Dinesh D’Souza is a renowned author and filmmaker. He was born in Bombay, India and came to America as an exchange student. He later graduated from Dartmouth College and became a naturalized citizen.
D’Souza is the author of several ‘New York Times’ best-selling books and top documentaries. In 2012, D’Souza released his film: 2016: Obama’s America, an anti-Obama polemic based on his 2010 book The Roots of Obama’s Rage. The film is the highest-grossing conservative documentary film produced in the United States. Then, in 2016, D’Souza released a the documentary film and book entitled Hillary’s America. The film was the highest grossing documentary of 2016.
D’Souza has released another great blockbuster called ‘The Big Lie’. It takes aim at the liberal media, the Deep State and Democrats who are plotting against Trump and trying to destroy his America First Agenda
“You’re a fascist.” That term is thrown around by the low-information left as if it ends all arguments, but the reality is that fascism has far more in common with modern liberalism than with any flavor of conservatism.
That fact is exactly what renowned author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza makes perfectly clear in his new book — and he has brilliantly reminded readers who the real fascists are in America.
“There’s a deep fascist streak in politics now,” D’Souza explained to Breitbart News about his book, “The Big Lie.”
“Ironically, the fascism of today marches under the banner of anti-fascism, and it claims the moral credibility of anti-fascism,” he continued, referring to militant leftist groups such as “antifa” and “Black Lives Matter.”
Just like an individual with deep personal problems lashes out at others, the left has begun falsely projecting its own fascist inclinations onto President Donald Trump and his supporters.
“In other words, it tries to take all the odor of fascism – stained as it is with the Holocaust, Auschwitz – and project it onto Trump and on the right,” stated D’Souza. “This is a massive historical deception. That’s theBig Lie at its core.”
The author, whose previous books include “Obama’s America” and “Stealing America,” went on to explain that the goals of fascism and liberalism are the same: A centralized, all-powerful state.
“Remember, for example, that with the NSA today, there are surveillance technologies that were completely unavailable to Mussolini in the ’20’s or Hitler in the ’30’s,” he said. “So in a sense, true fascism, full-scale fascism, is more possible today than it was in the 20th Century.”
D’Souza cited several examples to show the connection between today’s left and the fascists of the last century. One of the most shocking is Planned Parenthood and its founder, Margaret Sanger.
“Margaret Sanger’s basic premise was eugenics. More children from the fit and less from the unfit. She was in support of fairly extreme measures, including segregation and then, notoriously, forced sterilization in order to deprive lower-class and uneducated women of the chance to reproduce,” he said. “She was very explicit about that.”
“Now, when the Nazis did it in 1933, Margaret Sanger gave speeches praising it. She said, ‘Look, the Nazis, the Germans, are ahead of us. We’ve got to catch up to them.’ This is the actual Margaret Sanger, but it’s not the Margaret Sanger you’ll find in Planned Parenthood brochures,” D’Souza continued.
Other connections are less well known, but even more blatant.
The guys, for example, who wrote the Nuremberg laws, the senior Nazi officials, are literally standing there and debating these laws holding in their hand the blueprints of Democratic laws of the Jim Crow South,” D’Souza elaborated.
“And they’re basically saying, ‘All we need to do, in effect, is cross out the word black and write in the word Jew, and we’re home free,’” he continued.
The bestselling author also made the point that despite the liberal hysteria over Trump’s alleged “nationalism,” there is actually no clear connection between Nazism and simply wanting your country to succeed.
“But the truth of it is that nationalism is not a key defining feature of fascism at all,” he clarified. “I was born in India. Gandhi was a nationalist. Mandela was a nationalist. All the anti-colonial leaders were nationalists. Churchill was a nationalist. The American Founders were nationalists,” he stated.
Liberal bullies are used to Conservatives backing down when accusations of being a “fascist” or a “racist” are thrown around.
