The Selective Application of Justice Is Not Justice At All–Democrats Deserve Their Desired Election Investigation

The Selective Application of Justice Is Not Justice At All–Democrats Deserve Their Desired Election Investigation

The selective application of justice is not justice at all…

…it’s a tool for tyrants to crush opposition or “problematic” citizens.

The Democrats say that their concern about the alleged Russian hacking, and the alleged Trump/Russia collusion, is the integrity of our elections. Despite the fact that whoever leaked the DNC/Podesta emails actually exposed the Democrats’ and media’s own subversions of a fair electoral process, and despite no evidence of Trump colluding with Russia, and despite never explaining exactly what sort of collusion they’re looking for…surely we need an independent investigation, they say–a special prosecutor, even.

Well if that’s the concern, then yes, let’s have an investigation into the election, and everything that may have affected its integrity. Here are some of the issues that would fall under that umbrella:

Bad for the Democrats:
– The Clinton server + investigation

  • Aiding a coverup for, or scuttling a worthy prosecution of, a presidential candidate would clearly be a problem and indeed a serious interference with the electoral process
  • The crime
    • Classified info mishandling
    • Endangering cybersecurity at State Dept, possibly wider (disabled govt security systems due to issues with the private server, State Dept was hacked within weeks)
    • Destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice (smashed devices with hammers, deleted emails after subpoena, modified emails (see “stonetear”))
  • The coverup, politicization of law enforcement
    • FBI giving immunity like candy
    • Allowing destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice
    • Mishandling witness/person of interest interviews: allowing people of interest to the suspected crime, who had given testimony prior, to act as Clinton’s lawyers/advisors during her testimony
    • Comey overstepping his authority to protect Clinton from prosecution, despite her clear guilt, where he invoked intent as necessary for prosecution despite such a requirement not being in the statute
  • Investigation interference, compromised Justice Dept: Bill meeting w/ AG Lynch on the Arizona tarmac (known about only thanks to a tip given to a local reporter)
  • Email about Lynch “not letting it go too far” (?)

– The Clinton Foundation investigation (ongoing?), pay for play

  • Again, was law enforcement politicized, and criminal activity of a presidential candidate shielded from investigation and prosecution?
  • The lucrative private speeches, the donations to the foundation
    • To/by people whom she made diplomatic deals and government contracts with, and pushed policy that benefited them (e.g. Libyan/Syrian wars)
      • Contractors, e.g. defense
      • Russian uranium deal
      • Foreign governments (and individuals within those governments), often mideast despots, Chinese, Russians
      • Individuals (given government/board positions)
    • Or to whom the Clintons gave access (e.g. Morocco)
  • Charity malfeasance (and crimes?)
    • Charity as cover for a political operation, e.g.
      • Sid Blumenthal and his activity in Libya (and perception by other Foundation employees)
      • Simultaneous employment of Huma by State Dept, CF, and Hillary’s personal office
    • Human trafficking activity/associations in Haiti?
    • Payments to Teneo holdings? Being used to arrange private, lucrative contracts (e.g. speeches) for Bill?

– DNC malfeasance

  • Violating their charter by not being impartial to the candidates (see: DNC class-action lawsuit)
    • Thereby:
      • Defrauding donors
      • Wasting taxpayer money on primaries
    • Cheating in the debates (questions given to Clinton beforehand)
    • Scheming to create media narratives against Bernie
    • Intimidation and control over endorsements
    • Laundering and pilfering state party/candidate funds to DNC coffers via Hillary Victory Fund and control over transfers
    • Superdelegates, misleading media reporting of delegate totals
    • Limiting # of debates and controlling all of them, via rule changes by DWS (none unsanctioned by DNC allowed)
    • Collusion/coordination by DNC and Clinton campaign

