Saturday, 13 January 2018

The Democrats are trying to hang Trump out to dry: I don't think they are succeeding


“The Democrats, the longer they talk about identity politics, I got ’em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.” Steve Bannon 

President Trump, in a private conversation with congressmen, is said to have used an ugly word, 's-hole', to describe Haiti and African countries. 

A British diplomat seconded to the UN called Rupert Colville has denounced this as racist, which is piffle. 

The word the President should have used is hell-hole. No-one can doubt that Haiti and some countries in Africa are in a hellish state.  This is why their inhabitants want to leave. 

Donald Trump sees himself as a dealmaker in the mould of LBJ but politics, as Michael Wolff points out in his book, is now a zero sum game. The Democrats didn't want a deal but to make political capital.

The best comment I have seen on the brouhaha is this:

Retweeted Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter):
Well, @realDonaldTrump, you offered to work with Dick Durbin and the Dems and they screwed you. No shock there.

I am sure it will win rather than lose the President support at home.


One Sawsan Chebli, an Arab-German Berlin state legislator, is alarmed by anti-Semitism among new immigrants and has suggested that they be required to visit Nazi concentration camps. The World Jewish Congress agrees. But wouldn't it also be a good idea for Europe to stop taking in migrants from what Mr. Trump says are hell-hole countries, or words to that effect?


Younger readers think, for reasons that I very easily understand, that Donald Trump is cartoonishly evil. I didn't think Margaret Thatcher was a bad person and I was always a Tory in a philosophical sense, but in my twenties I swallowed the line from the BBC that she did not care about the poor.

This is the left's spiel. Please don't take it seriously. They used always to say that the right was class prejudiced, uncaring and oppressing the working class. Now they are rather less concerned about the working class (whom they have done for) and more concerned about racism, homophobia and the rest. But they always say that the right is uncaring and cruel, whatever the facts.

Look at things objectively and remember that received opinion is almost always wrong. Never more so than with that very odd and in many ways repellent figure, Donald Trump.

I have just read Michael Wolff's astonishingly effective character assassination of President Trump. There were some things that he stretched but did he, like Huck Finn, mostly tell the truth?

It is a bundle of unsourced assertions based largely on the testimony of the late Roger Ailes, who somewhat conveniently is not here to comment, and the unwisely outspoken Steve Bannon who only denied that he said Donald Trump Junior's speaking to a Russian lawyer about Hillary Clinton, without informing the American authorities, was 'treasonable'. Which of course it wasn't.

Mr Bannon, in many ways, is the hero of the book and he was cast into outer darkness by President Trump because of it.

Is it true that neither Donald Trump nor his entourage expected or wanted to win? This is the damning allegation, that makes the American electorate look like fools.

No evidence is adduced. No-one is quoted as saying so. Michael Wolff himself says that Steve Bannon was always certain that Trump would win. 

Be sure that Kellyanne Conway and Ivanka Trump didn't share this with the author.

The man from Cambridge Analytica told Megyn Kelly shortly after the election that by the Saturday before the election he was certain Trump would win because of his campaign's use of data analytics. The Trump team knew this and came in to his office for reassurance.

Outrageously, Michael Wolff doesn't refer to this.

So, this is clever polemic and courtiers' gossip, with at least rather a large number of mistakes and ommissions. 

The author has a long history of being economical with the actualité. Michelle Cottle noted in a 2004 article in The New Republic,
Much to the annoyance of Wolff’s critics, the scenes in his columns aren’t recreated so much as created—springing from Wolff’s imagination rather than from actual knowledge of events. Even Wolff acknowledges that conventional reporting isn’t his bag. Rather, he absorbs the atmosphere and gossip swirling around him at cocktail parties, on the street, and especially during those long lunches at Michael’s.

On the other hand, there is clearly a fair amount of truth in the book. As a beautiful woman once told me, the secret of being a bitch is telling the truth in the nastiest possible way. Michael Wolffe is nothing if not a complete bitch.

I am sure the White House was utterly disorganised until General Kelly became Chief of Staff. It can only be much better now, I hope. 

I am sure that Steve Bannon is a hustler. It seems he hasn't made a fortune, despite the press stories he presumably inspired. He is nevertheless a force of nature who perhaps, as he maintains, won the election for Donald Trump.

Obviously, 'Jarvanka', Ivanka Trump and her smooth husband, are lightweights and Democrat lightweights at that - not Republicans and still less American nationalists. They should not have political jobs or influence.

I think that Donald Trump is a monstrous and absurd person, quite unprepared for the presidency, not very truthful or very moral, but then we all knew that all along, including the people who voted for him and still support him. 

