All

Right Wing Round-Up - 8/25/16

Right Wing Bonus Tracks - 8/25/16

  • Paul Blair lost a runoff election for a GOP state senate nomination in Oklahoma and is not taking it well.
  • Glenn Beck and his producers are refusing to abide by a judge's order to name their sources in the defamation lawsuit against them.
  • Speaking of Beck, he always talks about the importance of personal integrity and decency, but tonight he'll be spending an hour hanging out with Mel Gibson.
  • Paul Hair says that his "default position on refugees has changed. I now believe it is immoral to help them."
  • Erik Rush longs for an alternate reality in which Hillary Clinton could be see for what she truly is: "Objective reality would probably represent her appearance as an amorphous, grayish-green entity with only occasional glimpses of her leering face and trendy designer apparel peeking through the goo. Festering boils, sores and other lesions would populate a shifting, gelatinous corpulence. Groups of diseased genitalia and excretory organs might form in random areas on her glistening skin, migrating across its surface and occasionally engaging each other in horrid fashion."
  • Finally, David Barton says that we mock him for claiming that the Bible opposes the minimum wage because we have never read the Bible and don't know what it says. In fact, the reason we mock Barton is because we have read the Bible and know what it says.

Pat Robertson Is Still A Vince Foster Truther

Today on “The 700 Club,” Pat Robertson revived the debunked allegation that Bill and Hillary Clinton were involved in murdering former administration aide Vince Foster, who died of suicide.

“All the records on that have now disappeared,” he said. (They haven’t.) “So they’re trying to clean up their tracks before somebody goes investigating some of that stuff too.”

Robertson has been spreading the conspiracy theory that the Clintons murdered Foster and others since the early 1990s.

Anti-Immigrant Right Reacts To Trump's 'Softening' With Anger & Denial

Donald Trump confused his supporters and detractors alike this week when, after months of promising to build a “deportation force” to go after every undocumented immigrant in the country, his new campaign manager said that Trump’s stance on mass deportations is “to be determined” and the candidate himself said “there certainly could be a softening” of his immigration position. (Trump, however, continued to insist that he is “not flip-flopping” on the issue.)

This left Trump’s supporters in the anti-immigrant movement, many who have hailed his candidacy as something just short of the Second Coming, confused about how to respond. The reactions have ranged from denial that Trump will actually change his position—a fair assumption given Trump’s track record of saying whatever he thinks his current audience wants to hear—to dire warnings that he got behind “amnesty” to resigned acceptance that whatever Trump does, at least he’ll take a harder line on immigration than Hillary Clinton.

Some activists, like Trump himself, are claiming that he has not changed his position at all. Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson made this argument on CNN today, explaining that the candidate “hasn’t changed his position. He has changed the words he is saying.”

Dan Stein, the head of the anti-immigrant Federation for American Immigration Reform, took a similar tack, telling Newsmax that while Trump probably wouldn’t lose much support from his base if he weakened his hardline immigration stance, given the alternative candidates, he was “very confidant that [Trump’s] positions, in the end, are going to remain substantially intact.”

The Center for Immigration Studies’ Mark Krikorian, meanwhile, claimed that Trump never actually meant what he originally said about creating a deportation force, claiming that the “deportation force” he promised was just “symbolic talk” for stricter immigration enforcement.

"The idea we were ever going to deport all 12 million in two years with deportation squads—or whatever [Trump] popped off about—was never a policy,” Krikorian told The Washington Times. “It was an Uncle George spouting off about the latest thing. I think a lot of people took that as symbolic talk, a way of showing he's serious on immigration and, ‘I'm not Jeb Bush.’’

Anti-immigrant flamethrower Ann Coulter similarly tried to downplay Trump’s attempted repositioning on the issue, telling the Washington Examiner in an interview that took place after Trump’s campaign manager’s comments but before the candidate’s own, that the campaign’s change in rhetoric isn’t “a change in policy.” But she also, stunningly, conceded that it may be “in our interest to let some [undocumented immigrants] stay.”

"It mostly worries me rhetorically ... I mean, what to do with the illegals already here was never really a big part of it," she said. "We're getting a wall. We're definitely getting a wall. That's the one thing we know about a Trump presidency."