– Media malfeasance

  • Collusion w/ Clinton team, revealed in the Podesta emails
  • ‘Pied piper’ strategy to engineer the Republican primary
  • Rampant, outright dishonesty and bias, for Clinton and against her opponents (esp. Trump)
  • AP declaring Clinton the winner of the Democratic nomination the night before the California primary, based on private, anonymous polling of superdelegate endorsements (not even officially added to the delegate count until they vote at the convention)
  • NBC holding the pussy tape for maximum impact, leaked before they intended

– REAL story behind DNC leaks and Russia

  • Who leaked
    • Zero evidence it was Russia, or that the leaker obtained emails via hacking
    • Assange says it was not a state actor, Craig Murray says it was a DNC insider, Robbin Young says it was Seth Rich (via alleged correspondence with Guccifer 2.0, wherein it’s claimed he was murdered for leaking)
    • Podesta emails were phished, not hacked
  • Was it whistleblowing
    • It did reveal corruption, cheating, collusion, violation of charter (i.e. defrauded donors)
  • Was Seth Rich (DNC staffer) the leaker?
    • He was murdered in July, right before the leaks and the convention, on the streets of DC, with the police concluding it was a “botched robbery”, despite his valuables being left on his person. Case remains unsolved.
    • Podesta emails revealed his attitude towards leakers in Feb 2015: “I’m definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it.”
    • The Robbin Young messages, if true, show just how criminal, dangerous, and immoral the DNC/Clintons and/or their allies were.
    • Wikileaks has STRONGLY hinted Seth Rich is the leaker, offering a reward for information about his murder, and Assange talking about him in the context of the dangers that leakers face in this interview
      • Rod Wheeler, former DC homicide detective, now PI hired by Rich’s family, has stated
        • tangible evidence on Rich’s laptop that confirms he was communicating with WikiLeaks prior to his death
        • believes there is a cover-up and the police department has been told to back down from the investigation
        • “The police department nor the FBI have been forthcoming,” said Wheeler. “They haven’t been cooperating at all. I believe that the answer to solving his death lies on that computer, which I believe is either at the police department or either at the FBI. I have been told both.”
        • “I have a source inside the police department that has looked at me straight in the eye and said, ‘Rod, we were told to stand down on this case and I can’t share any information with you.’ Now, that is highly unusual for a murder investigation, especially from a police department. Again, I don’t think it comes from the chief’s office, but I do believe there is a correlation between the mayor’s office and the DNC and that is the information that will come out [Tuesday].”
      • Julian Assange and Wikileaks have both retweeted this story (though maintain their practice of not revealing sources)
      • UPDATE: The family has pushed back on Wheeler’s claims, via their spokesperson, Brad Bauman, who just happens to be a Democratic PR crisis consultant who’s been “serving” them since just after Rich’s death.
      • UPDATE 2: Apparently Wheeler has walked back his claims of hard knowledge about emails and WL contact, take that as you will (Was he just looking for attention for himself? Trying to revive the issue?  Has he been intimidated/threatened?  Regardless, we still have all the other evidence, and WL’s strong hints)
  • Who hacked, how, and why
    • DNC had terrible cybersecurity (a familiar habit for Clinton); showed lack of concern, action; ignored warnings by FBI of cyber attacks and threats
      • So really, could have been anyone
      • RNC received same warnings by FBI, had better security that foiled alleged hacks
    • Terrible, nonsensical, unverifiable evidence provided to public in embarrassingly sparse intelligence reports
      • All on the word of Crowdstrike, hired by the DNC, headed by Russian expat Dmitri Alperovitch, and who have severely damaged credibility after their false Ukrainian artillery story
      • FBI & gov never allowed to analyze server
    • Evidence that the Russia hacking narrative is false
      • All of the above, and:
      • Counter testimony by other cybersecurity experts
        • Ukrainian malware was an old version, easily obtainable on the web by anyone
        • Cyrillic characters, etc.–no apparent attempt by Russia to hide their tracks
        • APT’s not actually well-defined groups? Not necessarily Russian state or state-associated?
      • Emails showing planning of the Trump/Putin bromance narrative by Clinton campaign before the leaks: e.g. “Best approach is to slaughter Donald for his bromance with Putin” (Podesta, Dec 21 2015)
      • Wikileaks showing insane CIA malfeasance, and ability to frame a hack as other nations
      • Politicization of IC and law enforcement (see FBI, Comey)