It’s time to push back! It’s time to join Dinesh D’Souza and say to the liberals – ENOUGH ALREADY!
As one person said, ‘Truth by virtue of facts beats out any liberal lie, …it always has and always will.’
John Coleman says Al Gore started it — the “global warming silliness.” But now the retired weatherman and founder of The Weather Channel is “horrified” to see San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer channeling the ex-veep with a Climate Action Plan. It “just turns my stomach.”
“I think he saw money and power, and I don’t know what else he thought of it,” Coleman says of the Republican mayor. “I can’t believe he really [felt he] was going to save the city from some terrible fate.”
Coleman, 82, laughs during a lively phone chat from his home near Las Vegas.
“San Diego’s not going to go underwater. Period,” he says. “Not in my lifetime or yours or our kids’ lifetime. When the Earth ends in 4 1/2 billion years, it probably still won’t have flooded.”
He also mocks “the damn tsunami warning route signs that they put up all over the city,” which he calls “about as silly as anything I’ve ever saw in my life. The chance of a significant tsunami hitting Southern California is about as great as a flying saucer landing tonight at Lindbergh Field. It’s just sheer nonsense.”
Coleman also knows how many people regard his decade-old public arguments. As sheer nonsense.
“I’m just a dumb old skeptic — a denier as they call me — who ought to be jailed or put to death,” he says. “I understand how they feel. But you know something? I know I’m right. So I don’t care.”
That’s clear from his Twitter feed, “climate frenzy” blog and occasional political activism — he made hundreds of phone calls (reading a script) urging votes for Donald Trump during the primaries.
“I went to the opening of the Trump campaign headquarters in Nevada, and that sort of thing,” he says of the man who labels climate change a hoax. “I went to one of his rallies.”
Coleman aims to expose what he calls “Algorian” scientists fudging data and taking billions in government research grants for the sake of career advancement and economic comfort.
At KUSI-TV in San Diego, with financial backing from the Republican McKinnon family, Coleman hosted two hour-long documentaries critical of the notion of manmade climate change. He did many news pieces.
Coleman calls global warming a scientific issue, not a political one. “But since it had become a political issue, [Michael D. McKinnon] strongly supported my skeptical position on global warming,” he says. “If it hadn’t been for that, I probably would have retired much sooner. [KUSI] gave me a great platform from which to work.”
How did Coleman go from the clowning meteorologist of ABC’s “Eyewitness News” in Chicago to the Kay-YOOOOOUUUU-Es-Eye crusader against “the greatest scam in history”?
Several stories are told.
Charles Homan of Columbia Journalism Review said Coleman “snapped” while watching an Eagles-Cowboys football game one Sunday night when TV studio lights were cut as a “green” gesture.
Coleman also points to Gore’s Oscar-winning “An Inconvenient Truth” of 2006. “I think the Al Gore movie probably stimulated me more than anything,” he now says. “I’m happy to see that his new movie seems to be less than spectacular success.”
Coleman credits Joseph D’Aleo, his meteorological director at The Weather Channel and forecast assistant at “Good Morning America.”
“We started together in 1977, I guess,” he says. “He’s the one who has taught me about climate skepticism, about Algorian skepticism, and I learned it through him. And then I learned it through Willie Soon. It goes way, way back before 2007.”
In January 2010, responding to an “Other Side” broadcast on KUSI but not using Coleman’s name, research professor emeritus Richard Somerville of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography issued a 550-word, six-point “Response to Climate Change Denialism.”
On July 1, 2017, fact-checking site Snopes.com labeled as “False” the assertion — circulating after Trump pulled out of the Paris climate accords — that “Weather Channel co-founder John Coleman provided evidence that convincingly refutes the concept of anthropogenic global warming.”
But Coleman confessed to Times of San Diego that his TV turns are drying up.
He says a CBS production company contacted him about an interview for an hourlong TV show.
