What next? Kristallnacht?

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell


During the past two years, beginning well before Trump became President, we have published posts describing the uncanny resemblances between Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler — not their physical appearances, but their actions.

For example:

  1. Astounding similarities: Of whom does this remind you? It’s happening now
  2. Hitler in America. Why a bigot can win the Presidency
  3. What if Trump had won

and several others making similar comparisons.

Predictably, a reader has invoked Godwin’s law, to tell me that by mentioning the name “Hitler” I had “lost” the argument. (Not sure which “argument.”)

But, so long as “laws,” are being quoted, I feel compelled to put forth Sanayana’s: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

And therein lies the problem, for I feel quite certain that Trump’s backers do not remember Hitler’s history, a history that should serve as an object lesson for all people.

If you take a moment to read just #1 (above), you immediately will see the frightening historical parallels between Hitler and Trump.

Here is yet another bit of history for your comparison:

Wikipedia:  In the 1920s, most German Jews were fully integrated into German society as German citizens.

Conditions for the Jews began to change after the appointment of Adolf Hitler as Chancellor of Germany on 30 January 1933

From its inception, Hitler’s régime moved quickly to introduce anti-Jewish policies.

Nazi propaganda singled out the 500,000 Jews in Germany, who accounted for only 0.86% of the overall population, as an enemy within who were responsible for Germany’s defeat in the First World War and for its subsequent economic disasters

Kristallnacht or the Night of Broken Glass, was a pogrom against Jews throughout Nazi Germany on 9–10 November 1938, carried out by paramilitary forces and German civilians.

German authorities looked on without intervening.

The name Kristallnacht comes from the shards of broken glass that littered the streets after Jewish-owned stores, buildings, and synagogues had their windows smashed.

Jewish homes, hospitals, and schools were ransacked, as the attackers demolished buildings with sledgehammers. Over 1,000 synagogues were burned and over 7,000 Jewish businesses destroyed or damaged.

The (British) Times wrote at the time: “No foreign propagandist bent upon blackening Germany before the world could outdo the tale of burnings and beatings, of blackguardly assaults on defenseless and innocent people, which disgraced that country yesterday.”

The pretext for the attacks was the assassination of the German diplomat Ernst vom Rath by Herschel Grynszpan, a German-born Polish Jew living in Paris.

Kristallnacht was followed by additional economic and political persecution of Jews, and is viewed by historians as part of Nazi Germany’s broader racial policy, and the beginning of the Final Solution and The Holocaust.

Some key points:

  1. Before Hitler, Jews lived peacefully as German citizens.
  2. Jews were an infinitesimal proportion of the German population
  3. Hitler’s regime introduced anti-Jewish policies
  4. The excuse for these policies was a crime by a Jew.
  5. Hitler’s propaganda inflamed the German people who committed atrocities on the Jews, their businesses, and their homes.
  6. Not mentioned in the article was the historical fact that disabled people received harsh treatment from Hitler, who felt they could not be part of his “blond beast, master race,” and
  7. Paul Joseph Goebbels was a German politician and Reich Minister of Propaganda of Nazi Germany, one of Adolf Hitler’s close associates and most devoted followers. He was known for his  deep, virulent antisemitism, which was evident in his publicly voiced views.
  8. Hitler rounded up the Jews and “deported” them to concentration camps.

Keep those points in mind as you read this:

Hate incidents spreading in wake of Trump win

On Friday, a Muslim-American high school teacher in central Georgia received a handwritten letter regarding her hijab.

“Your headscarf isn’t allowed anymore,” read the anonymous note. “Why don’t you tie it around your neck and hang yourself with it.”

On Saturday night, a church offering Spanish-language services in Silver Spring, Md., was vandalized with the message, “Trump nation. Whites only.”

And over the weekend, several college students at the New School in New York City awoke to find swastikas scrawled on their dorm-room doors.

These are just a few of the incidents of hate speech, harassment, and intimidation that have been reported in the wake of last week’s presidential election.

As of Friday evening, the Southern Poverty Law Center had counted 201 hate incidents in the first three days after the election, citing local news stories, social media posts and submissions through the SPLC’s website. By Monday, that number had more than doubled, to 437.

“We feel strongly that this outburst of hate crimes is directly related to Donald Trump’s victory,”Mark Potok, SPLC senior fellow, told Yahoo News, noting that “a very large proportion” of these cases included direct references to Donald Trump, his campaign or the presidential election.

“My feeling is that Trump absolutely encouraged this,” Potok said, referring to the divisive rhetoric — including the claim that most Mexican immigrants are “rapists” and “criminals,” his promise to “build a wall” on the United States’ southern border and a proposed ban on allowing Muslims to enter the the country — that came to define Trump’s White House campaign.

“The man has spent the better part of 18 months attacking minorities of all kinds, so it should hardly be a surprise that people who despise minorities are now celebrating and acting out,” he said.

In fact, the recent outpouring of animosity seems to fall in line with what the SPLC and other anti-discrimination groups have described as a rising tide of hate over the past year or so leading up to the election.

On Monday, the FBI released its annual report on hate crimes, which showed an overall rise in the number of incidents nationwide during 2015, driven in large part by a 67 percent increase in anti-Muslim attacks since 2014.

The president-elect has already outraged anti-discrimination groups with his selection of former Breitbart News chairman Stephen Bannon, CEO of the Trump campaign, as chief strategist to the Trump White House.

