RUSH: So, I ran across this piece and I want to share it with you because when I was reading this piece, it caused a bunch of lights to go off. One of the things that I’ve been trying to figure out, even though those of you who listen will think I have it figured out, to me there’s always more than what I understand on most things. Even though I think I may have something figured out, there’s still more to learn about it.
And this opposition to Trump, it’s so irrational. It’s so obsessive that it puzzles me. And over what? Make America Great Again. Now, look, I understand the left hates America. The left hates the concept of capitalism and freedom. But they have never been anywhere near a majority of the population in this country. Never. They’ve always been fringe. They’ve been around since the days of the founding. Their strength has ebbed and flowed, you might say they’re 30, 35 percent, but I don’t even think that in terms of getting votes.
But yet they’re portrayed by a sympathetic media as being the majority of the country. If you landed here from Mars you would think the election of Donald Trump was some kind of real aberration because he represents 20 percent of the thinking and that the whole country is outraged every day because Donald Trump somehow shouldn’t be president. And, of course, the truth is over 65 million people voted for Donald Trump. He won the presidency fair and square. And yet this picture exists of something else.
And the opposition to Trump goes way beyond just Democrats losing. And it is the singular slogan of Trump’s that it’s not just a slogan, it’s an objective: Make America Great Again. The degree to which that has rendered his opponents insane has remained a big question. Even though I think I understand most of it intellectually, I’ve said to myself there’s got to be more to this. This is just irrational. It doesn’t make sense that this many people do not want America to be great.
So that remains a focal point, a frame of reference, as I go about my life living, learning, reading, this kind of thing. I came across something today that helped me understand it a bit more. It was nothing I didn’t already know. It’s one of these pieces, like Angelo Codevilla’s piece that we shared with you many, many moons ago on the ruling class versus the country class. It was like the revelation of learning what the current services baseline is in the federal budget and how that leads to what is called baseline budgeting. Those were light-goes-off moments.
Well, this piece that I ran into appears at the American Greatness website. And it’s written by a man named John Fonte, F-o-n-t-e. And the headline, ” Who Makes the ‘Rules’ in a ‘Rules-Based’ Liberal Global Order?” Now, this column is adapted from a speech that he gave at the National Conservative Conference in Washington on July 17th, about a month ago. And it prints to six pages. I can’t read the whole thing. But I’ve highlighted some pull quotes for you here that I think will make the point.
It begins thus: “The forces promoting global governance represent a serious actor, driver, or player in world politics. Transnationalism or globalism has an ideology and a social-material base. And, crucially, it has a strong American connection.” Transnationalism is the word now for globalism.
“The ideology is utopian, the age-old dream of worldwide peace and prosperity under a benevolent global regime. Further, the globalist project is bipartisan, in terms of both ideas and institutions.”
Now, I don’t believe that there’s anything utopian about it. Maybe from the duped, like your woke millennial college kids who think that utopia is possible. But the people running the show, I don’t think there’s anything utopian about them. I think they’re power mad. I think they’re evil, power mad people. And they have no intention of creating a utopia.
“Democrat Anne Marie Slaughter, who headed the Obama State Department’s office of policy and planning, declared that global governance meant nations would cede sovereign authority to supranational institutions in cases requiring global solutions to global problems.”
So this is simply acknowledging that Obama had a State Department employee who was responsible for spearheading America’s participation in this new global transnationalism, and her name was Anne Marie Slaughter. George H.W. Bush had somebody in his administration who today is involved in the same project. His name is Richard Haass. He held the same position in the State Department as Anne Marie Slaughter did for Obama, but he now runs the Council on Foreign Relations.
“More than a decade ago, he said it was time to ‘rethink’ sovereignty arguing that ‘sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker.'” To transnationalists or globalists, sovereignty is an opposition. It’s something that has to be overcome. Sovereignty cannot exist with transnationalists. You’ve got get rid of borders, you’ve got to get rid of nation states, the whole concept.
“In 2008, Robert Kagan, then advising the presidential campaign of Senator John McCain, declared that the ‘United States . . . should not oppose, but welcome a world of pooled and diminished national sovereignty.’
“The social-material base of the transnationalists is housed in many institutions and organizations. For example, in the leadership of the United Nations; with bureaucrats from the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank; with judges from the World Court in the Hague, the International Criminal Court, and the European Court of Human Rights.”