“And we talked and talked and everything was scheduled,” Coleman says. “And then two days before the shoot was to occur, they called and said, ‘Sorry, we have to cancel that. Thank you very much anyway.’
“Because?” Coleman asked.
“Well, you know,” came the reply.
Said Coleman: “That happens all the time.”
Coleman doubles down: “I understand that there are plenty of people who rip me to shreds, and you can find strong and powerful put-downs on every topic I’m talking about. … But the truth is that I know all about all that stuff, and I don’t give a rat’s ass, because I know I’m right.”
In the phone chat, Coleman was asked about “97 percent of climate scientists” citing manmade change.
Coleman shot back: “Do you believe that? That’s sheer nonsense.”
He called it a “totally contrived figure” that gained ultimate currency when it was “uttered by President Obama. … But it’s totally fabricated. The so-called research that came up with that 97 percent was done by people who were looking to produce that figure and had to manipulate everything they got.”
He directed me to wattsupwiththat.com to view “eight or nine well-done articles that debunk the 97 percent.”
So where did the 97 percent come from?
Coleman’s says it’s just the share of scientists who agree the earth is warming, which even Coleman concedes.
“You’ve had Ice Ages and glacial periods, warm spells, one after another, cycling back and forth,” he says. “And certainly man didn’t cause any of them. They’re all natural events.”
He says the American Meteorological Society, in its most recent survey, “came up with about 47 percent skeptical, so 53 percent support (manmade climate change). And that’s after the society did everything they can to promote it. The society has been totally politicized. And still they can’t get all their members aboard.”
But contacted this week, AMS spokesman Tom Champoux provided links to several reports and blogs, including its 2016 survey of members which found “only 5 percent [of survey respondents] said that climate change was ‘largely or entirely’ due to natural events.”
“Mr. Coleman’s assertion that the 97 percent figure is ‘totally contrived’ and was ‘uttered by President Obama’ is in no way accurate,” said Champoux, who pointed to a British science nonprofit’s conclusion that “amongst 1,381 papers self-rated by their authors as stating a position on human-caused global warming, 97.2 percent endorsed the consensus.”
The AMS survey did find a 53 percent figure, however: “A total of 4,092 AMS members participated, with participants coming from the United States and internationally. The participation rate in the survey was 53.3 percent.”
Another evergreen Coleman critique is that billions of dollars of research grants go only to scientists who support the global warming theory: “You MUST take the Algorian side or you’re dead meat.”
He cites “the great Judith Curry,” an accomplished climate scientist who left her job at Georgia Tech “because she couldn’t handle it anymore” — reaction to her skeptical positions. He noted “my great friend Willie Soon at the Smithsonian Institute, whose life has been turned to hell because of his position.”
He says the power of money — $20 billion a year — buys opinion. “But even THAT has not produced a 97 percent consensus, so that consensus figure is a dead-in-the-ringer lie.”
But what about that fact Republicans control the pursestrings?
Coleman is ready.
“Have you heard the chant ‘Drain the swamp’? I don’t think the swamp is only Democrats and bureaucrats. … Lord help me, the Republican Congress is very unlikely to cut off funding projects of the Scripps Oceanographic Institute or Woods Hole or any of the others. The Republican Party, they’re a slimy fish swimming through the swamp.”
Coleman agrees that Trump would like to shut the spigot. But not because he has a strong position on climate science. It’s just for budget savings.
“But I’m also confident that his family … they’re going to have dinner with him at night: ‘Hey, Dad, we got to keep this money flowing.’ So I don’t know how successful it will be. But I know the two most powerful forces on earth are sex and money. And by God it’s really hard to shut off the money. And it’s really hard to not go for the sex.”
“Just pure and total embarrassing nonsense,” Coleman says, “And another darn good reason not to live in California. If I have to get a passport to come see my son in Palm Springs in the future, so be it. That state has gotten so silly. Oh my God, I’m so glad I don’t live there.”