Let's see if he has any substance and can make something of his presidency or if by failing he strengthens the forces of liberalism. 

The always cogent David Goldman (Spengler in Asia Times) has written an interesting riposte to Michael Wolff.


  1. "Younger readers think, for reasons that I very easily understand, that Donald Trump is cartoonishly evil."

    Thats a strange assumption to make. Generation Z are widely regarded to be more right leaning than any generation since the silent generation. If they are the type who thinks Trump is cartoonishly evil I doubt they'd be reading your blog to begin with.

    1. It is too early to know but there are plenty of signs that the young are more progressive than ever. Most British people regard Trump with abhorrence and I suppose I get some British readers. Romanians mostly feel the same though with a certain number of exceptions.

    2. I don't think you can say that. British people who don't regard Trump with abhorrence have virtually no voice in the mainstream media which is wall to wall anti Trump. The purpose of propaganda is not so much to convince you what you think but to change what you think your neighbour is thinking. In any case, a young person under 40 who hates Trump isn't going to be reading your blog so you are addressing a group of people that doesn't exist.

    3. It is too early to know but there are plenty of signs that the young are more progressive than ever.

      Agreed. The idea that Generation Z is conservative seems to be pure wishful thinking.

      They might be right-wing, but that's not the same thing. Progressive right-wingers (or right-liberals) are the greatest single menace that our civilisation faces. They combine all the awfulness of the right with all the insanity of the cultural left.

    4. I think compared with Milennials, Gen X, and boomers are more red-pilled. They the first generation raised entirely online. They don't watch TV so compared with all previous generations they are are exposed to much more unfiltered information. At the moment they are witnessing a ferocious attack on free speech and the Truth by the Left. They listen to their blue-pilled Millenial teachers spout PC crap while they can easily find counter-arguments online.

    5. I think that screenshot on Vox's blog looks fake tbh. There is still is a lot of good signs that Generation Z is more resistant to brainwashing than milennials.

    6. They don't watch TV so compared with all previous generations they are are exposed to much more unfiltered information.

      That's a dubious claim. There might be unfiltered information on the internet but most people don't know it's there and don't care. What most people are getting on the internet is incredibly filtered.

      Back in the 1960s they had unfiltered information too. They had these things called books. You could find out all sorts of stuff.

      But Generation Z Will Save Us is an article of faith on the alt-right. Everyone has their delusions, including alt-righters.

    7. Books are great but they're not really unfilitered. First you have to get a publisher to agree to publish what you've written. Think of how much difficulty even Peter Hitchens and Roger Scruton had getting some of their books published, never mind a nationalist or Alt Right book. Look in any Waterstones Politics section and the number of conservative books you can count on one hand. Obviously in 60s there was far less censorship than today but there was even by this time there was censorship of right wing books. You might get published by a small publisher but it would be more difficult for people to find out about your book, so the book would not be widely read. Information was much less accessible. What might have taken someone many years to find out in the 1960s can be achieved in a few minutes or hours today.

  2. If there are no shithole countries, why are, according to the UN, 60 million Africans, Arabs, Afghans etc on their way to Europe???
    George A.

  3. I prefer the term "Third World Toilet."

  4. I am beginning to think that Trump is engaged in counter conditioning. Desensitizing the public to the trigger words they have recently been conditioned to respond to. However, it is true that the news media is very forgiving when certain people stretch the truth. In Barack Obama's biography, "Dreams of My Father" he asserted that his grandfather, a cook for the British Army, was actually a captured Mau Mau who was whipped daily by the British. In a similar vein, his stepfather, Soewarno Martodihardj, was an Indonesian freedom fighter killed by the repressive Dutch. Both stories were false. But for those seeking accuracy the Guardian admonishes,"The most limited way to read the book is to comb it for its direct referents to reality."

  5. He also like to call the Saudis 'desert niggers'
    Bibi told me.

    1. Sorry! Not the Saudis... the Arabs in general.

    2. Actually, it was his son... right outside that club in Floreasca... where the hookers are cheaper than drinks...

  6. Haiti is the oldest black run state in the world. They ejected the French in 1803 so they've had no white man to "oppress" them for 215 years. If the equalist leftoids and race-blind cuckservatives were correct then the skyline of Port au Prince should look like Hong Kong by now. Instead, its mountains of garbage.

    The British writer Sir Spenser St. John wrote of Haiti in "Hayti, the Black Republic" (1884):

    “The vexed question as to the position held by the negroes in the great scheme of nature was continually brought before us whilst I lived in Hayti, and I could not but regret to find that the greater my experience the less I thought of the capacity of the negro to hold an independent position.

