Geert Wilders and the Real Story of the Election

Following-up, "The Dutch Coalition Government."

From Daniel Greenfield, at FrontPage Magazine:

Geert Wilders and the Real Story of the Election https://t.co/Jx82X5jiwG

— Geert Wilders (@geertwilderspvv) March 16, 2017

New Michael Brown Video Prompts Massive Round of Fake News

This is so stupid. Even Obama's own Justice Department couldn't exonerate the thug Mike Brown.

At NYT, via Memeorandum, "New Ferguson Video Adds Wrinkle to Michael Brown Case."

And at Conservative Treehouse, "CNN Tries Another Michael Brown Con Job – Everything About The “New” Mike Brown Video is Fraud Here’s Proof…," and from Ed Driscoll, at Instapundit, "NO. NEXT QUESTION? DOES NEW VIDEO IN THE MICHAEL BROWN CASE CHANGE ANYTHING?"

Still more, at Gateway Pundit, "VERY FAKE NEWS: CNN Releases New Mike Brown Video at Convenience Store – Suggests It’s From Day of Shooting."

Far-Right Surge in the Far-Left Netherlands

As you know, I don't think populist nationalist parties are "far-right," but WaPo insists on the terminology, despite the support for Geert Wilders' insurgent parliamentary campaign among people we'd normally call center-left.

A great piece, surprisingly.

At the Washington Post:

Anti-immigrant anger threatens to remake the liberal Netherlands https://t.co/5OvIlBfutY

— Washington Post (@washingtonpost) March 12, 2017

The New Nationalism in America

From Matthew Continetti, at Free Beacon:

The New Nationalism in America: How conservatism is changing in the Trump era https://t.co/ytTqhBYbTx via @continetti pic.twitter.com/GtJZRFZkCi

— Free Beacon (@FreeBeacon) February 24, 2017

FLASHBACK: "The Political Establishment's Terrified by Donald Trump's 'Tangible American Nationalism'."

Hey Lefitsts, a Little Something for Your Butt-Hurt?

Heh.

Seen on Twitter.

Maybe everyone that is never Trump will find this helpful. pic.twitter.com/FomzdYzhgO

— Russian Hotties (@hottiesfortrump) January 17, 2017

Goldman Sachs, With Long History of Public Service, Makes Return to Washington in Trump Administration

This is pretty fascinating.

At NYT, "Goldman Sachs Completes Return From Wilderness to the White House":

“Government Sachs” is back. In the Trump administration, economic policy making is being handed to Goldman alumni. https://t.co/xOpGGxPGl3

— The New York Times (@nytimes) January 12, 2017

“Government Sachs” is back.

After eight years in the political wilderness, its name synonymous with the supposedly undue and self-serving influence in Washington that brought us the financial crisis and the Wall Street bailout, Goldman Sachs is again making its presence felt. In the Trump administration, to an unprecedented degree, economic policy making is largely being handed over to people with Goldman ties.

The Goldman alumni include Steven T. Mnuchin, the nominee for Treasury secretary; Gary D. Cohn, tapped as director of the National Economic Council and White House adviser on economic policy; and Stephen K. Bannon, who was named chief White House strategist. Jay Clayton, named to head the Securities and Exchange Commission, is a Wall Street lawyer who has represented Goldman.

This week President-elect Donald J. Trump hired Dina H. Powell, a Goldman partner who heads impact investing, as a White House adviser. Anthony Scaramucci, a Goldman alumnus (whom I spotlighted last week), is on the Trump transition committee and is expected to be named to a White House position as well.

And this after Mr. Trump campaigned against Wall Street, excoriated Senator Ted Cruz for his ties to Goldman, and castigated Hillary Clinton for giving paid speeches to big banks, Goldman among them.

The Goldman influx has so far drawn little criticism, perhaps because worries about what once would have been deemed undue influence now mix with relief that there is some adult supervision in the executive branch.

