By Olivia Pierson
[First published on Incite 12/9/18]

When did it become fair game to make allusions and wisecracks about the assassination of a much loved president?

Since nihilism became mainstream culture via the politics of the Left, that’s when.

Yesterday, the famous Broadway actress and female dinosaur, Carole Cook, said during an interview: 
  
‘Where is John Wilkes Booth when you need him?’ 

She was, of course, referring to the actor who murdered President Lincoln in 1865.
Last year, Member of the Missouri Senate, Maria Chappelle-Nadal, wrote on a Facebook post:

“I hope Trump is assassinated.”

After calls to resign from her colleagues, Ms. Chappelle-Nadal finally issued a formal apology to President Trump and his family.  The Missouri Senate voted 28-2 to have her censured. “I could have chosen and should have chosen better language. I do not think it is worthy of expelling me from the Senate,” Chappelle-Nadal said. “I am owning up to it. He makes me mad from time to time. He says outrageous things. My emotions got the best of me.”

The drug-addled actor Johnny Depp spoke these words at the Glastonbury Festival in 2017: 

“When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?” 

His fans thought it was hilarious. Depp also issued a formal apology to the President, adding these words: “It did not come out as intended, and I intended no malice. I was only trying to amuse, not to harm anyone.”

And who could forget the photos of two-bit celeb Kathy Griffin holding up a mock-up of the bloodied and severed head of President Trump?  How could a woman be this simple-minded and puerile considering she was living through the very real events of the Islamic State’s penchant for beheading people, including Americans: James Foley, Steven Sotloff and Peter Hessig – all butchered at the hands of Jihadi John during 2014, just three years before Griffin’s lunacy.

Let’s also remember Madonna Louise Ciccone’s crazed squawks when she addressed females festooned in pussy-hats at a Washington Woman’s March in 2017: 

“Yes, I am angry. Yes, I am outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the Whitehouse!  But I know it won’t do any good.” 

I think it would be safe to call these casual remarks from the Left now commonplace – only there is nothing safe about them.  It just takes one lonely loon looking for some attention and perhaps a bit of kudos from one of his acting idols to make an assassination attempt a central life purpose.

During the eight years of his presidency, I never saw one famous person on the Right make such a remark about assassinating Barack Obama. If someone had…  let’s say someone like Kanye West, or Gary Sinise or maybe Jon Voight,  can you imagine the hysterical backlash that would’ve ensued along the lines of “Racist Conservatives Threaten to Lynch our President”?  Conservatives just don’t do things like this, so people need to cut the crap about rancorous invective existing on both sides.

In the abominably seditious piece by Anonymous in the New York Times last week, the writer says these words:

“So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it’s over.”

What does “one way or another” refer to?  Assassination?  Given how often assassination is now referenced by the Resistance, this is a highly believable conclusion to draw.  This is an imperative security issue.  If President Trump is believed to be so destructive for the Republic, would Anonymous, or someone else like them, feel similar feelings to Carole Cook, Maria Chappelle-Nadal, Johnny Depp, Kathy Griffin or Madonna?  There could realistically be a lethal assassin in the President’s daily midst.

Anonymous winds down his treacherous op-ed with this:

“The bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.”

President Trump has done nothing but elevate the Presidency back to its former glory in a manner that is truly extraordinary, resulting in undeniable prosperity and safety that hitherto was just a whimsical, distant memory. 

Greatness is seldom recognised during the actual life of a great man, but tends to be realised much later when the haunting bleakness of mediocrity, once again, becomes all people can remember.  Nobody sang the praises of Winston Churchill’s greatness when he was running for Prime Minister in the 1945 election, or again in 1950, even after he had fought so victoriously to win the Second World War.  Now he is rightly considered to be the greatest man of the 20th Century, I can’t help but wonder if he had been elected after that great war victory, would Great Britain have completely lost its greatness, as it has done?  I doubt it.

Getting back to the small-minded world of Anonymous, he or she lastly appeals to the final letter of John McCain, himself an inspiration to the Resistance on the Right:

Senator John McCain put it best in his farewell letter. All Americans should heed his words and break free of the tribalism trap, with the high aim of uniting through our shared values and love of this great nation.

