Their ultimate goal: American regime change
Pat Buchanan: What is afoot is the overthrow of our democratically elected head of state
Patrick J. Buchanan

The campaign to overturn the 2016 election and bring down President Trump shifted into high gear this week.

Inspiration came Saturday morning from the altar of the National Cathedral where our establishment came to pay homage to John McCain.

Gathered there were all the presidents from 1993 to 2017, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, Vice Presidents Al Gore and Dick Cheney, Secretaries of State Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Henry Kissinger, the leaders of both houses of Congress, and too many generals and admirals to list.

Striding into the pulpit, Obama delivered a searing indictment of the man undoing his legacy:

“So much of our politics, our public life, our public discourse can seem small and mean and petty, trafficking in bombast and insult and phony controversies and manufactured outrage. … It’s a politics that pretends to be brave and tough but in fact is born of fear.”

Speakers praised McCain’s willingness to cross party lines, but Democrats took away a new determination: From here on out, confrontation!

Tuesday morning, as Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court began, Democrats disrupted the proceedings and demanded immediate adjournment, as scores of protesters shouted and screamed to halt the hearings.

Taking credit for orchestrating the disruption, Sen. Dick Durbin boasted, “What we’ve heard is the noise of democracy.”

But if mob action to shut down a Senate hearing is the noise of democracy, this may explain why many countries are taking a new look at the authoritarian rulers who can at least deliver a semblance of order.

Wednesday came leaks in the Washington Post from Bob Woodward’s new book, attributing to Chief of Staff John Kelly and Gen. James Mattis crude remarks on the president’s intelligence, character and maturity, and describing the Trump White House as a “crazytown” led by a fifth- or sixth-grader.

Kelly and Mattis both denied making the comments.

Thursday came an op-ed in the New York Times by an anonymous “senior official” claiming to be a member of the “resistance … working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his (Trump’s) agenda.”

A pedestrian piece of prose containing nothing about Trump one cannot read or hear daily in the media, the op-ed caused a sensation, but only because Times editors decided to give the disloyal and seditious Trump aide who wrote it immunity and cover to betray his or her president.

The transaction served the political objectives of both parties.

While the Woodward book may debut at the top of the New York Times best-seller list, and “Anonymous,” once ferreted out and fired, will have his or her 15 minutes of fame, what this portends is not good.

For what is afoot here is something America specializes in – regime change. Only the regime our establishment and media mean to change is the government of the United States. What is afoot is the overthrow of America’s democratically elected head of state.

The methodology is familiar. After a years-long assault on the White House and president by a special prosecutor’s office, the House takes up impeachment, while a collaborationist press plays its traditional supporting role.

Presidents are wounded, disabled or overthrown, and Pulitzers all around.

No one suggests Richard Nixon was without sin in trying to cover up the Watergate break-in. But no one should delude himself into believing that the overthrow of that president, not two years after he won the greatest landslide in U.S. history, was not an act of vengeance by a hate-filled city that ran a sword through Nixon for offenses it had covered up or brushed under the rug in the Roosevelt, Kennedy and Johnson years.

So, where are we headed?

If November’s elections produce, as many predict, a Democratic House, there will be more investigations of President Trump than any man charged with running the U.S. government may be able to manage.

There is the Mueller investigation into “Russiagate” that began before Trump was inaugurated. There is the investigation of his business and private life before he became president in the Southern District of New York. There is the investigation into the Trump Foundation by the state of New York.

There will be investigations by House committees into alleged violations of the Emoluments Clause. And ever present will be platoons of journalists ready to report the leaks from all of these investigations.

Then, if media coverage can drive Trump’s polls low enough, will come the impeachment investigation and the regurgitation of all that went before.

If Trump has the stamina to hold on, and the Senate remains Republican, he may survive, even as Democrats divide between a rising militant socialist left and the Democrats’ septuagenarian caucus led by Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Kerry, Bernie Sanders and Nancy Pelosi.

2019 looks to be the year of bellum omnium contra omnes, the war of all against all. Entertaining, for sure, but how many more of these coups d’etat can the republic sustain before a new generation says enough of all this?

https://www.wnd.com/2018/09/their-ultima...-regime-change/

From 2017:

'Purple Revolution' about to run blood-red
Exclusive: Scott Lively sees rerun of nationalism vs. communism battle in '20s German
Published: 06/23/2017 at 7:26 PM
Scott Lively

During the 2016 election, I wrote a series of articles explaining how Barack Obama’s global fast-tracking of the “progressive” agenda had caused the the traditional left/right division of Western society to morph into a war of nationalism vs. communism, essentially recreating the hyper-polarization Germany experienced in the 1920s and early ’30s. This was a phenomenon I predicted in 2009 with the rise of the Tea Party and Occupy movements, and saw come to fruition in 2016 in a 25-nation personal fact-finding tour.