On balance, “it’s a plus,” Michael R. Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor who built his fortune on Wall Street, told me this week. “Whatever you may think of them individually, you can’t get to be a Goldman partner and survive if you’re stupid, lazy or unprofessional.” (Mr. Bloomberg is co-chairman of Goldman’s “10,000 Small Businesses” initiative, which provides support to fledgling entrepreneurs.)

Whatever bricks Mr. Trump threw at Wall Street during the campaign, investors have cheered his victory, driving the stock market to new highs. And Goldman has been a particular beneficiary, with its shares gaining 35 percent since Election Day — the top-performing stock in the Dow Jones industrial average in that time.

Mr. Trump, a spokeswoman of his told me, sees no contradiction here. There’s a difference between individuals who happen to have worked at Goldman Sachs, at some point in their careers, and Goldman Sachs itself. “He’s said from the beginning that he’ll hire the very best people for the job regardless of where they worked before, which is what he’s done throughout his career,” said the spokeswoman, Hope Hicks.

While the firm’s influence in a Trump administration may reach a new apex, Goldman alumni have long been fixtures in both Republican and Democratic administrations. The Goldman legend Sidney J. Weinberg headed Franklin D. Roosevelt’s influential Business Advisory and Planning Council.

Recent Treasury secretaries with Goldman roots include Robert E. Rubin, a former co-chairman, under Bill Clinton; and Henry M. Paulson Jr., a former chairman and chief executive, under George W. Bush.

Even in the Obama administration, where a Goldman pedigree was something akin to a scarlet letter, Gary Gensler was credited with reviving a moribund Commodity Futures Trading Commission and might have been Treasury secretary had Mrs. Clinton won in November.

Which raises the question: Why would such a disproportionate number of the “best people,” in Mr. Trump’s view, come from just one bank? After all, Goldman is hardly the only large bank, and it is also far from the biggest. It employs roughly 33,000 people; JPMorgan Chase’s work force is many times as large.

Many point to a unique Goldman culture that has long encouraged public service and philanthropy as integral to its business model.

Goldman “does seem to produce people who are very smart and have valuable experience,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “And they have a culture and a long tradition of leaving the firm for public service. The firm pushes them to do that.”

More.

President Obama Surprises Vice President Joe Biden with Presidential Medal of Freedom (VIDEO)

Biden was generally surprised.

He truly thought it was a farewell ceremony, and that folks were mostly going to say good things about each other, blah, blah. And then the president announced the award.

I'll be glad when this administration is gone, and I frankly don't remember so much glad-handing, back-slapping, and mutual encomiums when the G.W. Bush administration left office. I think O's taken narcissism to a whole new level.

Still, I gotta admit this moment was pretty amazing. That's genuine emotion coming from the vice president (who, I believe, is a decent man, despite his far-left proclivities).

The story's at USA Today.

And at CNN, which I had going live in real time:

Manhunt Still Underway for Suspect Accused of Murdering Orlando Police Officer: Reward Raised to $100,000 (VIDEO)

We should be having nationwide protests against the demonic murderers of police officers, especially black police officers.

This is horrific. The suspect's still on the loose.

At the Orlando Sentinel, "Orlando police killer reward raised to $100,000; suspect still on run."

Chicago Facebook Beating and Torture Video: Window Into a Depraved Culture

I though of Heather Mac Donald almost immediately when the story broke.

No one's got this beat nailed down better than she does.

At City Journal, "A Window Into a Depraved Culture."

There's no easy block quotes, so read it all at the link.

And don't forget Ms. Heather's wonderful book, The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe.

A Window Into a Depraved Culture https://t.co/LNDiVXRV9E

— Manhattan Institute (@ManhattanInst) January 10, 2017

With Six Tweets, Trump Gives Taste of What's to Come

I've been arguing, mostly in conversations offline, that Trump should ditch his Twitter feed after he takes office. He should tweet from the official POTUS account and keep it professional. No personal attacks. No attacks on intelligence agencies, etc.

But it's been reported that he won't stop tweeting after the inauguration. If so, it's going to set a new precedent in presidential leadership and political communications. His successors won't be bound by norms of propriety and professionalism. Trump's in fact changing what it means to be a professional president. He's a showman in office. It's going to be a wild ride.