– Crimes by Democratic operatives at highest levels (e.g. one and two degrees away from Obama and the Clinton campaign, one often personally visiting the White House)

  • Conspiring to commit mass voter fraud, admission of doing so for years (see: Project Veritas videos)
  • Instigation of violence at opponents’ rallies, organized at highest levels (see: Project Veritas videos, “birddogging”)

– Leftist political violence and intimidation

– Voter disenfranchisement in Dem primaries

  • Unexplained registration changes/drops
  • Massive reduction in polling places in some states, e.g. Arizona, leading to hours long waits in sun and heat
  • Harry Reid’s shenanigans in NV w/ unions? Letting them off work to vote for Clinton?
  • Biased ballots? E.g. California showing Clinton with picture and no one else?

– Obama admin. abuse of power (for political ends and electoral advantage)

  • DOJ slush fund (allowing billions of dollars in fines payed by corporations as punishment/settlement to go to Dem-favored political groups instead of Treasury)
  • IRS targeting conservative political groups

– Improper, politically-motivated surveillance, unmasking, and leaking of info targeting Trump/campaign (Fisas, warrantless surveillance, unmasking)

  • Rejection of FISA warrant request (super rare, ~ 1 in 3000) in June
  • Fake Dossier (paid for by FBI?) (falsified/improperly used to get October FISA?)
  • Inappropriate unmasking of Trump and associates (and family?) for no apparent legitimate intelligence reason, as revealed by Nunes (and not challenged by Dems who’ve seen the reports–they just shot the messenger, as usual)
  • Rule change by Obama in final days of presidency, to allow wide dissemination of unmasked intelligence on Americans throughout government (to facilitate leaks on Trump)
  • Leaking/spreading of piss dossier
  • Illegal leaks of classified info targeting Trump and associates’ legal activities

– Post-election attempts to subvert democracy

  • See above, Russia narrative, collusion narrative, surveillance/unmasking/leaking against Trump and associates
  • Riots (e.g. at inauguration, Berkeley, Portland)
    • Antifa, an anarcho-communist terrorist movement, ignored/downplayed by media (while “Nazis” are everywhere!)
    • Violence towards innocents allowed to happen (twice!) at Berkeley, cops stood down and did nothing
      • Likely ordered to stand down by mayor, who was a member of the extremist, leftist cult BAMN’s Facebook group
  • Calls for political violence, sedition by celebrities and media
  • Paid protesting
  • Widespread hate crime hoaxes to demonize Trump and his supporters
  • False narratives of election fraud and recounts specifically targeting Trump
  • Campaign to overturn the results via electors
  • And all this on the heels of Clinton (and the media) accusing Trump of being a “threat to democracy” for not pre-emptively accepting election results, when result-affecting fraud or legitimate recounts were still actually a possibility (unlike after the election, when the results were clear)
  • Continuous calls for impeachment, investigation of Trump on ZERO evidence (after nearly a year of investigation, including surveillance), continuing to this day

Bad for Trump:

  • Alleged collusion between his campaign and Russia
    • Only bad for him IF you believe it actually happened, despite there still being zero evidence, and all signs pointing to it being a false, politically-motivated narrative to undermine our democracy and delegitimize a legitimately elected president. Bad for Dems if false.
  • Comey press conference in July outlining findings in Clinton server case and recommending against prosecution, letter to Congress committee in October about reopening of case
    • But these aren’t even Trump’s doing, and the alternative should not just be Comey’s public silence on, but Clinton actually being prosecuted for her crimes, not to mention anyone around her who also might be guilty

So, Democrat party, establishment RINOs, and media: still want a special prosecutor/investigation? You want to ensure the integrity of our democracy and our elections? What an admirable goal! So let’s do it. Let’s clear out this mountain of corruption, crime, and lies you’ve buried this country under for years.

