Ann Coulter Kneecaps Jared Kushner; Here’s Hoping Ivanka’s Next

Ann Coulter, Democrats, Donald Trump, Family, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim

In the “What Ivanka Wants, Ivanka Gets” (April, 2017), Jared Kushner was described as looking “low T—like he might one day go the way of Bruce Jenner, now Caitlyn Jenner.”

In other words, Kushner looks like he’s transitioning.

Recently, Ann Coulter went one better and called Jared Kushner “THE BIRDBRAIN OF ALCATRAZ,” a moron, and a “a wispy little fellow.”

For that Thanksgiving gift we must be thankful.

However, Jared is second fiddle to Ivanka. The silly woman (Steve Bannon’s assessment) is The Boss. And Ivanka believes—again, in Steve Bannon’s estimation—that she and Jared are First Couple in waiting. She wants to be president.  Or, at least, make it onto the celebrity circuit at Davos.

More than anything, Ivanka and Jared crave respectability. Both have been scarred by the scandals of their fathers. Befitting young Democrats in high society, the Kushners would like to be able to press flesh with local and global elites. There will be none of that—no warm welcomes from the gilded and the glamorous at Davos—with Donald’s unsexy America First agenda.

URGENT: Ivanka needs to be neutralized. Let’s hope Ms. Coulter doesn’t take too long to dispatch Ivanka. Behind every weak, bloodless man there’s a mightily ambitious woman.

RELATED: “Steve Bannon Said Ivanka Trump Is ‘Dumb As A Brick.’ You Can Take That To The Bank.”

INTERVIEW: ‘Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism’

Culture, Ilana Mercer, libertarianism, Neoconservatism, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, The West

INTERVIEW: Big League Politics interviewed me on my paleolibertarianism under the headline: “Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism.’” I didn’t think I took CATO on, but was just pointing out sharp distinctions, in reply to correspondent Seth Segal’s sharp questions. But OK. <g>

BIG LEAGUE POLITICS: Being a preeminent paleolibertarian thinker today, how would you define paleolibertarianism and how does it differ from standard paleoconservatism?

ILANA MERCER: First, let’s define libertarianism. It’s concerned with the ethics of the use of force. Nothing more. This, and this alone, is the ambit of libertarian law.

All libertarians must respect the non-aggression axiom. Libertarians don’t initiate aggression against non-aggressors, not even if it’s “for their own good,” as neoconservatives like to cast America’s recreational wars of choice. If someone claims to be a libertarianism and also supports the proxy bombing of Yemen, or supported the war in Iraq; he is not a libertarian, plain and simple.

As to paleolibertarianism, in particular. And this is my take. It’s how I’ve applied certain principles week-in, week-out, for almost two decades. So, some will disagree. In my definition, a paleolibertarian grasps that ordered liberty has a civilizational dimension, stripped of which the just-mentioned libertarian non-aggression axiom, by which all decent people should live, will crumble. …

… Read the rest. “Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism’” is on Big League Politics.

Comments Off on INTERVIEW: ‘Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism’

Posse Comitatus? You’re Being Told That America Doesn’t Have Borders, So No Law Can Defend Her

Federalism, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Law, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Military, Neoconservatism, Secession, States' Rights

The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act: It’s the excuse parroted by almost everybody, Republicans included, for lack of vigorous military action against invaders on the border.

It took Ann Coulter to point out the obvious: “You can’t shoot … AMERICANS. You can shoot invaders.”

What on earth is The US Army for?

In effect, what you’re being told is, there is no law that’ll defend American borders.’

Or, America doesn’t have borders. Therefore, there is no law that can defend a de facto and de jure borderless country. And certainly some laws even prohibit a defense of America’s borders.

In truth, and according to the Congressional Research Service, as relayed by the Military Times, the Act means that “the U.S. military is not used to control or defeat American citizens on U.S. soil.

The hordes amassed on the border with Mexico, rushing the port of entry in San Ysidro, Calif., are not Americans. They are not even very nice.

Posse Comitatus sets “limitation against active-duty U.S. forces conducting law enforcement on U.S. soil,” but watch how quickly military force will be used “to suppress insurrection or to enforce federal authority.”

Feeling free?

Comments Off on Posse Comitatus? You’re Being Told That America Doesn’t Have Borders, So No Law Can Defend Her

Iranians Show Sense of Humor, But Get The US Blame Game Wrong

Donald Trump, Foreign Policy, Intelligence, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Russia

President Trump is right about the fate of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, killed in the Saudi Arabian consulate in Turkey: It’s not America’s bag.

But things get murky when the president  tells the Nation that America First means we side with Saudi Arabia in its regional wars, among them the vanquishing of Yemen. (There, people are dying from disease and starvation in the tens of thousands, thanks to the House of Saud, also the perps implicated in 9/11.)

The Iranians, on the other hand, are berated for sloganeering against America and Israel, and for “propping up dictator Bashar Assad in Syria,” which, as I explained, is VERY GOOD FOR CHRISTIANS IN THAT COUNTRY. (Read “Lies About Putin, Syria And The Alawite Alliance.”)

Iran, which has “killed zero Americans in terrorist attacks in the U.S. between 1975-2015,” is said to be “the world’s leading sponsor of terror.” Who said so? The same intelligence apparatus that wishes to unseat President Trump. DeepState.gov?

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Tuesday:

“Mr. Trump bizarrely devotes the FIRST paragraph of his shameful statement on Saudi atrocities to accuse IRAN of every sort of malfeasance he can think of. Perhaps we’re also responsible for the California fires, because we didn’t help rake the forests — just like the Finns do?”

While the Iranians get pointers for impolitic humor, they are still confused about one thing.

The Russians are responsible for the heartbreaking California fires, not the Iranians.