good post Big D. Everybody with a brain knows that DC is on the short kill list for ISIS and yet those people persist in misidentifying the true threat. Sux ta be you, DC. Shoulda bought a place in DubVee.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "I am not saying there is a fascist plan behind the Hillary Clinton forces..."

    Then you're either not paying attention or not being...forthcoming. In every way, shape and form the Democratic Party is a Fascist Party. One party rule. Everything in the State. Nothing outside the State. Every facet of the Deep State applied to promoting the One Party. Crushing of any and all perceived opposition. Violence against any who dare to not serve the Democratic plantation. Need I go on?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The more that douchebag elitists like Hiatt hyperventilate, the stronger my desire to vote for Trump.

    This "eff you" is for you, Freddy boy.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Not the first Justice who went political; there was the impeachment of Justice Chase. Samuel Chase had served on the Supreme Court since 1796. A staunch Federalist with a volcanic personality, Chase showed no willingness to tone down his bitter partisan rhetoric after Jeffersonian Republicans gained control of Congress in 1801. Representative John Randolph of Virginia, at the urging of President Thomas Jefferson, orchestrated impeachment proceedings against Chase, declaring he would wipe the floor with the obnoxious justice. The House voted to impeach Chase on March 12, 1804, accusing Chase of refusing to dismiss biased jurors and of excluding or limiting defense witnesses in two politically sensitive cases. The trial managers (members of the House of Representatives) hoped to prove that Chase had "behaved in an arbitrary, oppressive, and unjust way by announcing his legal interpretation on the law of treason before defense counsel had been heard." Highlighting the political nature of this case, the final article of impeachment accused the justice of continually promoting his political agenda on the bench, thereby "tending to prostitute the high judicial character with which he was invested, to the low purpose of an electioneering partizan."

    On November 30, 1804, the Senate appointed a committee to "prepare and report proper rules of proceedings" for the impeachment trial. When they took up the case against the Federalist justice in January 1805, the Senate consisted of 25 Jeffersonian Republicans and nine Federalists. Chase appeared before the members on January 4, 1805, to answer the charges. He declared that he was being tried for his political convictions rather than for any real crime or misdemeanor and requested a one-month postponement to prepare a defense. The Senate agreed and the trial began in earnest on February 4.

    Chase's defense team, which included several of the nation's most eminent attorneys, convinced several wavering senators that Chase's conduct did not warrant his removal from office. With at least six Jeffersonian Republicans joining the nine Federalists who voted not guilty on each article, the Senate on March 1, 1805, acquitted Samuel Chase on all counts. A majority voted guilty on three of the eight articles, but on each article the vote fell far short of the two-thirds required for conviction. The Senate thereby effectively insulated the judiciary from further congressional attacks based on disapproval of judges’ opinions. Chase resumed his duties at the bench, where he remained until his death in 1811.

    ReplyDelete