Anyone who bypassed the mainstream media even momentarily last year at least caught glimpses of all this stuff. I think when looking at it in total, the only reasonable conclusion is that the Clintons and the DNC are an astoundingly corrupt and conniving political machine, and posed an unparalleled threat to the health of our electoral, political, and governing processes.

They spent years amassing control over the Democratic party to the point where they thought they could muscle their way to both the DNC nomination and to the Presidency, through control, subversion, and collusion, rather than win on merit via a legitimate, democratic electoral process. As the Clintons gained control, the party’s attitudes and practices came to be more than just a reflection of their own–they became one and the same. The same thing can largely be said of the media, who acted as a partisan, political force and did their utmost to get her in the White House, while attempting (and failing) to maintain a facade of legitimate, ethical journalism.

Democrats should be thankful that Clinton didn’t ultimately succeed, as who knows what even just 4 more years of rot could have further done to their party, both internally and to its image, but more significantly, what the rot could have further done to the country and the world–indeed everyone should be thankful. We were saved from their Orwellian, authoritarian, corrupt mode of operation, perhaps only by the grace of their hubris and incompetence. They undoubtedly did not deserve to win this election, but if they were slightly more adept at their conniving, or at hiding their corruption, they might have won anyway, and we would all be in for some serious shit.

Since the election, the narratives have been continuously unraveling, and the Clintonian Democrat party slowly and visibly descending into desperate, unhinged, Russia-obsessed, anti-Trump madness. Polls have shown more Clinton voters would now switch their votes than Trump voters, and the Democrat party remains less popular than both the Republican party and the primary object of their seething, unhinged hatred, Trump himself. This despite the continued all-out war by the media on Trump and on the truth–or perhaps because of it, with trust in the media at a well-deserved all-time low (and continuing to decline, I would imagine).

Now as much as their twisting in the wind provides some sweetly poetic Schadenfreude to many, for their sake and the sake of our entire country I would like to see it end, punctuated by nothing less than the unmistakable signal of some long-awaited justice well-served:

  • for the Obama/Clinton empire to face the music for the corruption it has sown and for the damage it did to us, the world, and the faith in our institutions;
  • for an intellectually and morally decrepit Democratic party to pay penance to its defrauded donors and voters, implode, then start anew, with a hopefully legitimate, patriotic, and truly liberal (as in liberty) opposition party to take its place;
  • for an intelligence community that has been politicized, corrupted, and weaponized (literally) against the interests and security of the American people, to be reined in and made accountable at last, its methods and missions re-evaluated and–hopefully–effectively reformed;
  • and for the thoroughly dishonest, unscrupulous, and tunnel-visioned legacy media–who have rested on the laurels of their monopolistic past for far too long–to take their rightful place in the dustbin of history; and for an open, meritocratic, innovative and free (as in freedom) independent media to take their place, with the public empowered to leverage new communication technologies, and to reap the benefits of truly open dialogue, rather than the corporate/establishment/leftist-controlled dialogue that has obfuscated reality to our great harm

And I think nothing would help to expedite this justice more than a thorough, independent, honest review of all the issues I listed above that may have corrupted the integrity of our elections. So let’s get this show on the road. This Bernie-turned-Trump supporter is 100% on board.

I call on the Democratic Party to do what is right, not only for our country, but for themselves, to restore their own moral compass and credibility.  It will be a painful, embarrassing process for those who are guilty, but it’s the only way to stop the bleeding, and prevent more people like me from finding greener political pastures among their opposition.

(title image courtesy of Wikipedia user Continentaleurope)


Holy Shit. Our President is the Greatest Troll of All Time

Holy Shit. Our President is the Greatest Troll of All Time

(left image courtesy of /r/the_Donald)

That is, of course, assuming he’s the one who actually leaked his tax return, which seems extremely likely, given how it looks for him.  If he didn’t leak it, and this was the worst the leaker could find/put out on him…holy crap, he should release all his returns for the glowing publicity he’ll get.

What all did this accomplish?