My only concern is with reelection in 2020. We really need him to serve eight years if we want to build a long-lasting bulwark against the left's onslaught on society and basic decency. I'd hate for his tweeting to be a liability, but it wasn't in 2016, so perhaps it's a new era?

In any case, here's the latest at WSJ, "Six Tweets in 80 Minutes: Trump Gives New Congress a Taste of What’s to Come":

Wow, the ratings are in and Arnold Schwarzenegger got "swamped" (or destroyed) by comparison to the ratings machine, DJT. So much for....

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2017

being a movie star-and that was season 1 compared to season 14. Now compare him to my season 1. But who cares, he supported Kasich & Hillary

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2017

In a span of about 80 minutes on Friday morning, President-elect Donald Trump signaled what Congress and the American public may have in store for the next four years.

From 6:19 a.m. to 7:42 a.m., Mr. Trump posted six messages on Twitter in which he criticized the media, tweaked a promise to pay for a border wall and derided Arnold Schwarzenegger for a TV ratings flop—on a show that Mr. Trump himself is producing.

It may have been par for the course for candidate Trump, but it capped an extraordinary first week of a new Republican-controlled Congress eager to do business with President-elect Trump, who in turn got a taste for what life will be like in the nation’s capital as the 45th president two weeks from now.

It was a study in contrasts. Mr. Trump’s rapid-fire missives about an assortment of topics clashed with typical Washington political tactics that prioritize message discipline and avoiding overexposure.

Right from the start, Mr. Trump and his team seemed intent on influencing and, if necessary, overwhelming Washington’s political establishment—the Republicans, Democrats and the news media—that some in the incoming administration view as hurdles to connecting with American voters.

It was a successful battle plan during his 17-month presidential campaign. Mr. Trump’s formula for controlled chaos largely kept opponents on their heels as he rolled over more than a dozen Republican rivals and a better financed and more politically experienced Democratic presidential nominee.

The week appeared to start where the campaign left off, with a Trump criticism of one of the Congress’s first major acts—a Republican proposal to weaken an ethics watchdog. The party quickly abandoned the proposal after the president-elect tweeted his disapproval.

But as it wore on, the challenges of Mr. Trump’s continued strategy became more apparent. At times, his unique approach stirred confusion inside the Capitol and within his own team, according to officials in both places.

When Republicans in Congress started to plan the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, a move that Mr. Trump called for on the campaign trail, he took to Twitter to warn them to be careful of the political consequences and that the health-insurance system would fall under its own weight.

With that, more notes of caution were raised within his own party, leaving the Republican strategy for ending the Affordable Care Act looking more tenuous. Mr. Trump soon found his voice again in mocking Democrats seeking to save the act as clowns, but key Republican lawmakers, including Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.), said late in the week they wanted to settle on a replacement plan before beginning the complex task of repealing the law...

The New Yorker Mocks Trump Voters in Political Cartoon

I saw the buzz on this on Twitter a few days ago.

People were Photoshopping the hell out of this cartoon, by Will McPhail, for the New Yorker:

One from this week's @NewYorker. Hello politics, my names Will. pic.twitter.com/5LfNYnOgMA

— Will McPhail (@WillMcPhail) January 2, 2017

And here's the debate at today's editorial page, "When a cartoon is not just a cartoon: Mastio & Lawrence" (via Instapundit).

And see Legal Insurrection, "The New Yorker’s view of the world, updated for Trump victory," and the Blaze, "New Yorker cartoon sums up anti-elite national mood, angers many."

Do you think there was actually someone at the New Yorker who thought this cartoon made sense, or is it just 100% trolling? pic.twitter.com/EeSC4l7ogS

— Seth Mandel (@SethAMandel) January 2, 2017

This sums up what liberals think.
Understand, they think you are stupid + need to obey.@exjon @stephenkruiser @AceofSpadesHQ @LarryOConnor https://t.co/pEY2Aedz5H

— Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) January 2, 2017

Donald Trump Tweets Happy New Year to 'My Enemies' Who 'Lost So Badly...'

