Monday, May 22, 2017

Raimondo Rips "Donald of Arabia"

Justin Raimondo writes in an essay titled: Donald of Arabia: A Disgusting Spectacle:
 Has there been a more disgusting spectacle during the four months of this presidency than the sight of Donald Trump slobbering all over the barbarous Saudi monarch and his murderous family of petty princelings? It’s enough to make any normal American retch...
The old Trump told us that the Saudis were “mouth pieces, bullies, cowards,” who were “paying ISIS,” but now they’re our partners in the “war on terrorism.” Why it seems like only yesterday that he was calling out Saudi princes like Alwaleed bin Talal for thinking they can “control our US politicians” – today he’s kowtowing to them.
Meanwhile, the crazed neocon war hawk John Bolton tells us in a new op-ed that Trump's speech was a  "good start" for [more war]:
 Donald Trump made Saudi Arabia the first stop on his first presidential trip abroad for a reason. His speech Sunday in Riyadh was a principal factor in that decision, inviting as it does close comparison to Barack Obama’s June 2009, Cairo speech. Trump’s rhetoric wins hands down....

Once ISIS is eliminated from the territory it now holds in the region, the next strategic issue is countering Iran’s coalition, including its surrogates controlling Iraq’s government; the Assad regime in Syria; and Hezbollah in Lebanon (now extending into parts of Syria).

Preparing for possible conflict with Iran is very much on the minds of the Arab leaders Trump just met....

Trump’s speech brought welcome relief to his Arab audience after eight years of Obama’s blindness to Iranian and terrorist threats. But actions must follow. What he needs to accomplish most urgently is the expedited destruction of the ISIS “caliphate” in Iraq and Syria, followed by concrete steps to eliminate Iran’s nuclear-weapons program, and ultimately the ayatollah’s regime. If such actions follow his words, then his speech will have been a success.

And "hypnotist" Scott Adams remains completely under the Trump ether:


  1. Adams is 100% correct. Trump is getting stronger. When concrete evidence on Seth Rich drops, the narrative of the past 18 months will instantly flip. Trump's critics on the left are silenced. The internal leaks stop. Establishment Republicans will throw themselves at Trump. Trump moves on to his policy agenda.

    Probably bad for libertarians. We already lost Stone and Bannon (neither are actual libertarians) and Trump ideologically is some kind of combination of Herbert Hoover / Teddy Roosevelt. Republicans are only against that style of governance when they're out of power.

    Raimondo is 100% correct too. Candidate Trump was way better on foreign policy than is President Trump. Just like Obama and Bush before him. Sad!

  2. Funny--I recently had a discussion with someone who runs a liberty oriented blog, who said the following:

    "Non-aggression seems to be and absolute for you. It isn't for me.

    In most cases, non-aggression is the best posture for me but I would without hesitation grab the opportunity to be King of Saudi Arabia if I was offered that throne."

    1. Yikes, at least he's honest I suppose. So he believes in freedom primarily because he doesn't make the rules. Unless he has some ulterior motive.

  3. I have this feeling that Trump actually does have a plan. The Seth Rich story finally surfacing, the story about how Trump will be firing some staffers and now a story about the leakers actually being found... very interesting stuff.

    On the Arabia thing, of course Trump is sucking up to them. Do you think he really wants to have to deal with the death of the Petro dollar today? What do you want him to do? Seriously though, this is a real question. If the US abandoned the Sauds or insulted their leadership on their own soil, the effects would be immediate and horrible as gas prices fly through the roof and our other 'allies' become concerned about how solid the word of the US is. This is realpolitik in action.
    What would Raimondo have him do? Trump is in a pickle.

  4. Adams isn't wrong. The problem is that Adams is coming from what is good for Trump, rather than what is good for America. This is great for Trump, terrible for America. It's a political master move.