@TimOBrien writer of 2005 book TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald tweeted following on 7/16/2019:
The above scenario only makes sense if the goal has been all along to establish an authoritarian government in the USA by GOP conservative special interests who have figured out that the future voting demographics favor the Democratic Party, bigly.
Does anyone believe that these dark money GOP donors would graciously accept the reality that all the monies they have invested over the years in owning the Republican Party will be for naught? The GOP lawmakers like Pavlovian dogs have learned to jump to their demands as they’ve become dependent on their huge donations. So what, if it takes racist remarks to motivate the base to get out and vote; if foreign policy isn’t conducted with consideration as to what’s is the best national security interests of the USA, if Central American refugee children and families of color are being subjected to “crimes against humanity” in the name of the USA at the US SW border; and/or climate change science is being ignored and discounted.
One of the ways President Trump initially introduced racism into his rhetoric was at the start of his 2015 campaign on the Trump Tower’s elevator area, with anti-immigration tirades pertaining mostly to Mexicans. He promised to deal with the undocumented in a decisive way, because Mexico has dispatched the dregs of its society — “rapists” and “criminals” — to the United States. Later, he referred to them as “bad hombres.”
These are President Trump’s own words on 2 occasions:
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
— Donald Trump, announcement speech, June 2015
“One of my first acts will be to get all of the drug lords, all of the bad ones — we have some bad, bad people in this country that have to go out. We’re going to get them out. We’re going to secure the border. And once the border is secured, at a later date, we’ll make a determination as to the rest. But we have some bad hombres here, and we’re going to get them out.”
— Donald Trump, third and final presidential debate
Here’s the truth about what immigration adds to the USA culture, and which explains why diversity is highly valued by the vast majority of Americans: axios.com/Study: Immigrants and their kids founded 45% of U.S. Fortune 500 companies …
Here’s the rest of the story…
On July 19, 2019, Greg Sargent of the Washington Post penned the following op-ed piece, “New GOP panic about Trump’s racism reveals an ugly truth”
Excerpts:
“Credulous pundits told us for days that President Trump’s racist attacks on nonwhite lawmakers were brilliant politics, but Republicans disagree: They are widely warning Trump that presiding over a rally chant of “send her back,” directed at a refugee congresswoman, is putting the party at serious political risk.”
“Trump pretended to disavow the chant on Thursday, claiming he didn’t approve even though video contradicts this, and we are now learning from the New York Times that he came under intense private pressure to do so, including from Vice President Pence and Ivanka Trump.”
“Yet even as many Republicans profess discomfort with Trump’s display, here’s what else is happening: Trump is effectively trying to end asylum-seeking at the Southern border, and Politico now reports that the administration is seriously mulling an effort to slash refugee admissions to near-zero.”
“Generally speaking, Republicans are unlikely to be troubled by these radical, extreme changes.”
“These things aren’t necessarily contradictory. It’s theoretically possible to support dramatic asylum and refugee cuts for reasons not rooted in the white nationalism driving Trump’s attacks on Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), a refugee, and the other lawmakers, all U.S.-born racial, ethnic or religious minorities.”
“But it’s now inarguable that Trump’s overall immigration agenda is shaped around the broader goal of preventing as many people as possible from getting asylum and refugee status here, even if they qualify for it on the merits.”
“Given the totality of what we’ve seen, it’s also inarguable that underlying that is the goal of dramatically reducing the number of immigrants admitted to this country. And as Trump’s own rhetoric has repeatedly confirmed, this is inescapably about reducing the number of nonwhite immigrants here.”
“You can locate a zone of plausible deniability, in which one can claim support for such policies on pragmatic, economic or “cultural” grounds, and not out of any desire to make the US whiter. It’s precisely this zone that Republicans now seek to inhabit.”
“That’s why the GOP panic about the “send her back” chant is significant. It shines a floodlight into this zone and reveals why it’s so hard to credibly inhabit it.”
Why “send her back” is a breaking point
“What’s it about “send her back” that suddenly crossed a line? Consider the timeline:”
- “Trump tweets that the lawmakers should “go back” to their countries, characterizing them as corrupt hellholes (echoing his “s—-hole countries” comment), even though three were born here. That elicits only a bit of discomfort from Republicans.”
- “Trump then says, “if you hate our country, if you’re not happy here, you can leave.” Trump repeats this: “YOU CAN LEAVE!” Republicans defend this framing, piously pretending it has no racial dimension, even though it was directed at only minority lawmakers.”
- “Trump presides over the “send her back” chant. After criticism erupts, including among some Republicans, Trump pretends to “disagree” with it.”
Why did the last open the floodgates? The Times tells us Republicans fear telling lawmakers to get out will “backfire” because it appears “personal.” Yet Trump had repeatedly said to “go back” and “leave.”