Heh.

He's the best.

Donald Trump hits back at Democrats in triumphant tweet mocking Barack Obama's sanctions on Russia https://t.co/cJkTWxAj4k pic.twitter.com/bLeVXamZIg

— Daily Mail US (@DailyMail) December 31, 2016

Trump tweets: Happy new year to my enemies who "lost so badly" https://t.co/taDkSWHLDD pic.twitter.com/NkT1ABWpfG

— The Hill (@thehill) December 31, 2016

Obama Claims Trump's Election Wasn't Repudiation of His Ideological Vision (VIDEO)

Sure, go ahead and delude yourself Mr. President.

The fact is, November 8th saw the most beautiful ideological "shellacking" ever, heh.

At LAT, "Obama: Trump's election wasn't necessarily a rejection of my worldview":

President Obama acknowledged Tuesday that voters may have elected Donald Trump in part out of “natural desires for change,” but he batted down the idea that American voters gave an “outright rejection of my worldview.”

Hours after arriving in Greece to begin his final foreign tour as president, Obama tried to explain the American election, allowing elliptically for the first time that Trump’s election might have been a repudiation of his own presidency.

Presidential elections, Obama said, can turn on personalities as well as campaigns. Sometimes there are “natural desires for change when you have an incumbent who’s been there for eight years,” Obama said.

Still, “a pretty healthy majority of the American people agree” with his vision, Obama said, even though they did not elect Democrat Hillary Clinton on her promise to continue it.

“Sometimes people just feel as if we want to try something to see if we can shake things up, and that, I suspect, was a significant phenomenon,” Obama said.

Defending his record, Obama said key elements of his economic agenda for eight years — raising wages, investing in infrastructure and education — were directed at addressing the kind of anxiety that Trump successfully tapped into throughout his campaign.

"The problem was, I couldn't convince a Republican Congress to pass a lot of them," he said. "Having said that, people seem to think I did a pretty good job. And so there is this mismatch between frustration and anger."

Reacting to Trump’s stunning election upset for the second time in less than a day, this time on foreign soil, Obama drew a distinction between Trump’s victory and the so-called Brexit vote in Britain this summer, but also reflected on how nationalist sentiment that is threatening European unity might inhibit America’s own success...

More.

Kris Kobach Says He's 'Drafting Plan for Muslim Registry'

Fine with me.

We're at war for crying out loud. And as much as I pledge to be nice to them, it's not like Muslim residents are turning in the jihadists in their midst. In fact, it's probably the opposite: they're aiding and abetting them. God forbid we have another San Bernardino.

At PuffHo, of all places, "Reported Trump Immigration Advisor and Potential Attorney General is Drafting Plan for Muslim Registry."

I would love if Kobach got the nod for attorney general!

PREVIOUSLY: "Muslims Fear for the Lives (VIDEO)."

Muslims Fear for the Lives (VIDEO)

Following-up, "'Tolerant' Campus Administrators Exclude Trump Voters."

I attended the "safe places" event yesterday at my college, and two young Muslim women were there. They both wear the hijab, and one reports that's she's been harassed on campus since the election and the other says she's been living in fear for her life, even before the election. She thinks it's going to get worse after the inauguration.

I don't have any reason to discount their experiences. It's ugly all around. All I can say to people, as I've done in my classes, is that everyone deserves respect regardless of their background, religion, or political preferences. I'll continue to do that.

I'm also advocating for more resources on my campus. I think the best way for leftists to get used to the Trump era is for them to feel safe and included. I know media types will keep fanning the flames of division, so as a conservative I'm out to prove them wrong. That's what you have to do. Prove the leftist fuckers wrong.

In any case, at CNN:

'Tolerant' Campus Administrators Exclude Trump Voters

Actually, I'm having the time of my life. Students have been asking me if I'm "okay," thinking I was a Hillary Clinton supporter. That's because I try to teach it down the middle and not let my own ideological predisposition influence my instruction. It's not hard, being a former Democrat, as I know exactly what warms the hearts of progressives, but then if I go too easy on the Democrats the conservative students think I'm "biased."