He calls efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions “an insult to the average American family,” whose energy costs already rise $2,500 a year “because of the threat of so-called global warming. And that cap-and-trade will take it up to probably $4,800 a year.”
“That takes phones away from the kids, or they don’t get new tablets so they can do their homework right. Or the college fund is down. Or clothes or vacations. It hurts that family very deeply. And these politicians who live on the top edge don’t have any understanding or feeling for the average people. And it drives … me … nuts,” he says, pausing between words for emphasis.
Does Coleman regard La Jolla’s prestigious Scripps Institution of Oceanography — a groundbreaker in climate studies — as doing fake science?
“I think that they are dead wrong,” Coleman says. “I think theKeeling Curve is excellent science — the measurement of carbon [dioxide] in the atmosphere through the years and the development of that good steady flow of data. That’s a very good scientific piece of work.”
But the rest of Scripps’ studies?
“Just pathetic,” he says. “And it drives me nuts. A fine institution just went … where the money is. Without that money, hundreds of people would have to be let go.”
He asks: “Have you looked at my video where I tell about that dispute between [Scripps and UCSD legend] Roger Revelle and [his Harvard student] Al Gore? I gather it didn’t impress you. I’m convinced that it’s correct [that climate scientist Revelle didn’t urge action on human-caused global warming]. By the way, that has over a million views on YouTube.”
A spokeswoman for Scripps — once ranked No. 1in the nation for earth and environmental sciences by the journal Nature — said Somerville’s post still holds up seven years later, and she also noted that “while Mr. Coleman was at KUSI he was invited here many times to see the research in action and talk to scientists. He never came.”
Mayor Faulconer’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
But Masada Disenhouse did. The founder of climate action groupSanDiego350 — who helped organize the downtown Climate March in April — defended the mayor and countered Coleman on other issues.
“I think that the mayor of San Diego took climate change seriously and has moved to address it is because it’s been clear from polling, elections, growing climate marches and activism, and other indicators, that the people of San Diego increasingly support moving to clean energy and addressing the climate crisis,” she said Wednesday via email. “And when the people lead, the elected officials who represent them follow.”
On Coleman’s rejection of a waterlogged San Diego: “While Mr. Coleman may be in denial about it, coastal flooding due to sea level rise is already a problem in our coastal areas like Imperial Beach, Mission Beach and Carlsbad, with some areas expected to flood regularly at high tide in the next few decades.”
Disenhouse says Miami and New Orleans are a preview — “facing flooding from high tides even on sunny days on a regular basis right now.”
Disenhouse defended efforts to wean the economy from fossil fuels.
“California’s economy has been growing as it has reduced its energy use per person and begun to bring down greenhouse gas emissions,” she says. “In fact, the renewable energy sector has been hugely successful in California, one of the fastest growing job sectors.”
But here Coleman concurs.
“I love solar power,” he says. “But what does that have to do with climate change? Not a dibble-dee-do-dot.”
He says people assume that that if he’s a climate skeptic or opposed to cap-and-trade that he’s against solar or wind power or environmentalism, “or I want to fill the oceans with plastic or something.”
Coleman insists: “I am an environmentalist through and through. So don’t give me any of that. My son has solar on his house. And pays $16 a month for power in Palm Springs, and I’m excited about the future of graphene.”
He says a day will come when homes are coated with graphene paint and homeowners “disconnect the power line.” Same with the car.
“The age of fossil fuels and the electric grid will come to an end,” Coleman says. “Not in my lifetime, but possibly in yours. Time will tell and it’s all wonderful. Our life is good today not because a bunch of politicians have made laws and regulations and try to tell us how to live. Our lives are good today because of science.”
