July 21, 2016
Amidst Ted Cruz’s incredible display of narcissism yesterday at the Republican National Convention and his general disdain for the people’s (and finally the Republican GOPe) support for future President of the United States, Donald Trump, the Jew York Times published an article highlighting partial statements between Herr Trump and the article’s two Jewish correspondents titled Donald Trump Sets Conditions for Defending NATO Allies Against Attack.
Wow, Ted Cruz got booed off the stage, didn't honor the pledge! I saw his speech two hours early but let him speak anyway. No big deal!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 21, 2016
The article, replete with kvetching by Haberman and Sanger, frames Donald Trump as a dirty Nationalist, radical foreign policy candidate, and terribly misguided for wanting to place American domestic interests ahead of ‘extremely rich’ foreign countries. The full transcript can be read here (archive link).
SANGER: But I guess the question is, If we can’t, do you think that your presidency, let’s assume for a moment that they contribute what they are contributing today, or what they have contributed historically, your presidency would be one of pulling back and saying, “You know, we’re not going to invest in these alliances with NATO, we are not going to invest as much as we have in Asia since the end of the Korean War because we can’t afford it and it’s really not in our interest to do so.” (transcript)
During a 45-minute conversation, he explicitly raised new questions about his commitment to automatically defend NATO allies if they are attacked, saying he would first look at their contributions to the alliance. Mr. Trump re-emphasized the hard-line nationalist approach that has marked his improbable candidacy, describing how he would force allies to shoulder defense costs that the United States has borne for decades, cancel longstanding treaties he views as unfavorable, and redefine what it means to be a partner of the United States. (article)
There is nothing ‘improbable’ about Mr. Trump’s candidacy. His ascendancy as the now nominee of the Republican party for President is everything you could – and should – expect from a true-blooded American patriot looking around with disgust at the whore of a country the United States has become. Placing the interests of countries like Israel and Saudi Arabia ahead of those of its veterans and average citizens – specifically traditional White Americans. This is the ‘traditional conservative’ platform Haberman and Sanger press Mr. Trump in breaking away from.
Other than a small group of people who have suffered massive and embarrassing losses, the party is VERY united. Great love in the arena!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 21, 2016
Further, the general displeasure from the Jewish media at Trump’s hard-line and staunch support of an America First policy in one breath while claiming in the next that a break in support for allies as an example of placing American interests first is not favorable typifies the Jewish neurosis and pathological thinking which has been to the detriment of the last five decades of American foreign policy.
He said the rest of the world would learn to adjust to his approach. “I would prefer to be able to continue” existing agreements, he said, but only if allies stopped taking advantage of what he called an era of American largess that was no longer affordable.
Giving a preview of his address to the convention on Thursday night, he said that he would press the theme of “America First,” his rallying cry for the past four months, and that he was prepared to scrap the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada if he could not negotiate radically better terms.
He even called into question whether, as president, he would automatically extend the security guarantees that give the 28 members of NATO the assurance that the full force of the United States military has their back.
For example, asked about Russia’s threatening activities that have unnerved the small Baltic States that are among the more recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing whether those nations “have fulfilled their obligations to us.”
The underlying scorn, and the narrative which has been consistently pressed into the American social consciousness for the last year, is to frame any concern of domestic issues prior to international issues as ‘authoritarian’, ‘maladaptive’ and, ironically, to the detriment of domestic issues and our own citizens.
In the interview transcript Sanger asks Trump, in more detail than presented in the article, about Putin’s favorable view of him. These Jews can’t seem to understand that strong leaders respect other strong leaders and take advantage of weak ones. It is precisely because Trump refuses to detail, down to the last period, his foreign policy issues and publicly declare – as President Obama has done – his willingness to allow his country and his authority to be undermined that Putin respects him as an equal rather than disdain him as he does to Obama.
Last night was a Stalinist parade: if you did not clap loudly enough for Trump (even if you quasi-endorsed), you must be executed!
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) July 21, 2016
Asked what he would do explicitly in the event of a Russian attack on Baltic States Trump responded as any strong and competent leader should – “I don’t want to tell you what I’d do because I don’t want Putin to know what I’d do”. And this gets at the heart of why Trump is so terrifying to Jewish hegemony in the United States, and the West generally. We put out our strategies and then Jews know in advanced what they are and they craft schemes and plans to undermine them.
The article ends with Mr. Trump doubling down on his commitment to the United States and his resolute desire to end the last fifty years of Jewish foreign policy.
Mr. Trump used the “America First” slogan in an earlier interview with The New York Times, but on Wednesday he insisted he did not mean it in the way that Charles A. Lindbergh and other isolationists used it before World War II.
“To me, ‘America First’ is a brand-new, modern term,” he said. “I never related it to the past.” He paused a moment when asked what it meant to him.
“We are going to take care of this country first,” he said, “before we worry about everyone else in the world.”