All these things that we’ve cataloged, categorized and known as they’re established. Trump rails against them all as being anti-American. They’re not existing to further America’s interests. They exist to actually, for lack of a better word, punish America. This is all about what I’ve always said. Diminishing America in the post-war period. We are the remaining, the only world super power, but we’ve got to be diminished for these people. They don’t want to just run the U.S., they want to run the world. And they can’t if the U.S. remains a superpower and gigantic and sovereign.
“For American transnationalists, global experts in international law, human rights, the environment, gender equity would have greater legitimacy in the creation of ‘global rules’ than democratically elected officials.”
What this means is that for these people that believe in transnationalism, a utopian globalist regime that the experts that would be housed in leadership in this regime would have a much freer easy time of instituting their brand of human rights via the environment, gender equity — those things would have a much greater legitimacy if we could just diminish the United States because diminishing the United States would be diminishing its moral code, would be diminishing its moral and legal foundations.
So in many ways what this is saying is that we represent the obstacle, the final obstacle, if you will, to the desire these people have to establish a gigantic and, they claim, benevolent government leadership body.
Now, this group of people as it exists now, “The social base certainly includes the leadership of the European Union (which is a model for supranational governance) and its administrators in the European Commission, judges in the European Court of Justice, and other EU officials. It includes international non-governmental organizations (e.g. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Greenpeace, George Soros’s Open Society foundations, etc.).” It’s important that these are nongovernment, NGOs, they’re all leftists. Everything that we’re talking about here is left-wing. It’s liberal. It’s socialist. It’s communist.
And this alignment or amalgamation of government entities and nongovernment entities is meant to blanket and cover every area necessary to bring this about. Now, here’s the point or one of many.
“Significantly, there is a strong American presence in the forces of global governance: major foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie, etc.), the American academic world; the American Bar Association which openly advocates the ‘global rule of law’; and, of course, among leading American global corporations. Indeed, the vice president of Coca-Cola remarked, ‘We are not an American company.’ … A top executive at Colgate-Palmolive declared, ‘There is no mindset that puts this country (the United States) first.'”
See, there it is, right there. These people, these CEOs, corporate CEOs, nongovernment organizations, think tanks, you name it, and the European Union governing bodies all believe that there is no mindset that puts the U.S. first.
So here comes Trump, Make America Great Again. Putting America first is exactly what Donald Trump is all about. Donald Trump has not just swatted a hornet’s nest in the United States. Donald Trump has swatted a gigantic nest that’s the size of the whole world and he has put the fear of failure right in their face. He’s upset the apple cart in ways these people never thought could happen.
There would never be anybody from the current Washington establishment who would ever run for president, who would ever hold the views that Donald Trump holds, particularly and specifically about revitalizing America, making America a legitimate force for good in the world, by virtue of its strength and moral authority. They thought they had done away with that.
The Washington establishment simply doesn’t have people like Donald Trump in it and the Washington establishment is from where presidential candidates come. The scope and the impact to which Donald Trump has upset these people and their dreams and their worldwide objectives is hard to categorize, how dramatic and huge that it is.
“When she was a journalist writing for The Atlantic, current Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland was told by a U.S.-based CEO of one of the world’s largest hedge funds that he was not concerned about the ‘hollowing out of the American middle class.’ He said that if the global economy ‘lifts four people in China and India’ into the middle class and meanwhile ‘one American drops out of the middle class, that’s not such a bad trade.’ Samuel Huntington described this process as the ‘de-nationalization’ of American corporate elites.”
See, for the objectives of these people to succeed, the United States has to lose in a zero-sum game. In order for there to be economic gains, because these people that are running this worldwide transnationalist dream, they need for enough people to do well enough economically to not oppose anything. But they also understand that that can’t happen unless some of the wealth comes from the United States. And how do you take the wealth from the United States? Well, you take economic power away from the American middle class is how you do it.
And how do you do that? Well, you raise their taxes or you slow down their economy, and you tell them that America’s best days are behind them. You do what Obama did for eight years. You tell people that, “Hey, you know what? We’re not going to be as great as we once were. We weren’t as great as you think we were. We stole all the resources that we used to build ourselves up to a superpower, but we’ve been plenty immoral and unjust. And so there’s a new norm. There’s a new norm, and it is a steady decline and we’re the ones to manage it.”