    As long as he is influenced by contact with the white man, as in the southern portion of the United States, he gets on very well. But place him free from all such influence, as in Hayti, and he shows no signs of improvement; on the contrary, he is gradually retrograding to the African tribal customs, and without exterior pressure will fall into the state of the inhabitants on the Congo.”

    “I now agree with those who deny that the negro could ever originate a civilisation, and that with the best type of educations he remains an inferior type of man. He has as yet shown himself totally unfitted for self-government, and incapable as a people to make any progress whatever. To judge the negroes fairly, one must live a considerable time in their midst, and not be led away by the theory that all races are capable of equal advance in civilisation"

    Similarly, Hesketh Pritchard was the first European to travel across the interior of Haiti since the French defeat in 1803. He wrote in "Hayti: Where Black rules White" published in 1900:

    “To-day in Haiti we come to the real crux of the question. At the end of a hundred years of trial, how does the black man govern himself? What progress has he made? Absolutely none.
    Can the negro rule himself? Is he congenitally capable? …
    Up to date he has certainly not succeeded in giving any proof of capability, has not indeed come within measurable distance of success. I think we may go a full step beyond the non-proven. We may sat that, taken en masse at any rate, he has shown no signs whatsoever which could fairly entitle him to the benefit of the doubt that has so long hung about that question.
    He has had his opportunity. The opportunity has lasted for a hundred years in a splendid land which he found ready prepared for him. Yet to-day we find him with a Government which, save in the single point of force majeure, has degenerated into a farce; and as for the country itself, houses and plantations have disappeared, and where clearings once were there is now impenetrable forest. Certainly he has existed through one hundred years of internecine strife, but he has never for six consecutive months governed himself in any accepted sense of the word. To-day, and as matters stand, he certainly cannot rule himself.”

    1. It's remarkable how men used to write when England was still a free country. Not everything they wrote might have been true but you could publish your brutally honest opinion without being censored or to have to self-censor. And the reader could read something knowing that was your honest opinion and come to his own conclusion. That period started to come to an end in around the late 1920s and was gone by the post-war period.

  7. A London public toilet has said that it is "offended" by President Trump's remarks comparing Haiti to a shithole.

    "At least I still have running water!"

    The shithole said in a statement.

  8. First of all, there's no actual recording of his having said this in the first place so were starting an argument with a false premise. It is just something from an anonymous source. Second of all, I question the ethics of anyone going to the press with something discussed privately, off the record. Third of all, some places are definitely hell holes, Romania being borderline such a place, so calling it as it is, shouldn't offend anyone. If anything, it should be a wake up call for the people there to do something about it.

    1. All you said is obviously true. The Democrats are playing politics of course. Trump wanted a deal. I wonder if he cares much about immigration and I wonder if any more illegals get deported under him than Obama.

    2. Cut the man some slack, will ya... He's busy draining the shithole he lives in... By the way, do you remember him calling the White House a 'dump'?

    3. Dang me if this ain't ma homeboy 'Archie, Hail Trumpf, Munro' who ' has been settled in Romania for longer than he would like,' ... ever so subtle, dropping his snot in the conversation... Hey, yo mama's such a borderline slut, she gives out frequent rider miles.

  9. My knowledge of Haiti derives from Graham Greene's novel, 'The Comedians' and Hesketh Prichard's 'Where Black Rules White: A Journey Across and About Hayti' written in 1899. And I read both ages ago. But I assume the reason the Dominican Republic flourishes and Haiti which shares the same island does not is because the white elite were driven out of Haiti 200 years ago and people who ruled using voodoo replaced them. In Dominican Republic the white elite remains to this day including landowners and priests.

    I had a book about the revolution and Toussaint L'Ouverture but never read it. I think it was written by a communist in any case.

    1. Is the plight of those poor buggers in 'shit-hole' countries giving
      you, guys, a hard-on or something?
      Imagine you taking a few boatloads of dumb ass Germans, French and
      Italians to a deserted tropical island, put them to work, beat them
      up, fuck them up for a few hundred years...
      Do you really think, at the end of it, you gonna end up with the Swiss
      Confederation? Do you?

    2. Slavery was abolished in Haiti in the early 19th C when the Europeans were massacred and expelled. Also Haiti is not a desert Island. It was the richest colony in the Caribbean and the sugar capital of the world. Today Haitians can't even grow their own sugar; they have to import it from the U.S.

      "Fuck them up" Haiti has received billions of dollars in foreign aid. Its geographical location is actually even more ideal since the Panama canal was built

      "Do you really think, at the end of it, you gonna end up with the Swiss
      Confederation? Do you?"

      Actually yes, pretty much. It Haiti were entirely populated by descendents of Germans, French and Italians it would be a first world country now. Definitely it would.