She said Trump still offers more than any of the other Republicans had.

"I don't think it is a change in policy," she said of Trump. "The policy is anyone who's here illegally is here illegally, does not have the right to be here. We'll decide whether it's in our interest to let them stay or not. Perhaps it is in our interest to let some of them stay."

Coulter hit a similar note in an interview with The Hill after Trump made his “softening” comment and vaguely outlined a policy in which some undocumented immigrants would have a way forward to legal status. “It's just rhetoric but it's still annoying,” she said. "I think he panicked and he had to say [it] ... I don't think he is softening. I mean the big thing is the wall.”

Coulter, however, who just happened to be launching her new book “In Trump We Trust” last night with a party hosted by Breitbart News, quickly changed her tune, taking to Twitter to accuse Trump of promoting “amnesty”:

William Gheen of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC similarly cautioned Trump against supporting “amnesty,” saying, “If Donald Trump significantly diverges from his promise to deport all illegals, he will end his own campaign or his own presidency. His campaign or his presidency will be wounded to the point of self-destruction.”

Krikorian had a similar warning in The National Review today, saying that if Trump loses to Hillary Clinton now, it will be because of his “softening” immigration views.

Krikorian, however, told The Washington Times yesterday that he trusted Trump’s advisers (who include Krikorian) to steer the candidate back to a hardline position. “I don’t trust Trump, but I trust the people working for him. And I trust Hillary to do the wrong thing without exception,” he said. “He could sell us out on everything and he’d still be better than Hillary.”

Tamara Scott: U.S. Enemies Becoming 'More Aggressive' Because They're Scared Of President Trump

Tamara Scott, the Republican National Committeewoman from Iowa who is also a prominent Religious Right activist in the state, hosted ACT for America president Brigitte Gabriel on her “Truth for Our Time” radio program last week to discuss efforts to resettle refugees from the Syrian civil war in the U.S.

After interviewing Gabriel, Scott falsely claimed that President Obama plans “to bring another 100,000 to 200,000 refugees into this country by November, by the voting date.” (The real number is 85,000 refugees from around the world, 10,000 of them from Syria.)

“Am I suggesting that they’ll be voting?” she said. “I’m not saying that, but he’s pushing it by October.”

Scott then claimed that America’s antagonists around the globe have been more “aggressive” toward us because they know Donald Trump might become president and change things “so that we can defeat our enemies.”

“And I would say, whether the election or not, students will misbehave when the substitute is there before the regular teacher comes back,” she said. “And I think that’s why you’re seeing some aggravated or more aggressive behavior around the globe towards us, because they know there’s a chance come November 8 that things are going to change in America. We will have a commander in chief by the name of Donald Trump who will defend our nation, who will rebuild our military, who will empower our soldiers, he said he’d change the rules of engagement so they don’t have to be a victim of a shot or a wound before they can defend themselves. He will change it so that we can defeat our enemies. How terrific would that be?”

“So I think that’s why you’re seeing some of this,” she concluded, “and I think that’s also why Obama may be trying to get some of this through before we even have our election.”

David Duke: Donald Trump Speaks Like An Alt-Right Leader

Yesterday, Louisiana-based white nationalist and U.S. Senate candidate David Duke reacted to the news of Hillary Clinton’s upcoming speech about Donald Trump’s ties to the alt-right, a racist movement championed by Duke, by noting that Trump speaks just like alt-right leaders.

Duke said that Clinton “is really concerned and really scared because she realizes that there’s a sleeping tiger in this country, European-Americans, that are waking up to the realization that every right they have—the real racism in America is against white people.”

He praised Trump for capitalizing on these grievances and attempting to drive up the GOP’s share of the white vote, a strategy heralded by white nationalists as the key to political success.

“No candidate in this country would dare even stand up and say, ‘Yes, I definitely am going to defend the rights and the heritage of European-Americans,’” he continued. “One can go on to say, ‘Yes I want to respect the rights of all but I believe our people have rights too and the ethnic cleansing of America has got to stop.’ I believe this is a sleeping tiger that is easily awakened.”