That’s how you do it. That is how you convince the American people to tolerate the evaporation of their economy. Don’t just tell them that it’s over, that you’re looking out for them, you’re looking out for them, you’re watching out for them, you’re going to have their backs. In the meantime, the lower classes, the middle classes of the world have to be lifted up and it’s done with U.S. wealth.
And Donald Trump is not going to play ball here. Donald Trump is not going to participate in this. He’s telling them this every day. Given the plans these people have and given the obstacle Donald Trump has presented, it makes perfect sense that they would despise this guy. It makes perfect sense that they would become irrational in their hatred and delusional. They’re on the verge of pulling this off.
If Hillary Clinton had been elected they would have pulled this off. It would just have been the continuation of the decline, the continuation of the belief that America’s best economic days are behind us. The continuation of the belief that the days of your kids doing better than you did are over. Obama and his administration implanted that very thought and idea in the minds of Americans — they thought.
And then here comes Trump down the escalator in 2015 essentially saying, “No way; we’re not putting up with this. We’re not going to sit here and let America be made a second-class country. We’re going to be making it great again.” And look at what happened. A clear majority of the American people rose up and voted for the guy, and these people who are running this transnationalist scheme, which is very real, still haven’t recovered from it.
So the ongoing effort to ruin Trump is not going to stop. And even if Trump stopped tweeting, and if he did everything all the people who don’t like the way he lives, if he would change everything the way everybody’s demanding, it would not stop one iota worth of criticism.
RUSH: Now back to this piece on transnationalism — and, again, this is by John Fonte. I found it at American Greatness. It’s from a speech that he gave a month ago in Washington. Let me repeat this one paragraph because this is key: “A top executive at Colgate-Palmolive declared, ‘There is no mindset [among his compatriots, among his transnationalists] that puts this country (the United States) first.’ When she was a journalist writing for the Atlantic, current Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland was told by a U.S.-based CEO of one of the world’s largest hedge funds that he was not concerned about the ‘hollowing out of the American middle class.'”
“He said that if the global economy ‘lifts four people in China and India’ into the middle class and meanwhile ‘one American drops out of the middle class,’ we can live with that.” Well, what does that mean? It means for these people in India and China to lift themselves within their own middle class, the wealth has to come from the U.S. — and he’s perfectly fine with that. That’s why I said, “It was not accidental that Barack Obama is telling everybody that our best days are behind us, that we’re in a new period of decline, that Obama and his types are the perfect people to manage the decline.
“And 1%, 1.5% economic growth? That’s the new normal!”
All of this was to set in motion a mental attitude in the United States, “Hey, 1% growth is good; that’s about what we can expect. Maybe we shouldn’t have been so powerful in the past!” This was all part of being able to strip wealth out of the United States, spread it around the world, build up support for the transnational government. If you’ve got a transnational organization and you can say that you’re helping people move up economically, then you may have their support. Not that you care about the democratic process, but it would help in limiting anybody opposed to what you’re trying to do.
It’s a hideous bunch.
So Trump comes along and totally pulls the rug out from under these people.
Brexit! Brexit was the same thing.
“With the Brexit referendum, the election of Donald Trump, and the rise of conservative, democratic nationalists throughout the West,” meaning western democracies, “the global governance project has been seriously challenged for the first time.” They thought they were in an “arc of history” that was inevitable, that we were headed to this transnational/globalist way of life that would result in an end to the concept of national sovereignty. And then Brexit and Trump came along. And they have been rendered…
They’ve never faced this kind of opposition.
This is the establishment we’re talking about. They put things into place specifically and precisely to make sure these kinds of things — Trump and Brexit — don’t happen, and yet they both did. What does this mean? What are these people thinking screwed this up? I’m telling you: Democracy. People having the vote is what screwed up their plans. If you take nothing away from what I’m saying, take two things away: In order for this to work, the American wealth has to be reduced — and the vote of the people, the democratic way of life, has got to be eliminated.