If the high aim of those shared values were truly an authentically held conviction, both John McCain and Anonymous would have seen clearly that people like themselves are the very people who, along with those who make jokes about Trump’s assassination, set the “tribalism trap” at an appallingly low level.  They have not the courage to support the elected Leader of the Free World whom their countrymen and women have chosen.  They have not the courage to put aside petty differences and narcissistic egos for the safety and prosperity of their great nation, indeed, one of them cannot even muster the courage to put their name to their own opinions and writings.  It does not get much lower than that in a free and democratic country.  For shame!


If you enjoyed this article, please buy my book "Western Values Defended: A Primer" ​ ​

By Olivia Pierson
[First Published on Incite 7/9/18]

Lest anyone think that President Trump and his supporters have been relying on empty conspiracy theories about the deep-state Resistance, we now have a full admission of someone who is serving in the Whitehouse for the very purpose of undermining the President and his agenda.

In a fairly unprecedented move, the New York Times published an anonymous op-ed by a treacherous coward, who says:

“This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state….That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.” 
 
Not only is this perfidiously un-patriotic, it’s also despicably desperate. The publishing of this article arrives swiftly on the heels of Bob Woodward’s new anti-Trump book, Fear, obviously in an effort to give it credence after the administration’s push-back against it was so strong and believable.  With the Midterm elections looming just around the corner, it’s easy to see why such desperation is being flashed around on the sleeve of the Resistance. As if the Democrat party’s circus antics at the confirmation hearing of Judge Brett Kavanaugh are not enough to show us their wretched state.

The Resistance’s greatest fear has always been that Trump’s presidency may be embarrassingly (to them) successful.  Even the writer of this op-ed has had to concede that this administration’s policies “have already made America safer and more prosperous.”   He then cites the “bright-spots” that the mainstream media never captures – “effective deregulation, historic tax reform and a more robust military and more.”

So while America grows safer and more prosperous, why then does this writer consider President Trump to be “detrimental to the health of the republic?”

The reasons the writer gives are staggeringly small-minded and nothing we haven’t heard a thousand times before: he or she claims the President’s leadership style is adversarial, erratic, impetuous, petty and ineffective. He or she claims that the President has a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un.  Lastly, he or she claims that the President has a tendency to change his mind.  That’s it.

The writer seems to be utterly oblivious to the fact that his or her abject deceit, cowardice and double-dealing while serving inside the Whitehouse under a president who was democratically elected by the very republic he or she claims to love, stands as monumentally more egregious and in want of moral character than anything President Trump has ever said, done or possibly even imagined.

This is the problem with desperation, it causes people to act in thoughtless ways without considering that their anxious emotions may not be the ideal basis on which to be choosing their actions.

The Resistance fancies itself as some kind of messianic group, there to save their imperilled republic from President Evil, whom they consider unfit to hold office. We saw exactly this same delusion at play in James Comey, Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe.  But I think that history will one day show us clearly that these fanciful saboteurs were merely unfit to serve in President Trump’s world-changing administration.
​

If you enjoyed this article, please buy my book "Western Values Defended: A Primer" ​ ​​

By Olivia Pierson
[First published on Incite 30/8/18]

As (most of) America mourns and eulogises over the death of Senator John McCain and his great patriotic services to the country, services which started under Lyndon Johnson during the Vietnam War and continued into the current Trump presidency, I feel that a few alternative facts are in order. 

Twice McCain tried to run for the office of President and failed.  Once in 2000 as he competed to be an alternative to George.W.Bush, and then again in 2008 with Sarah Palin as his running mate, trying in vain to defeat the inevitability of Barack Obama. 
 
I haven’t got much to say about McCain’s time as a POW for 5 years in Hanoi, nor would I wish to denigrate the record of a man subjected to torture by grubby little communists.  Even if he did sing under torture, as quite a few people seem to think he did, hence the nickname the “Songbird of Hanoi,” long-standing torture does terrible things to the human spirit which I consider to be a mitigating circumstance. 

Remember President Trump’s famous dictum about McCain: 
“He’s only a war-hero because he was captured; I like people who weren’t captured.”

Perhaps this is wisdom. Captured soldiers who are tortured are subjected to terrible pains which will make them do and say almost anything to make the agony stop.  Soldiers who aren’t captured never have this question of patriotic loyalty dogging them for the rest of their lives if they survive. McCain did.