I guess that's better than being hounded as a conservative, which has of course happened in the past when my blogging has become an issue on campus.

In any case, I'm actually sympathetic to students who are sad, but at this point it's time to buck up and move on. Moping around all depressed about it won't change a thing. Trump's coming and folks better get used to it, or at the least start mobilizing for the next round of elections.

In any case, here's Professor Glenn Reynolds, at USA Today, "'Tolerant' educators exile Trump voters from campus":

Official safe spaces marginalize Republicans as the 'other' and turn universities into a joke.

One of the more amusing bits of fallout from last week’s election has been the safe-space response of many colleges and universities to the election of the “wrong” candidate. But on closer examination, this response isn’t really amusing. In fact, it’s downright mean.

Donald Trump’s substantial victory, when most progressives expected a Hillary Clinton landslide, came as a shock to many. That shock seems to have been multiplied in academe, where few people seem to know any Trump supporters — or, at least, any Trump supporters who’ll admit to it.

The response to the shock has been to turn campuses into kindergarten. The University of Michigan Law School announced a ”post-election self-care” event with “food" and "play,” including “coloring sheets, play dough (sic), positive card-making, Legos and bubbles with your fellow law students.” (Embarrassed by the attention, UM Law scrubbed the announcement from its website, perhaps concerned that people would wonder whether its graduates would require Legos and bubbles in the event of stressful litigation.)

Stanford emailed its students and faculty that psychological counseling was available for those experiencing “uncertainty, anger, anxiety and/or fear” following the election. So did the University of Michigan’s Flint campus.

Meanwhile, even the Ivy League wasn’t immune, with the University of Pennsylvania (Trump’s alma mater) creating a post-election safe space with puppies and coloring books:

Student Daniel Tancredi reported that the people who attended were “fearful” about the results of the election.

“For the most part, students just hung out and ate snacks and made small talk,” Tancredi told "The College Fix." “Of course, that was in addition to coloring and playing with the animals.”

Keep reading.

Funny enough, I'm going to attend a "safe spaces" lunchtime meeting tomorrow, mostly because I want to make sure students get accurate information, particularly on immigration (deportations could increase, although the "build the wall" might not play out in concrete policy right off the bat).

More on that later.

From Brexit to Trump

Britain's Douglas Murray nails it, at Foreign Affairs, "Giving the Elites a Hard Kick":

The two big electoral events of 2016—Brexit and the election of Donald Trump as the next U.S. president—were seemingly conjoined from the moment the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. That historic day in June was a sign that American voters might also choose, once given the chance, to give their ruling elites as hard a kick as possible, for as many reasons as possible. And just as the European Commission, a symbol of elitism, became the target for the British public, so too did Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton become a target for the American public on election day.

The two political upheavals are united in that both societies include a class of people whose job prospects have been wrecked by the outsourcing of labor, people for whom globalization is a problem rather than an opportunity. Perhaps the most important similarity, at least in the long term, will be that both events raise the possibility of a new left-right hybrid in domestic politics: one that learns from the years of lax immigration and the years of lax economics. This hybrid acknowledges the failures of right-wing free-market economics, favoring forms of protectionism over internationalism in trade policies; it also ignores some of the restraining shibboleths of left and right in recent years, instead recognizing legitimate fears of economic competition from abroad and the social concerns that immigration can bring...

More at that top link.

Bwahaha! European Union Meets to 'Rethink' Defense Policy Under Donald Trump Administration

The E.U. is the epitome of the unaccountable elite, and now these despicable hacks are hating life.

I love it.

At the link is Federica Mogherini, the Italian Marxist who's been pushing an Islamo-communist agenda since she came to power as an E.U. apparatchik.

Fuck 'em.

At WSJ, "EU Meets to Rethink Defense Options Under Trump Presidency":

BRUSSELS — European foreign and defense ministers met Monday to approve ways of expanding their security cooperation as pressure builds on Europe to increase its own military spending with the election of Donald Trump.