  • Exposed the McCarthyist-in-chief, Rachel Maddow, and her entire organization, for the desperate, overhyped shills that they are.  Also shows them to be complete idiots, for not realizing this is positive for him (or for not reviewing the document before hyping it).
    • This will rub off on the corporate media, the Democrats, and anti-Trumpers as a whole.
    • This damages the jingoistic, McCarthyist witch-hunt movement, given her role as its spiritual leader. This is great not just for him, but for the country and the world as a whole.
  • Shut down any desire from his opposition to talk about his tax returns for the time being
  • Showed he had income at a rate where he probably is indeed a billionaire, and that he has paid a fairly high tax rate (higher than NBC, Obama, and Sanders), completely cutting down two speculative criticisms of him.
    • Further, shows he probably earned at least a billion between ’95 and ’05 alone, given the billion dollar loss in ’95 he could have deducted for up to 18 years
  • Tarnished the reputation of David Johnston (the reporter who received the document and took it to Maddow), who wrote a negative biography of Trump during the campaign.

The fact that it went to Maddow is probably just incidental (but extremely fortunate) as it was probably Johnston’s own choice to go to her.  And the spectacular, extremely hyped-up fashion it all blew up in is just about the best result Trump could have hoped for, but couldn’t actually control.

This is also the greatest trolling not just because it’s funny as hell and he utterly BTFO his opponents, but because he did a GREAT service to the country, as it might be enough to put an end to the extremely dangerous McCarthyism and jingoism that Maddow has been leading, and the media at large has been fueling.  As someone who has been calling out (more so on social media than here) the Russia hacking/collusion narrative as the politically-motivated, dangerous, hysteria that it is ever since it started last summer, last night was both a huge relief and extremely satisfying.

I’ve recently seen commenters on Reddit literally calling for war with Russia over what is clearly nothing (or almost nothing, if Russia actually was the one who leaked the DNC/Podesta emails and exposed their unethical, democracy-subverting behavior; which is probably not the case, and perhaps completely unknowable).  Everything Trump ever did or said involving a Russian has been fuel for the paranoid fires in their heads, and each one of the daily litany of lazy, disingenuous and innuendo-laden articles further ignited their rage.  The jingoism was getting crazy and feverish, and the baseless accusations of treason and treachery even more rampant and vicious than during the run-up to the Iraq war.

I think the Dems were likely going to spin themselves into a political death spiral before they could actually gain the power/influence to outright stoke war with Russia—but it still presented a serious risk of that, among other dangers like pressuring the administration into unnecessary belligerence, which it may have already done.  It’s not something I want to see fucked around with in the slightest.  Michael Tracey, who is from what I’ve seen one of the more reasonable and respectable liberal journalists, outlines well the very real danger the anti-Russia hysteria poses.  I hope it tamps down quickly now.

I’m not trying to idolize Trump, or revel in partisan schadenfreude—I think this is truly a watershed moment in exposing an unscrupulous media, and hopefully in refocusing/shifting our approach towards Russia and, really, our entire political atmosphere. Maybe, just maybe, we can get on to governing now.  Trump will come out of this with more respect (if begrudging) and sympathy from a lot of people, and the many vicious, irresponsible, tunnel-visioned opponents of his in the media and government will rightfully come out of this with a lot less respect.  I think this is evidenced by the online reactions, case in point (found in an anti-Trump community):


God bless this timeline.

The Trumps give the Obama-Jarrets a housewarming gift #ObamaGate

I would write an article on some of the crazy developments in the past few days (or weeks) but other projects are keeping me quite busy right now, and on one of the big stories (the other being Wikileaks vault7) Stefan Molyneux does a damn fine job summarizing and contextualizing the issue, so I’ll just link his video (at bottom), and provide you my in-depth meme.

Also, he and Hard Bastard both had good takes on the Loretta Lynch video, which was pretty extraordinary and exactly what I’m talking about when I say the left is recklessly encouraging violence.  (And what do you know?  More violence at Berkeley.)

I hope to have more content sooner than later!  I appreciate anyone who checks in here.

