Trump Does a John Howard By Chris Knight
Trump’s State of the union address had some high points, and real low ones, showing that he is little more than a front man for the 1 percenters, and that he listens too much to Jared Kushner. But really, what else could he have been given his background? And the threat of Hillary Clinton was just too great. The main point is that Trump departed from the teleprompter to add his own personal philosophy of wanting the largest immigration intake that America has had:
“9:35: Trump on immigration. He says he wants people to come into America “in the largest numbers ever” so long as they come in legally. He asks Congress to come together on illegal immigration because it is a “moral issue.” He also speaks about how working-class Americans often have to suffer because of illegal immigration while wealthy Americans “push for open borders while living their lives behind walls and gates and guards”:
The Congress has 10 days left to pass a bill that will fund our Government, protect our homeland, and secure our southern border. Now is the time for the Congress to show the world that America is committed to ending illegal immigration and putting the ruthless coyotes, cartels, drug dealers, and human traffickers out of business. As we speak, large, organized caravans are on the march to the United States. We have just heard that Mexican cities, in order to remove the illegal immigrants from their communities, are getting trucks and buses to bring them up to our country in areas where there is little border protection. I have ordered another 3,750 troops to our southern border to prepare for this tremendous onslaught. This is a moral issue. The lawless state of our southern border is a threat to the safety, security, and financial well being of all America. We have a moral duty to create an immigration system that protects the lives and jobs of our citizens. This includes our obligation to the millions of immigrants living here today, who followed the rules and respected our laws. Legal immigrants enrich our Nation and strengthen our society in countless ways. I want people to come into our country in the largest numbers ever, but they have to come in legally.
Tonight, I am asking you to defend our very dangerous southern border out of love and devotion to our fellow citizens and to our country. No issue better illustrates the divide between America’s working class and America’s political class than illegal immigration. Wealthy politicians and donors push for open borders while living their lives behind walls and gates and guards. Meanwhile, working class Americans are left to pay the price for mass illegal migration — reduced jobs, lower wages, overburdened schools and hospitals, increased crime, and a depleted social safety net. Tolerance for illegal immigration is not compassionate — it is actually very cruel. One in three women is sexually assaulted on the long journey north. Smugglers use migrant children as human pawns to exploit our laws and gain access to our country. Human traffickers and sex traffickers take advantage of the wide open areas between our ports of entry to smuggle thousands of young girls and women into the United States and to sell them into prostitution and modern-day slavery. Tens of thousands of innocent Americans are killed by lethal drugs that cross our border and flood into our cities — including meth, heroin, cocaine, and fentanyl. The savage gang, MS-13, now operates in 20 different American states, and they almost all come through our southern border. Just yesterday, an MS-13 gang member was taken into custody for a fatal shooting on a subway platform in New York City. We are removing these gang members by the thousands, but until we secure our border they’re going to keep streaming back in. Year after year, countless Americans are murdered by criminal illegal aliens.”
A deceptive, manipulative speech.
Notice how these so-called conservatives, from John Howard to Trump, use the illegal immigration issue to weasel in mass legal immigration, which has the same destructive impact upon workers in the host country. Trump is not a traitor, he is true to the globalist class he praises. Here is Anne Coulter on the great immigration scam, making comments that indicate that she would be far superior as a president than the useful idiot, Trumpet:
“Assiduous readers of my column know that I have frequently made the point that America’s immigration policies benefit only three groups of people: 1) rich Americans with a lot of employees, 2) the immigrants themselves, and 3) their grandmothers back in Chiapas. The money illegal immigrants send out of the country doesn’t come from their low wages. It comes from the taxpayers, who are required to subsidize immigrants so that investment bankers can have cheap nannies. Yes, it is a problem that they couldn’t possibly live on what I pay them, but that’s where YOU come in, taxpayers! When the rich merely have to pay Social Security taxes on their nannies, they quickly say, Oh, never mind, as we saw in the 1990s, when Bill Clinton’s first two female attorney general nominees had to withdraw because of the illegal aliens raising their kids, and we finally ended up with Janet Reno. Zoe Baird, the first nominee caught up in Nannygate, promptly fired her illegal alien nanny and chauffeur, Lillian and Victor Corderos, who were deported. That’s how much the rich love Latino immigrants! As Baird’s spokeswoman, Jamie Gorelick, said at the time: “I think it truly pains them that Lillian has had to pay this price. ... They have true affection for her.”
She’s like family! A cynic might wonder if the beneficiaries of mass Third-World immigration would be so altruistic toward the rest of the world if they were the ones being forced to compete with immigrant workers. At a time when the working class could have been ginned up to oppose this dump of low-wage workers on the country, the unions lied to them and told them, Don’t worry! This will make the union stronger. Thirty years later, California construction workers who were making $45 an hour are now making $11 an hour. The entire readership of The New York Times is immune from wage pressure like that. Our immigration policies strictly limit high-skilled immigration, ensuring that there will be no competition for jobs in the executive suite, while foisting a dog-eat-dog, survival-of-the-fittest competition on their employees. The left has never had to defend the argument that everyone on the planet has a right to come to America, drive down wages, access welfare and force us to educate their children — because rich Republicans like the cheap labor, too. Seeing what a fantastic deal mass immigration is for the rich, it’s easy to understand why they lie so much about it. For example, the Cato Institute — funded by the Koch brothers — keeps producing “studies” claiming that immigrants are less likely to be on welfare than Americans.