Expanding European defense cooperation has long been controversial, with a number of proposals in the past blocked by Britain, which preferred to work to strengthen security through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

But Britain’s decision to leave the European Union and now the election of Mr. Trump has given fresh impetus to the EU to come up with new plans for security cooperation. In his presidential campaign, Mr. Trump has questioned the relevance of the NATO military alliance and suggested American military support could be conditional on European defense spending.

Federica Mogherini, the EU’s foreign policy chief, has said Europe must develop strategic autonomy, an ability to act independently of the U.S.

“We have a lot of potential that we don’t utilize yet,” Ms. Mogherini said Monday. “There is a need to strengthen our security profile.”

According to a draft statement, due to be published later Monday, foreign and defense ministers said they were committed to strengthening the EU’s ability to act as a security provider: “This will enhance its global strategic role and its capacity to act autonomously when and where necessary and with partners wherever possible.”

Still, forging consensus in the EU is difficult, and divisions remain in the bloc over how to increase defense spending or create new military capabilities.

Concerns by a number of countries over the need to avoid duplication with NATO have resulted in a watered-down proposal for a military headquarters. The EU is now proposing a strategic group that could plan and oversee training missions but not conduct peacekeeping or other military operations.

The new EU plan focuses on how to improve and speed up such military training missions, leaving so-called collective defense planning to NATO.

In the short term, the most meaningful step forward by the EU will likely not be a new initiative, but simply utilizing its standing battle groups. Nations contribute a battalion of forces for six-month periods so that the EU always has a crisis-response team ready, but the EU has never used the force.

However, Monday’s statement contains a number of other initiatives that could over time significantly enhance the bloc’s defense cooperation.

The bloc will review its rules with an eye to increasing the amount of common EU funding available for covering the cost of its overseas civilian and military missions. It will study options for making the rules for deploying the battle groups more flexible and for ensuring the crisis-response teams are better equipped to respond to specific crises.

The EU will also hold regular leaders’ summits on defense and security and conduct an annual ministerial review of how the EU is doing to build greater defense capabilities. And it will look at the options for allowing a group of EU member states to set up a permanent defense structure that can build up the bloc’s defense readiness.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said Monday’s decisions are a key moment in developing the bloc’s potential...

More.

Trump-Triggered George Mason University Administrator Calls Conservatives 'Worthless Pieces of Trash'

Yeah.

Here's more of that progressive healing they're always talking about.

At Twitchy, "Trump-triggered! George Mason U. admission’s director proves ‘tolerance is a one-way street’."

Hat Tip: Instapundit, "DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE."

Here's What the Entire Leftist Media Establishment Got Wrong

Not a full-on mea culpa, but close. Very close.

At NBC News, "First Read: What We Got Wrong":

What we got wrong in the 2016 presidential election

If you believe in learning from your mistakes, here is everything we and plenty others seemed to get wrong in the general election:

That the poll numbers showing Donald Trump's percentage in the high 30s and low 40s couldn't grow;

That a seemingly stable race -- with Hillary Clinton holding a consistent lead -- wouldn't change at the end;

That the votes out of Urban America and its suburbs would overwhelm the votes out of Rural America;

That Clinton was the one expanding the political map versus Trump doing it;

That changing demographics assured Democratic success in presidential contests, unless the GOP made an explicit appeal to minority voters;

That the Obama coalition could be transferred to another Democrat;

That Trump couldn't win if he got a lower percentage of white voters than Mitt Romney did four years ago;

That the party's that's more united has the advantage in a presidential contest over the more divide party;

That the conventions and presidential debates actually mattered;

That a small band of partisans couldn't get away with trying to delegitimize the media;

And that a presidential candidate who demolished so many norms (not releasing tax returns, talking about jailing an opponent, threatening not to respect the election's outcome) would pay a price for them in the end.

Note this is just NBC, although my headline indicates "the entire leftist media establishment," which should be under indictment at this point. Sheesh.

RELATED: "Crystal Ball's Mea Culpa (VIDEO)."