I can’t take credit for the story/punchline here, just meming it into reality.  Have a good day, everyone.  Hope you have lots of popcorn for the weeks ahead.  Things will get interesting (and hopefully remain peaceful).


Stefan Molyneux’s video on Obama wiretaps:

Hard Bastard’s video on Loretta Lynch:

Stefan Molyneux’s video on Loretta Lynch:

Antifa: The rise of left wing Fascism

Really pertinent historical parallels and context for recent events, good summaries of many important issues at play right now, and insightful perspectives.

Great follow up read to my last article. Highly, highly recommend.

J.P.R. Campbell's Blog

Antifa are an organisation of ‘anti-fascists,’ though I use the term so loosely that it slides right off the bones of Antifa like rotting flesh, revealing the jagged skeleton of fascism.

There’s a quote often mistaken to originate from Winston Churchill, though its actual origin is more likely to be that of Huey Long a populist politician from the state of Louisiana in the 1930’s. The quote can be summarised as follows:

“When Fascism comes to America, it will (be in the name of/come under the guise of/be called) anti-Fascism!”

Huey was arguing a point about fascism, that it isn’t so easily identifiable as a swastika. His point was that fascism is first and foremost an ideology, and that anyone can display it. It would almost be humorous the coincidence that the fascists of America call themselves anti-fascists, if it weren’t for the fact that none of this is funny.

View original post 1,496 more words

The Road to Fascism Could Not Be Clearer, but It’s Not What the Media Says It Is

The Road to Fascism Could Not Be Clearer, but It’s Not What the Media Says It Is

Last night should make it clear where the greatest threat of fascism in this country lies.  If the left continues on its current course, it will either bring it about directly, or in concert with whatever response it provokes.

The longer the media downplays and excuses, even celebrates leftist violence, extremism, hate, and ignorance, the greater the risk that all of it festers into war and/or fascism.  (Or communism/whatever term you prefer.  Violent, doublethink-ridden, authoritarian movements are what I’m talking about here.)

THE SEEDS OF THIS HAVE BEEN VISIBLE FOR A YEAR, though invisible to most.  There are videos of dozens upon dozens of physical attacks on Trump supporters, that the media conveniently swept under the rug all last year.  It’s really disturbing and hard to watch.  Have you seen the incidents in this video?  It’s only from June of last year:

Most people haven’t seen them, because the media acted as a deceptive, one-sided, gatekeeper.  They were the true builders of our “post-truth” society.

But they made sure the world saw, on repeat, the one clear instance of a Trump supporter hitting someone else at a rally.  And they uncritically relayed a series of alleged post-election hate crimes, the vast majority of which turned out to be hoaxes, and to this day still use them to claim there was an epidemic of right-wing violence.  One of many BIG LIES of late (e.g. “17 intelligence agencies“).

Again, all this deception, this inversion of reality by the media, and the downplaying of extremism and violence on the left, has. to. stop.

They have fueled a false hysteria that the political opposition are all nazis, and now are giving calls to violence against these alleged nazis.  How do they expect this to turn out?  Who the fuck are they, that raucously celebrate an awards ceremony speech that calls outright for political violenceWhat have they become, if not exactly what they claim to protest?

Have you seen the Project Veritas videos?  Whatever you have heard about James O’Keefe, it is clear and well established that he did not fake these videos, and that the misdeeds, of both conspiring to commit mass voter fraud and of routinely instigating violence at Trump rallies, are undeniable, and were committed by Democratic operatives at the very highest levelsThe left needs to wake up and smell the bullshit, because it is and has been all around them, and they need to get out of it.

Whatever you do, do not consider yourself informed if you only get/trust information from major mainstream and left-leaning outlets.  Sure, read those, but not exclusively.  Independent and right-leaning media are a must if you want a real sense of what is happening in the world.  E.g. Sargon of Akkad, Dave Rubin, Ron Paul Liberty Report, DailyWire, Fox, and yes, even r/The_Donald, Breitbart and InfoWars are all useful to keep on your radar.  You don’t have to believe or agree with everything they say, or how they say it, to get value out of them.  And the fact is they are all usually far less deceptive than mainstream outlets, who deceptively edit, omit (a LOT) and skew things constantly.