Just after the election, news emerged of a planned “Purple Revolution” in the United States, to be orchestrated by George Soros and the Clintons along the lines of Soros’ “color revolutions” in various countries of the former Soviet Union.

Importantly, both Hillary and Bill Clinton wore purple for her concession speech, interpreted in the media as magnanimous statement about Republican and Democratic unity, but which was true only in the sense that the elites in both parties are united against President Trump. Purple is also the color long adopted by the “gay” movement, whose leaders and activists, including both Hillary and Obama, represent the central core of the hard left. It is not mere coincidence that rhetorical attacks against Mr. Trump always accuse him of “hate” against “gays” despite his many (unfortunate) concessions to the LGBT community.

Upon the emergence of the “Purple Revolution,” I predicted the following, some of which has already occurred, sooner than I expected:

1) An army of faceless anarchists engaged in civil disobedience and property destruction on an “anti-fascism” theme (imagine the explosion of street violence in the late 1960s but employing “social justice” rather than anti-war rhetoric – like Black Lives Matter but bigger and broader). This is designed to terrorize the public but also to deliberately provoke police reactions that can be documented on film and edited to misrepresent the police as Brownshirt-style fascists.

2) A coordinated propaganda campaign by all the usual suspects on the left in media, academia, Hollywood and the nonprofit/foundations sector, branding the Trump administration as a fascist regime akin to the Third Reich. This will build slowly but inexorably as the left gathers and weaves together its case like a crooked prosecutor in the courtroom of international opinion.

3) Obstruction of conservative policy through guerrilla litigation tactics by groups such as the Center for Constitutional Rights and Southern Poverty Law Center, and their silent partners in the federal judiciary.

In the weeks leading to the Trump inauguration, Barack Obama jumped into the “resistance” movement with both feet and conducted a campaign of sabotage of our government designed to deny President Trump an ability to govern effectively. I compared Obama’s actions to Adolf Hitler’s sabotage of Cherbourg, France, as the Germans withdrew from Brittany, and predicted an American leftist version of the German post-D-Day counter-offensive known as the Battle of Bloody Gulch.

Obama also attempted to trigger a hot war with Russia in his final days in office, a move that might well have worked save for the remarkable restraint of Vladimir Putin. To the U.S. provocation of withdrawing its diplomatic staff from Russia in manner historically taken only on the threshold of military action, Putin responded with grace and humor, diffusing the crisis. U.S. military maneuvers in Europe that had been set in motion by Obama in anticipation of a hot war footing were forced to play out in an entirely unilateral and unjustifiable context.

From Day 1 of the Trump administration, Trump-hating leftists and elitists from both parties, including the leadership of the GOP establishment, have worked to undermine every aspect of his administration and policy agenda and to lay the groundwork for his impeachment or forced resignation. It was only through superior strategic thinking that Trump outmaneuvered these “deep state” operatives and removed the linchpin of their strategy: James Comey. (This is really a must-read analysis.)

The “Impeach Trump” strategy was essentially gutted at that point, though those who set the special counsel process in motion to accomplish the goal were left building a gallows in the public square without a “culprit” to hang.

Like the malicious schemer Haman in the biblical story of Esther, I predict that some of the very people that set up President Trump are going to dangle from their own noose.

But that’s a sideshow, now. The main event is the full-throated blood-in-the-streets communist/anarchist revolt the political left has always dreamed of. They came close to getting it in the 1960s. And they got a little taste this decade with the carefully orchestrated Black Lives Matter rioting, and more recently with the Steve Scalise shooting. However, now that the “mainstream” media and Hollywood appear fully on board, and Bernie Sanders has given the order to his army to “resist” by any means necessary, and (after Ossoff) the “centrist” Democrats realize that they can’t win through the legitimate political process any more, the perfect storm of political rage and opportunity appear to be shaping up for the summer of 2017.

I was a bit early in my prediction of widespread violence, stating in March of 2016 that I expected it to erupt before the November election.

However, as I pointed out then, the original agitators that started the war in the streets of pre-Nazi Germany were not the Nationalists, but the Communists. Nationalism was the reaction, not the cause. It’s very unfortunate that the closest blueprint for what’s unfolding in America is Germany, since the nationalists here are by no means Nazis, nor is overwhelmingly pro-Israel Trump in any way another Hitler. However, Communists are Communists wherever you find them, as predictable as voter fraud in a Democrat-controlled city: They WILL initiate serious violence and blame it on “fascism,” its only a question of when and to what extreme.

Mark my words, the “Purple Revolution” will run red.


https://www.wnd.com/2017/06/purple-revol...-run-blood-red/