The thing I mistrusted about McCain with all this was his opposition to Trump’s pick for CIA Director, Gina Haspel.  He opposed her because when she was a chief operative, jihadists and those firmly connected to other jihadists were subjected to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” aka waterboarding, enemas, temporary confinement in a box and sleep deprivation.  When the enemy were regularly carrying out throat cutting, mutilations, beatings and beheadings on their POWs, I fail to see how enhanced interrogation techniques, once practiced by the CIA, qualify as being so inordinately “immoral,” as McCain stated that they were.  I just don’t get it – something smells off.

But beyond these POW issues, John McCain took some very unpatriotic stances during his service as a politician and a senator. For instance, in 1996 he voted against the Simpson Amendment to S.1664 – a vote to in effect allow immigrants to send for their adult relatives, who in turn send for their and their spouses’ adult relatives. The bi-partisan Barbara Jordan Commission recommended doing away with the adult relative categories in order to lessen wage depression among lower-paid American workers.  The Simpson Amendment attempted to carry out that recommendation.  McCain voted with the majority which defeated the recommendation by 80-20 votes.

Also in 1996, McCain voted against the Feinstein Amendment to S.1664, which sought to reduce the annual admission of spouses and minor children of immigrants – another attempt to limit chain migration.  Who could’ve thought that McCain would find Democrat Dianne Feinstein’s amendment a little too harsh?  Only in RINO Land. 

By the time 2007 rolled around, McCain was voting against looser amendments to facilitate more immigration.  Perhaps the results of his earlier 1996 efforts began to look obvious as the demographics of America’s electorate had been irretrievably altered by then. 

McCain was famously one of the Gang of Eight, along with Chuck Schumer, back in the days when Democrats said they were worried about the constant flow of illegal immigration over the Mexican border.  The bill, however, would’ve facilitated millions of illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship, itself a controversial idea among Republicans.  Another provision of the bill included completing 700 miles of pedestrian fencing along the border, which would require approximately 350 new miles of fencing (a fence just sounds so much more palatable than a wall).  The bill was ultimately defeated in Congress.  When Trump strolled onto the scene boldly brandishing his idea of building a “great, big, beautiful wall,”  McCain opposed it vehemently.  In his final letter to America which was read out publicly yesterday, McCain wrote:

“We weaken our greatness when we confuse our patriotism with tribal rivalries that have sown resentment and hatred and violence in all the corners of the globe. We weaken it when we hide behind walls, rather than tear them down, when we doubt the power of our ideals, rather than trust them to be the great force for change they have always been.”

Something in that paragraph doesn’t quite fit the rest of its sentiment.  Most of it speaks to the noble ideal of America’s greatness – but since when did America “hide behind walls, rather than tear them down?”  Oh, The Wall.  It looks as if McCain couldn’t quite die without confusing patriotism with a tribal rivalry of his own making, in his own corner of the globe.  How naughty!

During the election, McCain excoriated Trump for his comments about Mexican rapists and murderers coming over the border, then a year later when President Trump was weighing up a strike on Syria for its use of chemical weapons on civilians, McCain put the blame on the President outright:

“President Trump last week signalled to the world that the United States would prematurely withdraw from Syria. Bashar Assad and his Russian and Iranian backers have heard him, and emboldened by American inaction, Assad has reportedly launched another chemical attack against innocent men, women and children, this time in Douma.”

McCain’s rivalry was as boundless as America’s borders. 

It must be said that a tighter case could be made along the lines of McCain’s voting record being more responsible for the deaths of Kate Steinle, Molly Tibbetts and the little boy Abdul-ghani Wahhaj, who died at the hands of the New Mexico terrorist group, than can be made against President Trump for the deaths of civilians in Syria at the hands of their war-criminal leader. 

McCain’s brand of patriotism saw him oppose President Trump on absolutely everything, from border security, to Syria, to the Affordable Care Act, to handling the economy, China, North Korea, Russia and beyond – all due to what looked like an intense personal rivalry.  Personal dislikes are human and part-and-parcel of politics, no doubt, but I find myself rather dubious about this brand of McCain’s “patriotism” because I can’t tell the difference between it and the serious lunacy of the Leftist Resistance.  It reminds me that the Republicans did not actually win the extraordinary 2016 election, Trump did. It appears that after himself losing twice, John McCain, just like the Left, never got over it.

If you enjoyed this article, please buy my book "Western Values Defended: A Primer" ​ ​