Trump, Duke went on to say, “has energized European-Americans in sort of the implicit statements he makes, such as ‘take America back,’ and we’re going to take America back.”

Rolling Stone Covers Voter Suppression Rock Star Kris Kobach

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach is a right-wing activist who has championed anti-immigrant and voter suppression efforts around the country and has helped to insert right-wing rhetoric into recent Republican platforms.  As Miranda reported this month, Kobach is pushing his fellow Republicans to adopt legislation modeled after the disastrously restrictive voting law he helped push through in Kansas. The September 8 issue of Rolling Stone looks at one of Kobach’s ventures in “The GOP’s Stealth War Against Voters.”

The Rolling Stone story by journalist and author Greg Palast examines Crosscheck, a Kobach project that Palast calls “the culmination of a decade-long Republican effort to disenfranchise voters under the guise of battling voter fraud.” The Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program is ostensibly designed to target a virtually nonexistent form of voter fraud. In reality, it helps promote the Right Wing's bogus voter fraud narrative, which in turn provides justification for otherwise unjustifiable laws that restrict voting. In the worst case scenario, Crosscheck could lead to thousands of people, predominantly people of color and young voters, being wrongly purged from voting rolls in advance of November’s election.

Crosscheck compares voter registration lists in different states to identify individuals who are registered in more than one place. Theoretically, it requires matches on a voter's first, middle and last name, along with birth date and the final four digits of a social security number, but in reality, it doesn’t always work as advertised. As we noted a couple years ago, Crosscheck’s data was so unreliable that Florida and Oregon dropped out of the program

Palast says he was able to get his hands on Crosscheck lists from Virginia, Georgia and Washington state, and found that the lists often lacked a middle-name match and misidentified fathers and sons as the same voter.  He cites database expert Mark Swedlund, who criticizes Crosscheck’s “childish methodology.” He also notes that U.S. Census data indicates that people of color are statistically more likely to have last names in common, leading to an “astonishing” inherent bias in the results, with “one in six Hispanics, one in seven Asian-Americans, and one in nine African Americans in Crosscheck states landing on the list.” And Donald Trump complains the election is rigged against him!

“God forbid your name is Garcia, of which there are 858,000 in the U.S., and your first name if Joseph or Jose,” says Swedlund. “You’re probably suspected of voting in 27 states.”

It is up to each state to decide how it uses the data from Crosscheck; some send the lists to county officials who don’t have the resources to verify their accuracy. Rolling Stone reports that Crosscheck “has flagged close to half a million voters” in Ohio, and that 41,000 people were knocked off voting rolls in Virginia when it was under Republican control.

Even if state and local officials don’t end up using the data to initiate major purges, Crosscheck’s inflated numbers can be used to buttress false right-wing claims that voter fraud is a big problem. That mythology has been particularly damaging in the aftermath of rulings from conservative justices on the Supreme Court dismantling key Voting Rights Act protections, which allowed Republican officials in many states to pass laws aimed at making it harder for some people, particularly people of color and young people, to register and vote. And, says Palast, gutting the Voting Rights Act also meant dropping the requirement for covered states to keep racial data on voters, making it harder to document discriminatory practices.

Video: Chuck Grassley Just Doesn’t Think The Confirmation Process Is That Important  

It is common for members of the Senate to cite the process of confirming Supreme Court justices as one of their most important responsibilities. These judges receive lifetime appointments and their impact on the law lasts for decades. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley’s continued obstruction of Merrick Garland’s confirmation, though, reveals his lack of respect for his constitutionally mandated responsibility.

Previously, Grassley explicitly spelled out his belief that the confirmation process should not be taken as seriously as other functions of the Senate, such as yearly squabbling over budgets and appropriations.

In 1991, during the confirmation hearings for Justice Clarence Thomas, he explained, “Some have stated that the Senate’s advice and consent role in the elevation of Supreme Court justices, of any Supreme Court justice, for that matter, is the most important power that we in the Senate here exercise.” Grassley continued, “Now, I don't happen to share that view, as important as I take my responsibilities today and through this process, because I happen to feel that confronting the issue of war—as we did only last January, and attempting to bring government spending under control are among the more significant responsibilities that we have.”

“And, of course, I think the Constitution doesn't elevate the confirmation process quite this high. The Constitution shows this because the ‘advise and consent’ role is spelled out in Chapter 2 with executive powers, and not with the legislative powers in Article 1. So I think the Constitution itself indicates it is not a preeminent legislative power,” Grassley concluded.

If the chairman of the Judiciary Committee does not recognize that vetting and voting on the confirmation of Supreme Court justices is one of his greatest responsibilities, perhaps he should relinquish his gavel to someone who does.

Anti-Semitic Preacher Hopes Trump Will Be God's Instrument To Finally Destroy The Jews

Among the anti-Semites and white supremacists rallying behind Donald Trump is Christian writer and conspiracy theorist Texe Marrs, who declared on a radio program recently that Trump just might be God's instrument for finally destroying Israel and the Jews.

While speaking with Jeff Rense, a fellow right-wing extremist, Marrs made the case that Trump has a lot in common with Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, which he meant as a compliment.

After Rense complained that Hitler was one of the most unfairly maligned and misunderstood leaders in all of human history, Marrs declared that Stalin was plotting to arrest and imprison every Jew in the Soviet Union, but was murdered before he could carry it out.

But, Marrs said hopefully, Trump might be able to pick up where Hitler and Stalin left off.

"Israel is going to be destroyed and it is going to happen so fast we'll all be shocked about it," Marrs said. "It's going to happen and I've been wondering if maybe, let me just say something here, could Trump be the instrument of God in this? He doesn't have to be a Hitler, he doesn't have to be a Stalin, he can simply be a good guy."

"He's going to have to move very fast against these people," Marrs warned, because the Jews will work to take him down, just as they supposedly did to President Nixon.

But Trump "may be so smart though, and intelligent that he outwits them," Marrs stated. "He's their friend, he's their pal, he's their buddy and then it's suddenly, wow. He takes the woman, the whore, so to speak, Mystery Babylon the Great and suddenly he destroys her, in one single hour she will be destroyed."

After engaging in a bit of Holocaust denial, Marrs declared that a Trump presidency "may turn out quite surprising."

"I pray that they will get what is coming to them," Marrs said of the Jews. "These people who have done such horrible things over the years and who, right now, are plotting such horrible deeds against gentiles and others, I hope they get what they deserve. I hope they do and I hope maybe Trump could be the instrument of it."

Alt-Right Founder Demands Clinton Apologize To 'European-Americans Everywhere'

Richard Spencer, the white nationalist activist who coined the term “alt-right” to describe the emerging racist movement of which he is a leader, lashed out at Hillary Clinton today for her plans to criticize Donald Trump for his ties to the alt-right movement.

In a press release from his National Policy Insititute, Spencer demands that Clinton “issue an apology to European-Americans everywhere” for supporting “an anti-White agenda.”

Spender also denies that Trump or his new campaign chairman, Steven Bannon, are tied to the alt-right, writing that while he has “has written favorably about both Trump and [Bannon’s news agency] Breitbart, he has consistently emphasized they are not exactly the Alt Right.”

Bannon, for his part, feels differently: He said as recently as July that Breitbart under his leadership was “the platform for the alt-right.”

From Spencer’s press release:

Over the past few months, Hillary Clinton has engaged, rhetorically and directly, with an array of groups that support an anti-White agenda. Whether that’s endorsing the “Black Lives Matter” movement, which is directly responsible for a rise in violence throughout America, or her surrogates chastising European-Americans for their background and heritage.

Hillary and her allies in “conservative” media will stop at nothing to portray peaceful European-American advocacy as a dark specter haunting America. In reality, she and her allies, especially so-called “conservatives,” are only giving comfort to the most radical and violent elements in our society.

We disavow any attempts by Clinton or any of her surrogates on the left, right, or center to tag the National Policy Institute or the work we do as violent extremism. We call on her and her allies to issue an apology to European-Americans everywhere and confront her own troubling links to extremism and the civil unrest she has stoked for months.