    3. Haiti’s enduring poverty is in considerable measure a function of the efforts of France, the United States and other world powers of the 19th and early 20th century to block the Caribbean country’s development as an independent nation.

      That included the 150 million franc reparation demand France, Haiti’s former colonial master, imposed on it at gunpoint in 1825 as punishment for the country’s successful independence rebellion and overthrow of slavery. Haiti didn’t finish paying off the debt until 1947.

    4. After independence the lighter skinned blacks lorded it over the darker ones.

    5. 'Made in the USA Shithole'

    6.'s a dog-eat-dog world.

    7. If English convicts turned the desolate, remote, barren island of Australia into a civilized country, I don't see why European settlers couldn't have turned a fertile, tropical island (ok, half-island) with ideal weather and close to important shipping lanes into a jewel. Culture (rather than skin color) matters.

    8. The tropics were usually considered too hot for white men to settle there comfortably.

    9. I've never heard that theory (especially since in tropical areas not too far from the coast, it doesn't tend to get too hot - it's just comfortable). There were plenty of white settlers in the Spanish and Portuguese possessions around the world, many of these places tropical.

    10. In your opinion this:

      Many convicts were transported for petty crimes, while a significant number were political prisoners. More serious crimes, such as rape and murder, were punishable by death, and therefore not transportable offences. Once emancipated, most ex-convicts stayed in Australia and joined the free settlers, with some rising to prominent positions in Australian society.

      Is the same as this:

      France fought so hard to keep the colony because it was basically the Saudi Arabia of coffee and sugar at the time, providing the majority of both commodities consumed in Europe. The money it generated fueled the entire French empire. But it was made with blood. The slave regime necessary to produce those crops was so deadly that 1 in 10 enslaved Africans kidnapped and brought to the island died each year. As historian Laurent Dubois has noted, the French decided that it was cheaper to bring in new slaves than to keep the ones they had alive.

    11. I think the main reason Haiti is a shithouse is that it's full of Haitians.

      But whatever the reason, the fact remains that Haiti is a shithouse country. We can debate the reasons for it being a shithouse, but the fact of its being a shithouse is beyond debate.

    12. To offset the income that would be lost by French settlers and slave
      owners, France demanded that the newly independent state pay
      compensation amounting to 150 million gold francs. After a new deal
      was struck in 1838, Haiti agreed to pay France 90 million gold francs
      (the equivalent of €17 billion today). It was not until 1952 that
      Haiti made the final payment on what became known as its "independence

      ..Haiti population was back then about 500,000. That's 34,000 euro
      per person. Probably half of them if not more ,children. Double that.
      Blacks. Dirt poor. And they paid. Meanwhile...

      Germany’s resurgence has only been possible through waiving extensive
      debt payments and stopping reparations to its World War II victims… In
      the 20th century, Germany started two world wars, the second of which
      was conducted as a war of annihilation and extermination, and
      subsequently its enemies waived its reparations payments completely or
      to a considerable extent.

      See the difference? I doubt it...
      Well, don't really care about you folks being racist... that's your
      cross to bear (a burden or trial one must put up with, as in
      Alzheimer's) ... but you are so damn stupid... it boggles the mind...

  10. What is more racist, using that word or after 8 years since the earthquake not having helped the Haitians sufficiently to make a return home palatable? Obama and HRC did nothing!

  11. I am waiting with much concern for the reversal of the collective mind from overall shaming and blaming the successful for the failures of the weak and unsuccessful. I know it will not be a pleasant time; it will be murderous, cruel, vicious. The more we play the blaming game, the more the reaction to it will be tragic, the more these poor countries will fall into the abyss, as they'll take no effort to pull themselves up.
    It may come from the next successful crowd (the Chinese ) who are completely immune to the notion of blame. What times these S-holes countries will endure under the Pax Chinesa!

  12. When we first caught wind of President Trump’s “sh*thole” comment, we were outraged. We thought he was talking about our hometown.
    A family friend came to Baltimore for a visit last week:

    'I couldn’t believe it. You roll up your windows and lock the doors. And drive as fast as you can. There’s just block after block of boarded-up houses and padlocked stores. It doesn’t look as though anyone lives there. I don’t see how anyone could live there.
    We were, of course, relieved when we realized that our president was referring to foreign sh*tholes… not those in the USA.'

    But that’s the problem with sh*tholes: They’re all over the place.

    And they don’t stay put. Ireland was a sh*thole for about 400 years, after Oliver Cromwell’s army laid waste to the country.
    It was considered such a woebegone, poor, benighted backwater – and the “wild Irish” so disagreeable – that efforts were made to keep them from immigrating to the U.S.
    Now, Ireland is not so bad.

    More here: