All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 10, 2017 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor
45:41
Fury from the Left
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to a new edition of Radio Renaissance.
This is Jared Taylor, editor of American Renaissance, with my indispensable and regular guest, Paul Kersey.
Unfortunately, we have to talk about something that happened last night that we wished hadn't happened.
And that was the three judge panel Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit reaffirming Judge Robard's stay on Donald Trump's very sensible and intelligent immigration measures that he took after a few days in office.
What the judge has decided, of course, is basically that we live under a judicial dictatorship.
In effect, the judges said, well I don't care if the Constitution and the laws grant certain authority to the President, we as judges are going to overrule what the President has decided.
And of course what the President had decided was to put a temporary ban on all admissions of refugees and also again a temporary ban on any admissions of people from seven, as it turns out, majority Muslim countries.
Now, Paul, I believe you have the statutory justification that goes back to the 1950s, I believe, for exactly what Donald Trump did.
Yeah, Trump actually, in his scathing speech to the judge in Washington, he actually quoted the actual...
The actual legal reasoning that's codified.
But there's a fantastic article with the Los Angeles Times right now, and it states that, quote, The exclusions of aliens is a fundamental act of sovereignty inherent in the executive power.
This was from a Supreme Court decision in 1950.
And let me just be blunt here that Congress adopted a provision in 1952 stating that the
president, quote, may by proclamation and for such period as he shall deem necessary,
suspend the entry of all aliens and any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants
whenever he thinks it would be, quote, detrimental to the interests of the United States, unquote.
Jared, just from hearing that, from reading it, and from reciting it to you,
it would seem quite clear that Donald Trump's executive orders on
one.
Fall squarely underneath what is already established law and canon in the United States of America.
It certainly seems that to me.
And it seems to me that under that law, he could very well say, no more Muslims.
It's as simple as that.
Now, I understand that there is a different provision of a different law that says that no religious or racial test can be applied to the granting of visas.
But visa granting and just admission in general can be considered different categories.
If, as he says, if as the law says, if in Donald Trump's mind admitting certain people is detrimental to the interest of the United States, I see absolutely no legal reason or constitutional reason why he can't say no more Muslims.
The Constitution does not protect aliens.
And as you noted earlier, the Supreme Court decision said, it is a fundamental right of a nation to exclude anybody it wishes, on whatever grounds, as far as I can tell.
Otherwise, you aren't a nation. Exactly.
You are a landmass...
Prepared for continuous invasion.
And guess what? The taxpayers have to pay for that invasion force.
Which, again, we talk about this over and over again, but what's happening, there is no precedent in human history to talk about and to look back and say, well, this happened in the 1600s.
You know, the Greeks wrote about this in 200 BC. It hasn't happened.
And it's also interesting to think about all that's going on in Europe right now.
You see a lot of liberal justices, Jared, always want to cite international law as justification for their decisions overriding American sovereignty.
And as we're seeing increasingly in Europe, sane Nations there are beginning to say, well, wait a second, this Muslim situation isn't that great for us.
Controversially, in Switzerland, they're banning the burqa.
This is happening increasingly in other countries.
And I wanted to point out something to you because you are a...
You, of course, have a degree from an institution in France.
Yesterday, it was announced that in Paris, they're going to spend $22 million to build a permanent wall surrounding the Eiffel Tower to protect it from terrorist activity.
I mean, do you get this?
How insane this is?
And they call it... It's not a wall, by the way.
It is an aesthetic perimeter.
Well, I'm wondering how they're going to let Parisians through this aesthetic perimeter, for heaven's sake.
And I suspect it'll be a very un-aesthetic thing if it is something that is capable of actually keeping people out.
This is just a hideous thing.
Besides which, the Eiffel Tower certainly is a symbol of France and a symbol of Paris.
But there are 100 different monuments, more, that are symbols of Paris or symbols of France.
If they're going to build an aesthetic barrier around the Eiffel Tower, they're going to have to build one around Sacré-Cœur, around the Louvre, around the Palace of Versailles.
There's just no end to it.
Monuments on the Champs-Élysées. It's fascinating also because this is largely being erected to deter truck bombs, which they fear.
Again, you're not going to build something if there isn't, Jared, credible intelligence to justify it being built.
So you have to wonder, What French intelligence is gathering when it comes to the threats of Islam.
Every other day you hear about an attack that is thwarted.
Remember the three Muslim women who were going to try and blow up the Notre Dame.
This is one of those stories that, again, it was in the news for a day, then it went away.
And that was in the summer of 2016.
They were going to try and blow up Notre Dame in Paris.
I'm laughing. I hate to be laughing.
I'm sorry. I know some people think this is so serious.
It is, but the implausibility of the current year, as you hear so many people talk about, it's so revolting that sometimes the only way I can exist is to find humor in it.
Well, just yesterday, again in France, they arrested three men and a 16-year-old girl who were buying explosives and they had pledged allegiance to ISIS. I don't know exactly what they were going to blow up, but there you go.
But the Supreme Court of the United States has said that because Donald Trump can't point to a single actual terrorist in many of those seven countries, Who has committed a terrorist act in the United States, that he's all wrong, that this is not a matter of security.
And to me, the astonishing thing is that despite they are a legal body, they are actually making a decision drawn on whether or not this would have the necessary security effect.
That's an executive decision.
That's not a legal decision at all.
That's entirely up to the President of the United States.
Also, they seem to think that certain aliens actually do have claim to equal process under the law, constitutional law.
Now, I suppose those who are permanent residents, you could make an argument to that effect.
But those who have never set foot in the United States, they say, Are subject to equal process under the law.
It's really quite extraordinary.
And another thing that astonishes me, do you know the grounds on which Washington and Minnesota State decided that they had standing as parties in this case to sue?
Do you know what the grounds are? I know the grounds, but I want you to let the surprise.
The grounds are that this travel ban is going to hurt their businesses and their public universities.
Well, my goodness, if that is grounds to enter into a party, you could take that as grounds for just about any kind of regulation, anything that affects human beings.
This is really straining.
Clearly the lefties are straining, first of all, to give them legal standing to sue, and then giving the Supreme Court the authority to reject what is clearly, by statute and by Supreme Court decision, the prerogative of the President of the United States.
But there you go. They are absolutely desperate to have their way no matter what.
And we will see what happens when this goes to the Supreme Court, which I assume it soon will.
Very quickly, too. Yes, the predictions are that perhaps within a week, maybe 10 days, there could be a Supreme Court decision.
But, alas, it could very well be a 4-4 decision, in which case the Ninth Circuit Court decision stands.
I'm terrified that's going to be the case.
Of course, Sotomayor and Kagan Sheft recused themselves based on what they did as private citizens in advocating on behalf of the...
The rights of non-Americans to have the same rights that we have under the Constitution as citizens of the country.
I would like to point out one more thing before we move on because it's very important and instructive for the left anti-white mind.
Hillary Clinton was gloating about this on Twitter.
All the corporations that filed amicus briefs are gloating about this decision as if people who live in Largely technology Silicon Valley companies, as if people who have lived in huts, who have lived in caves, who have never touched a computer, let alone indoor plumbing, or had the ability to live in, to ever turn on an oven.
I mean, Jared, you've published amazing articles on American Renaissance that When Somalis come over here, they don't even know what a microwave is or what the toilet is.
They've never seen a launch switch.
Yeah. And yet somehow Amazon or Twitter or Facebook, they're somehow losing out on developers from these places.
It doesn't make any sense because these people wouldn't know the difference between coding and what toilet paper is at this point when they come here.
And it's... It's astonishing, it's laughable, and yet it's a reminder that had Hillary won, there would be no sovereignty anymore.
She would have basically declared every person on the planet protected by the U.S. Constitution.
And this is why I was so behind Donald Trump winning, because you knew what Hillary's election meant.
It would mean that you wouldn't be hearing Jared and I talk right now.
America Renaissance would be gone.
It would not be allowed to publish anymore.
I think it would have taken maybe six months.
Yeah. I'm not as confident as you.
I think that they would have made an example.
As you see right now, one more point.
Just the other day, the CEO of Under Armour made some comments about how excited he is about Donald Trump being president because he is a very pro-business individual.
And you would think that a CEO of a publicly traded company would want economic improvements because that would mean that Americans are spending more money.
They have more...
Well, his name is Kevin Plank, the CEO. He's being attacked right now for daring to say anything positive about Trump.
A number of the spokesmen and women who are paid by Under Armour to rep their products are attacking him for daring to say anything positive about Trump.
All he did was point out What any CEO would point out, we want a better business climate because that means people are spending money.
And as a CEO, your only obligation is to shareholders, to see an increase in the stock price.
And yet people are attacking them.
This just shows you, and I think this is a perfect segue, of how divisive our times really are and how polarized they are.
When Nordstrom drops Ivanka, One last point, though, about the executive orders that Donald Trump signed.
In a way, I do fault him.
Four, hanging his hat on the question of security.
And the other side, I think, has made a number of effective arguments.
After all, 19 of the attackers in the September 11 attack, those were Saudis, for heaven's sake.
A couple were unexpired visas, if memory serves, correct?
That's right. Some had overstayed.
In any case, they were Saudis.
And I think that, you know what this reminds me of?
It reminds me of the old segregationists in the South.
After the Brown versus Board Supreme Court decision saying that, no, the problem here is states' rights.
They were arguing states' rights.
Now that's one approach, but the real question was race and racial differences.
And that was the question they were afraid to raise.
I wish Donald Trump had come right out with a little bit more preparation, with a little bit more legal spade work and said, okay, no more Muslims.
That would have been laying the question right on the line where it deserves to be.
And I think hanging his hat in this, I think, sort of half-baked way, these countries bad, these countries okay.
I mean, really, are Pakistanis really that less dangerous than Iranians in terms of likelihood to commit some sort of terrorist act in the United States?
I'm not convinced. I really wish he had been straightforward and made a Muslim ban, like he talked about, and fight it out on that, rather than whether or not this is a question of, have we picked the right countries for terrorism?
Is it just a coincidence that they're all Muslim?
I wish he'd just gone full force.
Well, I'm a federalist now, so I could care less about the idea of states' rights, because it's so fascinating when you flip the script and what's going on in California with nullification.
I'm quite confident that the Supreme Court is going to rule in favor of President Trump.
I'm quite confident that we're headed towards some unbelievable times with even...
We're not going to talk about it today, but you saw the protests that erupted when they tried to deport an illegal in Arizona.
And just the violence that these communities are ready to do on behalf of their own countrymen who are invading our country.
I think there's some unbelievable moments coming on the horizon.
I agree with you. However, I would like to point out that this whole states' rights nonsense, guess what?
We've got people in place now.
I mean, Jeff Sessions is the Attorney General.
And they're already working on some incredible provisions, from what I understand and have read.
And we should all be Federalists now.
The idea of states' rights...
As many of those who listen to and read AR are ardent, probably proponents of the Confederacy, that question was answered, unfortunately, with the death of 600,000 Americans and Southerners.
And guess what?
We have the precedent now for Donald Trump to do the exact same thing with any state that dares try and break and dissolve our union.
And I have no problem with A-10 warthogs dropping a number of bombs on the I-5 in Los Angeles to destroy their ability to...
To even transport goods, if that's what it has to come to.
Now, we might not be on the same page, as far as that's concerned.
If California wants to go, to me, that's a good precedent.
There are millions of Californians who voted for Donald Trump.
It's not like in the case of the South when, of course, the Civil War wasn't about slavery at all, but there wasn't as much animosity between citizens of Georgia and these other southern states as you see.
A lot of white people voted for Trump in Washington and Oregon and in these other states that would join up with California.
Well, as far as Washington state is concerned and what the state has done to try to gut Donald Trump's immigration policy, a majority of Americans are in favor of a Muslim ban.
A majority of Americans are in favor in the steps that he took.
So we're flouting not only the Constitution and statute, but the will of the American people.
But we'll see what the Supreme Court decides.
I'm not as confident as you.
I think it could very well be a 4-4 split.
But anyway, no, these divisions, the divisions that are represented by the fury over these common sense immigration control methods that are proposed by our president, are really manifesting themselves in violence.
And that is a remarkable thing.
And we can trace this violence, of course, back to the pre-election period when so many people attending Donald Trump rallies were attacked.
And you never found the opposite happening.
The press, of course, managed to blame the violence on Donald Trump himself, whereas I have never heard of a single Hillary Clinton supporter being attacked for wanting to go to a Hillary Clinton rally.
That just never happened. But in city after city, there was violence attempts to, and in some cases succeeded, to shut down Donald Trump rallies.
Well, now it seems to me that one of the clearest indications of how happy The left is, or at least, at the very least, how ambiguous the left is about violence, was the case of Richard Spencer.
As I believe all of our listeners know, that on Inauguration Day, Richard Spencer was punched on television, really quite nastily by this Antifa character.
And this resulted in, to me, I guess I continue to be a naive person who thinks that even Democrats and even lefties have some sense of integrity.
But to my disappointment, the New York Times headline of the day after that, the 21st, the day after the inauguration, was, Attack on Alt-Right Leader Has Internet Asking, Is It Okay to Punch a Nazi?
Now, the New York Times then goes on to present mostly the people who are saying, yes, wonderful, punch them as much as you can.
And then it points out that a few people think that's not a very good way to behave.
But as far as the New York Times article was concerned, this seemed to be sort of a moral toss-up.
The Times itself didn't say this was wrong.
Now, perhaps in some other editorial they took a position, but in this front page article, they took no position at all.
It's an open question. And of course, you're familiar with what happened with the national editor at Politico magazine, Michael Hirsch.
He published Richard Spencer's home address, and then he tweeted out and said, no, the idea is not to go up and have a discussion with him.
Show up with a baseball bat.
It's important to remember that that was prior to the election.
That was prior to the inauguration.
That was when, I can't remember what flap was going on, what brouhaha, but that was an astonishing moment.
I remember he was forced to resign, actually, Michael Hirsch.
And that was when you began to kind of see This sea change in the mind of the left.
Yes. The really shocking nature of a lot of these Hollywood activists, uh, directors and screenwriters were coming out and they were beginning to say all sorts of crazy things.
They were, you know, um, some of the names are Josh Whedon.
Uh, I can't think of all of them off the top of my head right now.
Um, Rob Reiner.
The comments were incredible.
And then you had this guy, like you said, uh, advocate getting baseball bats to attack Spencer.
And as if, as if, uh, Preemptively attacking someone based on what they might or might not say is justified in the eyes of what I'm going to just call from now on the anti-white left.
I'm not going to call them the left anymore.
There has to be that preface every time.
They are overtly anti-white.
Well, there's a fellow named John Favreau.
He is a former speechwriter for Barack Obama.
And after the punch on Richard Spencer that went viral, it was set to all sorts of different kinds of music, apparently.
This and the people who hate us all thought this was most amusing.
And Jon Favreau, former speechwriter for Barack Obama, he tweeted, I don't care how many different songs you set Richard Spencer being punched to, I'll laugh at every one.
I mean, this is pretty brutal stuff.
Here's a guy who is close to a Democratic president.
A speechwriter is a close guy.
And he's saying, go boy, go.
And then, to me also, the nation.
The nation has a long history.
You know, it has not, insofar as I know, it has never actually come out and approved of violence.
But one of the authors of The Nation said that this punching was, what did he call it?
He called it pure kinetic beauty.
Yes, pure kinetic beauty.
Wow! This is really extraordinary to me, but I think this goes back.
The signs of this were very clear in the run-up to the election, during the campaign.
We could tell how they were reacting.
Then, of course, the rioting that resulted after the election.
And this was a clear sign of what is to come.
Then, of course, at the deplorable, they had this large Antifa gathering at the deplorable.
This, for those who may not be aware of this, this was a kind of pre-inauguration, inaugural ball, Put together by people who consider themselves the deplorables, the massive deplorables that Hillary Clinton had made fun of.
But you had to go through a violent gauntlet of people.
Gavin McInnes, the sort of alt-light comedian.
He was attacked.
He was pepper sprayed.
And then another incident with Gavin McInnes that you're probably familiar with.
He was to give a talk at NYU. Correct.
And his talk had to be abbreviated because of all of the violence, but the most extraordinary thing was a professor at NYU who is caught on a video, which once again went all around the internet, saying she was screaming hysterically at the police because they were protecting Gavin McInnes from the rioters.
Correct. She's saying, the police, you should be beating his ass.
Those are her very words. She used a lot more colorful language.
Every other word was the F word.
And this reminds me of what happened in 2014, Jared, at the University of Missouri, where the professor, Sandra Glick, I can't remember her name, where she pointed at a journalist who was daring to cover the demonstration and said, Get him!
Get him! And there's almost that same commonality, that same...
Fervor in their eyes.
I can only imagine that that's what the anti-communists saw.
I mean, this is getting more and more frightening.
If you think about this mass conformity that these individuals are preaching, that any deviation from the script...
Again, Gavin has gone out of his way to say, you know, of course I disavow this white supremacist talk.
Of course, you know, Nazi, what are you talking about?
You know, you keep talking about Nazis and guess what?
The demand for Nazis doesn't exactly have anything to do with the supply.
It's a beautiful line that he used.
But this is what they want because they want to...
And going back to that Nation article you mentioned where they talked about the...
Pure Kinetic Beauty, when Richard was punched, they actually would go on to write in that article that, quote, you personally don't have to fight neo-Nazis in the street, but you should support those who do, unquote.
And again, Richard Spencer is not a neo-Nazi.
Richard Spencer, I would even go as far as to say that he's not a white supremacist.
He probably has more hatred of white people than he does love of them for all that's happened.
I mean, again, it's this professor that was...
Using the F word and saying to the cops that, you know, you should let these people beat Gavin's ass because he's a quote unquote Nazi.
I mean... Richard has nothing but contempt for these white people.
But no, it is absolutely extraordinary that you have academics who are now saying that anyone who disagrees with us, at least on a certain kind of subject, this person can legitimately be beaten.
And the police are doing a disservice to society by protecting people from mob violence.
Exempt from civility is the only way to describe it.
If you dare say anything that can be construed as racist, you do not have First Amendment's Maybe even at some point, what, Fourth Amendment protection, freedom of assembly.
We're reaching that point, and as you so astutely noted, we saw the signs during Trump's campaign when he was forced to cancel the event in Chicago in March of 2016.
Of course, you remember, Ted Cruz attacked him.
He said, how dare Donald Trump create this environment where this type of violence goes on?
It's like, Ted, you son of a gun.
What are you talking about? I had hoped that Donald would have done more events in California because that's where some of the more graphic videos came from.
The violence of Trump supporters being attacked and bleeding and eggs thrown at them.
Just these really powerful images that would hit home to Americans in the Midwest and other important battle states.
He didn't do it, but you know what?
I have a feeling that that's not going to happen in 2018 when Trump goes around and you see him give speeches in these states that are poised to allow the Republicans to really begin to have huge majorities in the Senate and in the House.
It's going to be exciting. I know I'm jumping the gun here, putting the horse, putting the cart before the horse, but I'm optimistic.
And I know a lot of people out there, they aren't with all that's going on, but I... The fact that the left is going this quickly to try and assert their moral authority toward violence, Jared, it shows that we are in...
Put it quite bluntly, revolutionary times.
And it's not because of us.
It's because the left is beginning to believe that their vice and the stranglehold on discourse is dissipating.
And they have to find a way then to associate anyone, regardless of what they've ever said, they're a Nazi if they dare...
And they have the moral authority to then attack a Nazi, as the New York Times piece basically laid bare.
This is one of the first times in recent history, or maybe in the last 50 years, in which the left has suffered a major defeat.
A major defeat.
They are so used to winning, let's face it.
Their agenda has gone from strength to strength.
Our people have been backsliding and have been retreating year after year, and finally we dig our heels in.
And they are so frustrating that they are resorting to obvious, obvious violence.
And if we go back to this article, I think it's a remarkable article.
It appeared in January 22nd in The Nation.
And the author says, if we recognize fascism in Trump's ascendance, and of course they do, anything they don't like is fascism, let's face it.
If we recognize fascism, our response must be anti-fascist in nature.
The history of anti-fascist action is not one of polite protest, nor failed appeals to reasoned
debate with racist but direct aggressive confrontation.
That is what they want to do.
They are going to stop at nothing.
Violence is, for them, the obvious step against what they disagree with.
And I think an excellent example of this was at the Screen Actors Guild Awards.
Late January, there's some actor named David Harbour, whom I'd never heard of, was accepting an award, and then he went on to say, he gives this long rambling speech about how wonderful he is and all his friends are, and then he goes out and says, and we will hunt monsters.
We will punch some people in the face when they seek to destroy the weak and the disenfranchised and marginalized, and we'll do it with soul, with heart, and with joy.
And this whole room full of the Hollywood elite hops up on their feet and cheers.
They're cheering the idea of punching your political opponents.
This to me is just extraordinary, but it lays bare, it lays bare the utter hypocrisy of the left, which is always accusing the right of intolerance, of incipient violence, of all of these things of which they are so obviously guilty.
I bet the entire room rose to their feet after this.
Really strange. And it was a very pompous and narcissistic rant.
You don't have the material that he's talked about before.
He's an actor from a Netflix show.
I think it's called Stranger Things.
I might be wrong. But it was a frightening moment when you saw this crowd erupt.
Because you started to think, oh my gosh, this is getting kind of Stalin-esque.
I mean, who's going to be the first person to stop clapping?
And they're going to be the one who gets attacked.
Because they dared... They dared not show the proper affection to this bellicose speech.
We're reaching a moment where you have to imagine that this dude, David Harbour, he probably watched with glee Richard Spencer being sucker punched or probably you should call it sucker forearm because the dude who attacked him.
If you look, it's obvious there might be...
It looks like an elbow strike.
It was almost an elbow strike.
Some people have speculated that he might have actually had a foreign object concealed in the sweatshirt that he was wearing.
Regardless, the fact that this guy gave that speech the way he did, you're basically watching more and more people come to terms.
I'm talking about the anti-white left that, hey, you know...
A lot of people are beginning to justify this violence, and you wonder when, not if, but you wonder when, a Donald Trump supporter is going to be walking to the gym, wearing a Donald Trump hat or a Donald Trump shirt, and they're going to be viciously beaten.
Well, just a few days ago, there was a middle school student in Chesterfield, Missouri.
He's riding on a bus, on a school bus, with a MAGA hat on, and he was punched by three different people.
I mean, this is, and to me, again, this perhaps reflects my naivete, but I am disappointed that there has not been any kind of principled outrage about these things.
The left clearly not so secretly believes that people like us deserve violence.
We deserve to be shut up and destroyed if need be.
And so they don't care.
They have no principles when it comes to this.
See, I'd go one step further and agree with everything you just said, but I believe that most of the left doesn't want us to even be alive.
I know that people would find that to be, no, that's not true, but there is no coexisting with us in their eyes.
They truly do perceive us as the...
As the personification of evil.
Every victory they've had for the past, like you said, 50, 60, 70.
I would go back 80 years to Shelley v.
Kramer, which I have long argued that was the thing that the NAACP and these other organizations fought so hard to destroy the constitutional right of freedom of association.
That was the watershed moment from that point on.
It's been downhill from there on.
That was 47? 48.
48. And a 9-0 decision, even though in a number of state Supreme Courts it had been upheld as constitutional.
And remind our listeners what was at stake there.
Freedom of association. Well, but it was restrictive covenants.
Restrictive covenants, precisely.
It was the right for a community, for neighborhoods to basically restrict, well, America was a white black country then, to restrict blacks from buying property.
Because even though Martin Luther King in a famous Playboy interview said there is no evidence that blacks depreciate property, well, guess what?
That goes against everything that had been established when blacks would buy property in the 1880s.
One of my favorite books is W.E.B. DuBois' book.
I can't remember which one it is, but he writes about blacks in Philadelphia.
And in the 1880s, he was...
Reluctant to note how much crime the black community was committing then and homicide.
It's fascinating to read just how bad black crime was because Philadelphia was at that time pretty much the epicenter of where free blacks lived.
That was one of his first books.
That's right. It's called The Philadelphia Negro.
That's right. That's right. Yes.
And it's interesting because he goes into all of these facts in what appears to be a rather objective way.
But then, of course, he excuses it.
He justifies it. He explains it because of all the wicked things white people have done.
In a way, W.E.B. Du Bois, I think, is the founder of the whole white people are to blame school of thinking in the United States.
Up until him, it was more or less taken for granted That blacks were the way they were because that's just simply the way they were.
And he was the one who says, no, that's not the way they are.
They have been forced into this by white people.
If white people behave, then black people will behave.
But anyway, how did we get onto that?
In any case, yes, the other side is really showing its true colors.
And on the one hand, though, On the one hand, I'm grateful to them.
I'm grateful because this kind of violence, even though the lefties and the Hollywood types are going to somehow think that it's justified, they're not going to get excited about condemning it, ordinary Americans, I think, are shocked by this.
They are shocked. And I think this will push more and more people into our direction when they see the way our opponents behave.
At the same time, I have a certain grudging respect for people who are prepared to actually get out on the line and defend their views.
When is the last time there was any reactionary violence in the United States?
What can you think? No, reactionary violence.
Maybe the last time, what, the Boston anti-integration, school integration?
And that wasn't even very violent either.
People just stopping school buses.
There is, I mean, I have to respect people who are prepared to put their bodies on the line.
I've got to interject here and point out that the left is nothing more than the shock troops of the state and the establishment.
I mean, again, if right-wingers would go out there and do anything...
You would have every entity—I can name all the alphabet groups out there that advocate on behalf of the anti-white left—who would use that and be like, oh, see, this is just another Dylann Roof.
I mean, again, there is no positive media coverage.
Do you think Breitbart? Do you think Daily Caller?
Do you think Infowars is going to do a positive story on white people going out there and beating people?
No. No. No.
To me, we live in a—I mean, James Kirkpatrick of V-Dare put it best.
The only opposition that exists out there to Trump is the media.
And guess what? They are the gatekeepers of this anti-white paradigm that we live under, that we will continue to live under.
Until their ability to control the narrative is broken.
And any white person that went out there and tried to do what happened at the Milo Yiannopoulos event.
Say that Cornell West was going to give a talk.
Or say that Tainese Coast was going to give a talk.
And a bunch of white people showed up wearing masks.
And they said, no, we're going to beat you.
We're going to hurt and harm police officers.
We're going to attack these innocent black bodies.
And deny... I agree.
Yes, there is something to admire, but they are nothing more than the shock troops of the establishment.
Any white person or any white group of people who dared to deny Tainese coaches' ability to speak at, say, University of Maryland or at NYU, like what happened to Gavin McGinnis, they would become a pariah beyond any that we've had.
See, at this point in time, it would be a remarkable and extraordinary thing.
It would show the utter and contemptible hypocrisy of the entire American establishment if such a thing were to happen.
Now would be the time to do something like that.
I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just advocating the possibility of showing up en masse to protest.
And if there are enough people protesting, then something could happen.
Because institutions never expect a demonstration against Ta-Nehisi Coates, for example.
If 200 people showed up and screamed, they'd be so intimidated, they'd probably cancel without even the hint of violence.
You wouldn't have to break a single law.
And that would be such a remarkable concept with what's happening today.
In any case, it's an interesting...
I agree with you.
I don't advocate that anything happen like that, but I would say that, yes, it's a thought experiment, but I would just simply point out what media is going to broadcast this 24-7.
What newspaper is going to editorialize on how, oh, this is great, like what happened with Milo Minneapolis at Berkeley, where hundreds of people protested.
They stopped the speech. I think?
I just don't believe that there is a media apparatus yet.
You can't just rely on Breitbart to try and get this out.
No, but Paul, if Ta-Nehisi Coates were prevented from speaking, For whatever reason, at whatever locale, that would be coast-to-coast news.
That would be on every television station.
You could not suppress that because that is exactly the idea that the left has about the right, that we behave as they themselves behave.
And even if with strictly legal means, the most peaceful means, if there were some way to clog the gears to the extent that they could not enter the parking lot or whatever it was, the speech got cancelled, I think that would be a remarkable thing.
It would certainly be covered and it would really set people to thinking.
I'd like to think so anyway.
Well, the state, of course, has the monopoly on violence.
And the thing that we don't realize yet, one of the subjects you wanted to talk about was this number of police that had their cars vandalized in the suburb of Indianapolis.
I believe it's called Whitestown.
Where, in a number of subdivisions just north of Indianapolis, police officers parked their car in what you would think would be a safe subdivision, safe neighborhood, safe community.
It's where they live. It's where they live.
And a number of cars were destroyed, broken windows, tires slashed.
You know, none of the homes had any vandalism.
There was no robbery.
The vandals only did this to intimidate the police to write disparaging messages.
You know, FWPD... F the Whitestown Police Department, Jared.
And, you know, Indianapolis is one of those cities that I've been writing about at SBPDL.com for a while because it is a city that in 1990, Jared, was 78% white.
And it is now down to about 59% white.
It's largely...
It's been... A lot of Hispanic illegal immigration has gone there.
The black population has only increased a little to about 28%.
But for...
I want to say...
42 out of the past 50 years, Indianapolis has had a Republican mayor.
And they've done nothing.
The Republicans did nothing to stymie the rising tide of color, the white flight.
They did nothing to try and improve the lives of white.
The police department does everything they can to try and increase...
Community relations. About seven or eight years ago, they hired a black police chief from Baltimore who had been part of the really radical black police union.
I think it's called the Vanguard Union in Baltimore, just this radically pro-black police union.
He went there to try and reach out to all of the black ministers because Indianapolis is one of those cities.
There's been no black lives before.
Black Lives Matter violence there, yet they continue to break the homicide record each year, Jared, because blacks are just out of control.
And they're largely killing each other, although I have seen the crime data.
And for the past five years, there's been far more black on white murders than there have been white on black.
No one cares, though, because whites don't have any legitimate interests to live, as the left has made quite clear.
No one cares.
But, you know, Jared, I'm at a point now where I believe that police, they so want...
You know, police officers' families, they so want someone like Trump.
You know, Trump just gave that great speech at the Sheriff's Association meeting in D.C. And he said, we want to work with you.
You guys know where the bad guys are.
We want you to work with the Department of Homeland Security.
We want to unleash you to do the job to protect your communities.
And I think that's music to the police officers' ears nationwide.
Because they go home every day knowing, or they wake up every morning knowing, or if they wake up to go on their night shift, They might not see their family again.
And in our increasingly polarized climate, they might also be aware that a large segment of the population that they're supposedly sworn to protect and defend would be glad to see them lose their life.
Well, see, that's what's remarkable about this Whitestown Police Department episode.
As a matter of fact, it was people from a number of different agencies all living in this community here.
But the people who did that knew where they were.
They knew that police officers lived there.
When there was a police cruiser parked outside, they knew that, so they'd smash the windows, slash the tires.
If the cruiser was not there, what they would do is write F the WPD, Whitestone Police Department, on the garage doors.
They knew that is where they were living.
This is very disturbing stuff.
People who are so, so alienated against law and order, so hate the police that they're going to find them where they live and intimidate them in that way.
And imagine the families of these police officers.
They at least don't think that they're in the line of fire.
Well, they certainly feel like they're in the line of fire now.
And that is, of course, precisely what those perpetrators wanted them to feel.
And I would bet you any amount of money the people who did that were not BLM. I bet they were the same black block, overwhelmingly white people who went out and did that.
We may never know. There's a story.
Last year in Indianapolis, a police officer had his house attacked.
A black guy shows up wearing a Black Lives Matter shirt.
This is true.
This is insane. He shows up and he fires a number of rounds at the officer's house.
They captured him about a week later, if I remember correctly, and the Indianapolis police The police commissioner, he tried to downplay that element.
It's like, are you kidding me?
We've had five white police officers killed in Dallas, an event that no one cares to even remember anymore, on July 9th, I believe, of 2016.
Twelve officers injured, five white officers dead.
You know, this is one of the things that I still believe, you know, it's been an interesting couple weeks that Donald Trump has been president, Jared.
We've got some amazing constitutional battles about to happen and be decided upon by a Supreme Court that only has eight members right now.
So you're right, the 4-4 decision, it goes back to the lower court.
It becomes the law of the land. However, I still believe that the big battles are going to be about deportation and the ability for the police to work with the DHS to try and begin to regain control of some of these communities.
Where drugs, where illegal gangs, illegal alien gangs, MS-13 have a stronghold of foothold because of the fear that these police officers have when they go to Roundup that there will be an attack.
And I believe that the moment that a police officer is harmed or an ICE officer or a DHS officer is harmed in this, you will see the police...
Rally around together nationwide.
You will see Americans who believe in law and order and who don't believe in this idea that people like Richard Spencer should be punched presumptively based on their beliefs.
You will see those who believe in law and order rally around and embrace police.
And you will see Donald Trump and Jeff Sessions Hug that entire group as they mourn together.
And that, to me, the law and order message was what elected Donald Trump in a lot of ways, Jared.
And I believe that that is going to be what unites America to really work to start making America great again.
Well, I certainly hope so.
And as I said, what the left is doing now, the way they've behaved ever since the election of Donald Trump, I think is going to push millions of people quietly into our arms.
So, on that cheerful note, we will see you next time.
Always a pleasure, Brother Kersey.
▲
Export Selection