What changed? Well, the Times also reports that Trump advisers privately warned against letting these sentiments get out of control at his rally.
Link: washingtonpost.com/ Opinion | New GOP panic about Trump’s racism reveals an ugly truth …
Gronda Morin 
Gronda, let me speak plainly. A person who endangers others to win poltically is not a leader. They are promoting violence which is criminal behavior. Through his bullying, lying and denigrating of critics, he is providing kindling amd stoking the fire of his more extreme followers. A Louisiana lawmaker said what elected Congresswoman Omar needs is a bullet. Really?
GOP legislators who have gone along with this corrupt person’s behavior are beyond lying for a lying person, they are abettimg corrupt and criminal behavior. Just to show I am not speaking out of turn, renowned conservative writer George Will said recently “Trump is more corrupt than Richard Nixon.” I agree. Keith
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear Keith,
George Will’s analysis is right on the money as President Trump makes President Nixon like an amateur in comparison.
In a way, he’s done the US peoples a favor as he’s now out of the closest. There’s no subtlety, nuance, dog whistle. President Trump, the GOP congressional lawmakers and GOP dark money donors have taken off their masks. They have now advertised that they all are flaming the embers of racism into a major fire.
GOP congressional members will now be feathered and tarred with the word of racism. They are now naked for all the world to see and this is a very ugly picture.
Hugs, Gronda
LikeLike
Gronda, as former Republicans, we need to consistently remind our former party legislators that they must find their better angels and call this person on the carpet. I continue to not refer to the US president as a man, because a real man is accountable and responsible and when I think of Donald J Trump, neither of those words come to mind. I make this point as he has used a “false bravado” to sell his toughness to his followers.Keith
LikeLiked by 1 person
It would seem that both the Republican Party and a large portion of our society are rapidly devolving into something very ugly, something we expect to see in third world countries, not in a country that once was considered the leader of the free world. The question becomes, how do we stop the bleeding, how do we restore integrity to our government before it’s too late? I don’t know the answer, for Trump seems to have taken for himself unlimited power to do whatever he pleases, and the GOP seem to be too confused to reign him in. As for his followers? I fear there will be blood shed before this is over. Sigh. Hugs, my friend.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dear Jill,
I remember hesitating referring to President Trump reminding me of Nazism but now the this classification feels right.
This is why I’m convinced we can’t afford not to have every possible tool that the US government has at its disposal to stop this authoritarian wanna-be in his tracks, including the House commencing an impeachment inquiry/ investigation.
This is a leader who’ll push the envelop until he get what he wants. We can’t afford another 14 months of him in power. He’s already staffed key government institutions with his yes guys, like the DOJ head, AG Barr, the US Senate with the Maj Ldr Mitch McConnell and the Senate’s Judiciary Committee’s chair, Senator Graham; the US Supreme Court with Justice Brett Kavanaugh; not to mention all the other departments like EPA, DHS, Dept. of Education, etc.
Frankly, this president is the #1 threat to this country’s national security interests.
Hugs, Gronda
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gronda, I agree with him being the number one security risk. The world is far less safer with him pulling out of multilateral agreements and belittling allied cooperation. I can just envision the descriptive words other countries use to describe our US president. What Kim Darroch wrote is likely mild in contrast. Keith
LikeLiked by 1 person
I did not hesitate to make the Nazi comparison right from the beginning, but people told me I was nuts, was chasing shadows, was being an extremist. Many of those people now agree with me. As you know, I was with Pelosi on holding off on the impeachment inquiry, but no more. I was so disappointed last week … not surprised, but definitely disappointed … when they voted against the articles of impeachment. At the risk of being crass and vulgar, we need to do WHATEVER it takes to get this bastard out of office!
My fear, my genuine fear, is that he will be re-elected in 2020 … not honestly, but nonetheless re-elected … and that it will be the last presidential election we will see in mine or your lifetime. And therefore, we simply must impeach, even if the wussy Senate cannot find their cojones to convict. Sigh.
Hugs!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear Jill,
Once the Impeachment Inquiry is commenced, it’s the House Judiciary Committee that will be the one committee conducting all the heavy lifting for the collection of evidence. There’s so much to investigate that the House will be at this for at least a year. But in the meantime, there will be world wide daily media coverage regarding all the criminal activities by President Trump and his GOP sycophants in the White House, the US Congress and others, drip, drip, drip, like HRC’s email scandal.
It’s time to hold these wanna-be authoritarian racist trafficking GOP members, accountable.
Hugs, Gronda
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree … I think the clock is running out and it’s now or never. Meanwhile, this is causing disunity in the democratic party that is the last thing we need right now. Hugs!
LikeLiked by 1 person