Cast a wide net, folks, as wide as you can, and never trust a headline without reading and verifying an article.  Above all, think critically.


[1] Footage from the Berkeley riots/violence last night, if you haven’t seen it:

[2] Some background on Antifa and the black bloc

We Need Vigilance Against Bigotry, and That Means Increasing Our Understanding—Of Trump Voters

Emotions were extremely high this election, and one only need glance at social media to see that.  My regional, educational, and generational cohort swing liberal, so I’ve seen the gamut of raw, day-after shock and anger.  Much of it calls for vigilance against further bigotry and hatred of the kind we saw during the campaign.  And it’s spot-on.  We will need to be vigilant in opposing further bigotry and ignorance out of Trump, or bigotry he might continue to inspire or expose.  LGBT and racial minority rights and relations are literally a matter of life and death for many Americans, and directly affect the quality of life for the rest.  We are in this together after all (and even if we somehow weren’t, every decent person still deserves a decent life!)

Some of the reactions go further, and blame Trump voters for being ignorant, racist, sexist, selfish, or hateful—that as privileged whites, they’ve demonstrated that they don’t care about the needs or aspirations of anyone but themselves, or people superficially like themselves.

But to the people who feel this way, who are assigning blame this way, please remember—people’s choices were constrained.  Most of America wouldn’t have chosen Trump to be a nominee, and it should provide some small relief knowing that ~70% of America disapproves of him, despite the 48% (of people who voted) who voted for him.  Most people are appalled by the disgusting, offensive, and hateful things he’s said, even those people who checked his name on the ballot.

The reason many people chose him over Clinton in spite of all that is not because they are white, or because they only care about themselves, or only care about white straight men.  Starting from that premise assumes far too much about their motives, and assumes the worst about them—its the least empathetic interpretation of their decision, and is thus an extremely inaccurate interpretation in most cases.  It’s also thus a non-starter for building understanding and working together to move forward as a country.

What would you say to the 29% of Latinos who voted for him?  Or the 8% of blacks?  Or the 29% of asians?  Are they all “white” on the inside?  The very notion is offensive.

What would you say to the 14% of LGBT voters who chose him?  Are they simply unaware of who they are?  Do they not care about their own rights?

You have to be willing to understand someone’s decision-making before you judge their motive, or before you assume they made such a decision out of prejudice, ignorance or callousness—or even privilege. Many of the people who are appalled by some of Trump’s attitudes, also have fears about war, or the balance of power in society, or terrorism, or the economy, or malfeasance in government.  Those are life and death matters too.  Decisions about war and peace are clearly a life and death matter.  And the health and accountability of our institutions intimately affects everyone’s opportunities and quality of life.  Many of the same people who voted Trump are themselves economically down and out, disadvantaged, suffering because they have been beaten down by society in one way or another, held back by a government that is corrupted, or left behind by established interests and institutions that enrich themselves at others’ expense.

A thought experiment: hypothetically, if Hillary Clinton fueled a war in a smaller foreign country that Donald Trump wouldn’t have fueled, and 100,000 people died as a result, and a million ended up in refugee camps—is all that death and suffering “worth it”, to have a president who is a bigger proponent of LGBT rights for four years?  What if the actual resulting policy difference, or cultural difference, between candidates around those rights is minimal, or non-existent in those four years?  What if the war was with Russia, and the prospect of war actually threatened your life and livelihood, and your family’s?

Now, you may disagree with the premise that Clinton would be more likely to fuel war than Donald Trump, and you may hotly contest and debate that premise.  Good!  Society needs such debates.  But that debate gets off to a really bad start if you assume someone believes such a premise, or gives it the weight they do, simply because of the color of their skin.