If people weren’t able to vote, Trump wouldn’t have got elected. If there weren’t any vote in the U.K., there wouldn’t have been Brexit. I guarantee you that’s how these people are looking at it. They’re not seeing you individually as the opposition. They’re saying the right to vote is something they’ve got to snuff out. That’s how they’ll protect themselves against you. Meanwhile… Meanwhile… “After the fall of the Berlin Wall, many conservatives embraced President George H. W. Bush’s call for a ‘new world order.’
“It appeared to be a consolidation of the West’s Cold War victory and, thus, the building of a Reagan-Thatcher global order based on expanding liberal democracy and free markets. But the ‘rules’ in this ‘rules-based’ liberal global order began to ‘evolve’ (as academics like to say). In the 1990s, the United Nations Landmines Treaty and the establishment of the International Criminal Court were enacted …against the concerns of American sovereignty.” Not just against it, to effectively deal with.
The International Criminal Court, the World Trade Organization — all these organizations — were essentially created to rule against the United States. It was all part of the process of deemphasizing the power and role of the United States as a superpower in the world. “Recognizing this new transnationalist challenge in September 2000, John Bolton … portrayed a coming conflict between ‘Globalists and Americanists.’ At that time, 19 years ago, Bolton warned that we must take global governance seriously as a threat to democratic sovereignty.”
A mere ten years “later, the Obama administration in the name of the liberal global order was strong-arming democratic nation-states into adhering to progressive social policies concerning radical femi[nazi]ism, abortion, LGBT, and gender issues.” In other words, Obama popularizes these things. You know, he used to be anti-gay marriage; all of a sudden, he sends Biden out there. “We’re now pro-gay marriage!” You see what happens there.
Obama dispatches elements of his regime to normalize all of these things elsewhere in the democratic west, all for the purposes of destabilizing the existing political and economic order, to create angst and chaos in these countries as a distraction from the real objective, which was to steal the wealth from the middle class of the United States.
“Meanwhile, the EU forced the removal of democratically elected leaders in Italy and Greece, and, led by Germany, facilitated mass migration from the developing world without the consent of the people of Europe’s democratic nation-states,” and now it’s happening here. If you want to get rid of national borders and if you want to get rid of national sovereignty, what’s one of the fastest ways to do it? Flood nation states with people from outside! Water down the very identity of the nation states.
Do it with open-borders immigration and the welfare state necessary to keep them there. And what once was Burgeoning European Country X, becomes something unrecognizable with essentially no borders because anybody that wants to get in, can. You don’t even need a passport if you’re traveling within the European Union! And this is precisely what has been happening and is now ratcheting up in the United States with the caravans. And, again, here’s Donald Trump: “We’re going to build a wall!
“We’re going to stop this from happening. We’re going to make Mexico pay for the wall.” All this rhetoric from Trump, combined with his serious intention to do all this, has blown up the “arc of history” of these people with these grandiose plans. They’ve succeeded in Europe. They have not yet succeeded here because of Trump. So, folks, to wrap this up (chuckles) and there’s still much more here. But this deranged, delusional, extraordinary opposition to Donald Trump — if you know everything about this — makes perfect sense when you consider the people and the plans they had that he has disrupted.
RUSH: Here’s Wesley in Raleigh, North Carolina. You’re next and I’m glad you waited, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. It’s such a huge privilege to talk to you again. I love the show. I’ll get right to the point for Mr. Snerdley. I stumbled upon an article by Anthony Codevilla, whose name I know because you originally turned me on to him as a guy who posited the existence of the establishment. And the article raised — it’s called the White Supremacy Hoax — and it raises the specter of that hoax being used by said establishment to essentially oppress who they might see as deplorables, and that includes the FBI. And we know that Chris Wray said that white supremacists are the leading cause or the chief worry for domestic terrorism.
RUSH: I read the piece. And what you’re basically saying here, or you’re asking, is if the deep state, the ruling class extends to the FBI or to the military and so forth, and I’m out of time to explain the answer, which is yes. So I guess you’ll have to tune in tomorrow to find out why.
RUSH: Yeah, there’s still more to all of this, and what remains is quotes from others that further establish the objectives and quotes from Trump that demonstrate his opposition to it and why they’re so distressed by the arrival of Trump. And, by the way, the opposition to this has been portrayed as nationalism, white nationalism. That’s not at all what it is. Trying to maintain America’s sovereignty is the objective Trump’s really after.