In the biggest and most politically-explosive investigation in more than a decade, an investigation that has obvious national security implications, alleged cyber-espionage by a hostile foreign power, alleged collusion and treason by high-ranking officials, the possible impeachment of a sitting president, and yet, the FBI has not yet secured or examined the DNC servers that may or may not provide compelling forensic evidence of cyber-intrusion by Russia? Isn’t it curious Mueller’s legal dream team of 25 (including support staff) has only one lawyer versed in foreign-government influence of elections?
The reason the FBI never insisted on examining the DNC servers, is because they knew the narrative is and was bogus from the start. Russia didn’t hack anything, it was only a diversion. Conjured up on-the-fly to keep Hillary’s bandwagon from going down in flames. Think about how much was at stake. Hillary was to protect their monopoly. Big Government. Globalism. Open-Borders. Climate-Change…
POSTED BY A FRIEND AND WAS TOO GOOD NOT TO SHARE, Sheds a new light on recent events, and makes perfect sense. Enjoy!!
When you hire a businessman… expect BUSINESS !!!
This REALLY worth the read!
“Apparently, liberals and never-Trumpers are so isolated in their political circles that they have no concept how things work in the real world of business and corporate America. For example, they completely fail to grasp the concept of the “hatchet man.”
Allow me to explain:
Say you are a business tycoon. You just successfully completed a large-scale acquisition and merger, bringing together multiple smaller companies into one conglomerate. After the merger, you want to put your own people in charge of everything. However, all those smaller companies had their own executives – and, at least for the short term – you need to keep many of them around the keep things running. So, you keep many of those executives around, and let them retain their own senior staff. You even appoint one of them – the head of the largest of the companies you acquired – to be the CEO of the conglomerate, and he pledges to get all the departments working together harmoniously.
After a transition period, some of them are doing fine in the new conglomerate – but others are clearly causing trouble. In fact, the one you appointed CEO is clearly a disaster. The newly merged departments are working against each other.
Furthermore, you have good suspicion he is dealing in insider trading – nothing you can take to a prosecutor, but there is a lot of circumstantial evidence building up. Worse, he is not only doing his own dirty dealing, but it appears he may even be leaking intellectual property to your competitors, helping them take market share from you.
Clearly, he has to go – and go now.
Problem is, many of the senior employees in your conglomerate are loyal to him. If you just fire him and put in your own chosen CEO, you know you could get a lot of backlash from disgruntled employees. And in your business, there is such a small profit-margin that you really can’t afford anything at all that threatens performance. So what do you do?
In comes the hatchet man.
The hatchet man is someone you bring in for sole purpose of slashing the problems and shaking things up over a very short period of time – but doing it in a way that deflects any blame or blowback away from you. As soon as the problems are hacked away, the hatchet man leaves – taking the ire and resentment with him, and leaving you free to bring in your new team for a fresh start.
This happens in the business world all the time. And Donald Trump is a businessman. He knows this. He has lived this. We’ve seen him do it on “The Apprentice.” We’ve read about it in his books. This is not a surprise to anyone. Except for liberals and never-Trumpers.
Liberals and never-Trumpers see the past two weeks as proof of a Hitler-clown-circus spectacle, as evidence that Trump is unhinged and our government is in the hands of madmen. Anyone who understands the business world and Donald Trump fully understands that what we just witnessed was a perfectly executed hatchet man maneuver.
When Trump won the election, he essentially performed the political equivalent of an acquisition and merger. He brought together different political factions – establishment Republicans, conservatives, tea party, religious right, moderates, independents, cross-overs – into one winning political coup. For some, it was a hostile takeover – and if they were going to be dragged in against their will, they would sure as hell resist.
This is where Reince Priebus came in.
Priebus, as the then-chairman of the Republican National Committee, was hired as White House Chief of Staff to be a sort of post-merger CEO. It was his job to bring all these political factions together and get them to work harmoniously. But he failed. Worse, there is ample evidence to suggest he not only failed, but worked against Trump and the Trump agenda. Look at the leaks. Look at all the chaos. Look at all the bureaucracy continuing to work at odds with the president. Priebus – and a number of other people around him – had to go.