So please do not fret, about this, at least: the results of this election do not mean bigotry has won.  It does not mean half of America is okay with bigotry.  If we understand that, we’ll all be better equipped to operate in the political arena in the coming years, to work together to make the world a better place for all, and a better place particularly for the most disadvantaged among us.

Some Overlooked Considerations When Choosing a Presidency (not just a president)

On November 8th, we’re not just electing a president, we’re choosing a presidency.

A Donald Trump presidency would see his feet held firmly to the fire by the media on many, if not most, issues—just as we’ve seen so far.

A Clinton presidency, and we’d see: more of the wall-to-wall obfuscation of the Clintons’ self-enriching, corrupt “charity work” and the ongoing obligations they have as a result, or the morally bankrupt worldview it represents; and more obfuscation of her obsession with projecting American power militarily, and encirclement and brinksmanship with Russia.

Donald Trump is an awful person, and certainly unfit to be president.  He could do a lot of damage to the country and the world.  But at least he’d be held somewhat accountable by a media that clearly has an interest in opposing him.

Hillary Clinton is also an awful person, and certainly unfit to be president.  She could also do a lot of damage to the country and the world.  THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE IS: she would not be held accountable by the media to nearly the same extent—they would continue to shield her, keeping the public in the dark as they so often deliberately do, making it that much easier for her to march us to war with Russia, to pour new record amounts of weapons into the Middle East (surpassing the records she set as SoS), to fuel civil wars in a few more countries that refuse to roll over and be complete U.S. puppets, to continue to aid and abet terror-exporting Gulf states, to continue to support Islamic extremists in Syria for the sake of unnecessary regime change.  Millions more people could die, tens of millions more could suffer and be displaced.  And if she should lead us into war with Russia (which could come sooner than later if she enacts her no-fly zone, which she’s been itching to do), those numbers might not “just” be numbers any more—civilian Americans might be faced with risking their own lives and livelihood for unnecessary war, rather than somebody else’s, for the first time in a long while.

And that’s just on foreign policy.

There’s a whole other realm of her shady, staunchly pro-corporate worldview that poses a threat to the quality of life domestically, and a threat to the health of our politics, our government, and our economy.

For these reasons, when I look at these two astoundingly awful candidates, I can’t shake the feeling that Clinton is the more dangerous.  This comes from someone who can count on one hand the number of Republicans they’ve voted for in their life, and has said for years that Trump is a toxic, ignorant, xenophobic buffoon.  But to me, the behind-closed-doors machinations of an extremely well-connected Kissinger acolyte draw a clearer line to death and suffering in the world, than does divisive, ignorant bluster spewed into a microphone—particularly when that bluster is roundly condemned by American media and both political parties in this country.

No matter who is elected, we will have some serious challenges ahead in constraining their behavior, but such is the conundrum we find ourselves in.  I personally will be voting for Gary Johnson, and I encourage everyone else in a non-battleground state to vote for either Johnson or Stein.  The more support they get, the more likely we are to break free from the two-party stranglehold that put us in this situation in the first place.

If you’re not in a locked-in blue or red state, I won’t tell you who you should vote for.  Directly advocating either way in this regrettably high-stakes crapshoot, for such terrible candidates, wouldn’t feel right.  But I will encourage you to make as informed of a decision as possible, and to please, inform yourself about Clinton’s history on foreign policy (my other essays would be a good place to start), and about her fundamentally corrupt style of politics and governance (the latest Doug Band / John Podesta emails would be a good place to start, as well as the repeated intersection of corporations (and Gulf dictatorships!) who donated to the Foundation, paid the Clintons millions for speeches, and/or received lucrative State Dept-approved contracts).  I assume, thanks to the media, that you’re already familiar with Trump’s deplorable personal behavior, suspect business practices, and dangerous policy ideas, but if you’re not, I certainly encourage you to read up on those too.

And when you enter that booth, or mark that ballot at home, please, above all, consider the totality of the presidency and its potential effects, including how they will be treated by the media, the Congress, and already established elites, and whether or not as president they’ll be enabled or opposed in enacting the more troubling aspects of their agendas.