That’s at least counterintuitive. We’re told day in and day out about the horrible lives of the poor asylum-seekers. They’ll starve if we send them back! Their children have all kinds of health problems, no medical care, no decent food, no roof over their heads! Their neighborhoods are hotbeds of wife-beaters, drugs, murder and gangs! And then: A financial burden to America? No ... what makes you say that? Even if it were true that fewer immigrants were accessing government assistance than American citizens, the number of immigrants who should be on welfare is, wait, checking my notes ... yes: ZERO. Why would any country bring in people who immediately need our monetary support? In fact, bringing in poverty-stricken immigrants is a disaster for the welfare programs intended to help our fellow Americans. Fully half of all non-citizens in the United States are on at least one welfare program, according to the (very non-MAGA) Migration Policy Institute. The only purpose of these Cato “studies” are the headlines, which will be endlessly repeated throughout media without a moment’s reflection. Whether journalists are citing phony studies, phony polls or phony experts, every statement about immigration in the mainstream media is a lie. You always have to look for the trick. Cato’s welfare “studies,” for example, put welfare-receiving children of immigrants — legal and illegal — in the “American” column.
This tells us nothing about the soundness of our immigration policy. If the immigrants’ kids need welfare, we’re not bringing in the right immigrants. Even more preposterous, Cato counts Social Security and Medicare as “welfare.” This is money that was taken by force from working Americans for their entire lives, of which they will get a portion back upon reaching retirement age. Immigrants are collecting welfare that the older Americans didn’t collect when they were the same age. Wait until they retire. Of course Americans are more likely to be collecting Social Security and Medicare! I refer you to mass-immigration advocates’ usual sneer about white Americans being so much older than young, hardworking — and surprisingly cheap! — Latino immigrants. It’s so obvious that our immigration policies are bankrupting the nation’s welfare programs that I’ve often wondered if this was the intent of the libertarian Koch brothers all along. Burden the entire system until it blows up — and then we can finally return to pre-Great Society America! Someone needs to tell the plutocrats that their employees are voting, and they aren’t voting libertarian. Heard of Venezuela? Heard of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? Heard of California? The rich’s Third World employees — “natural Republicans,” we’re always told by The Wall Street Journal — turn out NOT to be huge fans of small government. That’s why, instead of being a libertarian paradise, California is a banana republic, running on fumes from Silicon Valley and Hollywood. As Lenin supposedly said, “Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.” The rich know they want to pay their employees less, and they don’t know anything else.”
All the arguments against illegal immigration, carry over to legal immigration, perhaps with the only exceptions being the violent crime arguments. Anyway, this is all going to be merely academic, in the lights of a new cold war between the US and Russia, something the neo-con Republicans and Democrats have been lusting for, and which Trump has surrendered to. Really, they all deserve what is coming, and it can be asked whether hell is sufficient punishment for these masters of war? Does eternal damnation go far enough?
“The INF treaty banned land-based nuclear-capable missiles with a range between 300 and 3,200 miles in 1987 when Russia and the U.S. had populated much of Europe with intermediate-range nuclear missiles. “The ban eliminated this entire class of missiles and went down as one of the most successful acts of arms control ever,” wrote MSN. Except it wasn’t successful in the least because Russian spent years developing a nuclear-capable weapon banned by the treaty, making the treaty absolutely worthless. The U.S. then responded by saying it would withdraw and design its own treaty-busting missiles. But the World War 3 and doomsday rhetoric jumped up a few notches when Russian media threatened to nuke the U.S. A BBC review of Russian newspapers, some state-owned and all adhering to state narratives or censored by the Kremlin, revealed some truly apocalyptic ideas. If the Americans deploy their new missiles near Russia’s borders, and in response we deploy ours, then, of course, the risk of [nuclear] conflict rises sharply,” an arms control expert told one paper.
“If US missiles are deployed in Poland or the Baltic states, they’ll be able to reach Russia in minutes. In such an event, the way Russia currently conceives using nuclear weapons, as a retaliatory strike, becomes impossible, since there won’t be time to work out which missiles have been launched against Russia, what their trajectory and their targets are,” he continued. “This is why there is now a temptation for both us and for them to adopt the doctrine of a preemptive strike.” For those who missed it, a preemptive strike is sending a nuke over without provocation or at just a sign that there might be conflict. The arms expert also declared that with the INF officially dead, the U.S. and Russian will have to consider nuking each other first (preemptive strike) because missile attacks won’t be as predictable as longer-range salvos from the continental U.S. and Russia’s mainland. Russian media threatened to use a doomsday device that would trigger a devastating tsunami causing widespread death and destruction to coastlines. “It cannot be excluded that one of the Poseidon with a 100 megaton nuclear warhead will lay low off the U.S. coast, becoming ‘the doomsday weapon.‘ Thus an attack on Russia will become a suicidal misadventure,” the paper states.
Well, thinking philosophically about all of this, it is probably fitting that the human race ends this way. We had the world in our hands, but then let it slip into the toilet. Both those who were active, and those who did nothing, must not complain when divine punishment is delivered: “The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget god.” Psalm 9:17