Back to Scaramucci.
Donald Trump has known for some time that Priebus was a disaster. He was going to give him his six-month trial period – that’s a fairly common thing in the private sector. After that, heads were going to roll. But Trump himself doesn’t want to be the hatchet man. He needs to be able to lead after the bloodbath. So what does he do? He turns to an old friend he has known for many years – someone with nothing to lose, someone who can step in with a hatchet and hack away, someone who can then just walk away from it all and leave the slate clean. He turned to Scaramucci.
So what does Scaramucci do? He comes in swinging. He fires a few people to make a quick example. He tells others they can “resign” right now if they want to – but if not, they will be fired. Others see what is going on and just up and quit of their own accord.
That problem CEO, Priebus? Oh, the new “structure” of the organization puts Scaramucci in direct competition with Priebus – and Priebus throws up his hands and says “fine, I’m out of here.” And Scaramucci does it all in a way that is spectacularly visible to draw all the fire from Trump critics.
So how does it all end? It ends with Trump putting in his new CEO – the one he probably wanted from day one, but held back – and the new CEO says “OK, Scaramucci – you are no longer needed here.”
Gen. Kelly now has a clean slate to start fresh – and Scaramucci takes all the heat. Where the left and never-Trumpers see a circus freak-show, realists from the business world see a perfectly executed post-merger hatchet-man job.
The political wonks see Kelly taking command as the first sane thing to happen in this administration. They don’t realize they’ve been played, and played perfectly. And soon we will likely see some other changes that move the Executive Branch further towards what Trump has wanted from day one. And then watch the real swamp-drainer get to work. It sucks to be Hillary Clinton right now…
Oh, and Scaramucci? He gets a sweet deal out of all this – no doubt, he and his friend Donald Trump talked it all out first.
Scaramucci was already facing a nasty divorce that would result in the liquidation of his business to divide assets. A little-known law allows people who are legally required to sell a business as a condition of employment in the Executive Branch (to prevent conflicts of interest) to defer the taxes on their profits from the sale.
Scaramucci was going to have to sell his company anyway due to his pending divorce. Now he and his soon-to-be ex-wife just saved $80 million in taxes. So don’t think for a moment all this was an unplanned mess that went awry. Scaramucci and Trump knew exactly what they were doing.
All of this was planned – and foreseen. Not just by me, but by others as well.
Scott Adams wrote before Trump was inaugurated that, to his critics, the first year of Trump would be a play in three acts:
Act One – Trump is literally Hitler.
Act Two – Trump is not literally Hitler, but Trump is incompetent.
Act Three – Trump is not incompetent, but we don’t like his policies.
We’ve seen this play out. From election night up through the first 100 days, the left was out rioting and acting as though Trump taking office was literally the end of Western Civilization.
But after 100 days, when Trump had failed to do evil-dictator things like round up all the brown people and put the gays into camps and force women to stay home and have babies, it became farcical to continue the “Trump is Hitler” narrative.
And so from that 100 day point up until now, it has been the “Trump is incompetent” game. Look at all the chaos. Look at all the leaking. Look at all the tweets. Now, we begin Act Three. With Priebus out and Kelly in, things will settle down. Pretty soon, all the left will have to say is “we just don’t like Trump’s policies.”…Act Three.
And once that happens, the left is dead. Because, Trump’s policies are policies that most Americans actually agree with. We should put America first. Build back our economy. Create jobs. Strengthen the military. Protect the border. Outside a few densely-populated liberal strongholds like New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and – of course – Washington, D.C., Americans in general agree with all of this. So when all the left has to say is “Trump’s policies are wrong,” the left will literally be telling most of America, “you people are stupid.”
Trump will win 47 states in 2020. The left will be scratching their heads and wondering what the hell happened. And you’ll be able to look back and say, “hey, some of us told you all this back in 2017.”