Several advocacy organizations have launched petitions urging Trump to dump Bannon, who is credited with transforming the conservative Breitbart News site into the mouthpiece of the white nationalist “alt-right” movement.

Now consider the parallels, point by point:

  1. Before Trump, Muslims lived peacefully in America
  2. Muslims are an infinitesimal proportion of America’s population.
  3. Trump introduced anti-Muslim policies
  4. The excuse for these policies is a comparatively small number of Muslim crimes
  5. Trump’s propaganda has inflamed Americans, who are beginning to commit atrocities on Muslims, their businesses, and their homes.
  6. Trump has mocked the disabled for their lack of “perfection.”  (He also mocks women who do not meet his standards of beauty.)
  7. Trump hired Stephen Bannon, the propagandist of the white nationalist “alt-right” movement, to be his chief strategist.
  8. Trump plans to round up Muslims and deport them to (concentration camps??)

The similarities cannot be doubted, nor can anyone doubt the disaster that befell Germany (and indeed all nations making bigotry a political imperative.)

Hatred is easy to sell; fools buy it.  Compassion is more difficult, which is why group hatred generally begins with the lowest-intelligent among us. (High IQs did not create the bigotries pictured above.)

Hatred also is quite contagious and difficult to control. It seeps into every pore of the population until no one is safe.

Finally, hatred tends to devolve to antisemitism. History has told that story countless times.

When things go badly for the Trump administration, you can be sure the bigotry Trump has sown will grow into a whirlwind of hatred for “that Jew, Jared Kushner, in the White House.” Ah, the irony.

So as our sad Hitlerian saga unwinds, we ask, “What next, Donald? Kristallnacht?”

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty



•Any monetarily NON-sovereign government — be it city, county, state or nation — that runs an ongoing trade deficit, eventually will run out of money.

•The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes..

•No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth.

•Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.

•A growing economy requires a growing supply of money (GDP = Federal Spending + Non-federal Spending + Net Exports)

•Deficit spending grows the supply of money

•The limit to federal deficit spending is an inflation that cannot be cured with interest rate control.

•The limit to non-federal deficit spending is the ability to borrow.

Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.

The single most important problem in economics is the Gap between rich and the rest.

•Austerity is the government’s method for widening the Gap between rich and poor.

•Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.

•Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..



36 thoughts on “What next? Kristallnacht?

  1. I have read your articles on economics and also on social and political issues.
    Your economic views are very interesting and informative. Your comparison of Trump to Hitler borders on ridiculous and hysterical.

    You would do well to stick to economics.


  2. Mr. Mitchell and elizabethharris001:

    I have found another monetary philosophy that rivals MMT (and MS).




    The name of the blogger is Cullen Roche. He is an investor who also dabbles into political economy commentary.

    I hope you can give me your opinions as to this economic perspective (he calls it ‘Monetary Realism’).



    1. Cullen Roche is a longtime critic of MMT, and he has no idea what he’s talking about.

      EXAMPLE: “All of the ‘money’ the government creates is in the form of notes and reserves.”

      WRONG. Notes are technically not money, although notes can be used as money. Moreover when the U.S. government credits your bank account with a Social Security payment, for example, the credit is neither notes nor reserves. It is true money.

      EXAMPLE: “The current legal structures do not allow the Federal Reserve of the US Treasury to spend money directly into the economy.”

      WRONG. The Federal Reserve System is not part of the Department of the Treasury.

      EXAMPLE: “The US Treasury must borrow bank money and issue bonds.”

      WRONG. The U.S. Treasury does not borrow one penny of its spending money from anyone.

      EXAMPLE: “There is no mechanism by which the US government can directly issue money into the US economy at present without breaking the legal arrangements we have in place.”

      WRONG. There are thousands of examples of the U.S. government putting money directly into the U.S. economy. For example, benefits for Medicare and Social Security (currently abut $2 trillion per year) come directly from the U.S. government, and go directly into the U.S. economy.

      EXAMPLE: “We can argue about what is and isn’t ‘money,’ but that’s pointless.”

      WRONG: Money is infinite, since it is a non-physical. Money is a strictly mental system of accounting that is represented by numbers in bank accounts. A “dollar” is simply a unit of account. If you do not understand this, then you will fall into endless errors.

      I could go on and on and on, but I won’t make the effort (although I will if pressed).

      Cullen Roche has no clue.


        1. Yes the Treasury is SUPPOSED to issue T-securities whose face value is equal to the amount of money that the U.S. government creates.

          However there are two caveats.

          First, no one really knows how much money the US government creates in a given fiscal year. Much of the U.S. federal spending is “off budget,” meaning unaccounted for. An example is the multi-billion-dollar “black budget” for intelligence agencies. There is also the “Overseas Contingency Operations fund,” through which billions (trillions?) of dollars are funneled for wars and military purposes. No one knows how much. Then there’s the Pentagon itself, which cannot be audited.

          Second, the Treasury can issue T-securities, which the Fed can then offer for sale through the Fed’s “open market operation.” If no one buys the T-securities, the Fed “buys” the T-securities itself, through operations that are basically accounting sleight of hand. It’s just a game of changing numbers on spread sheets, camouflaged by the lie that money is physical and limited.

          Regarding interest on T-securities, when you buy a T-security, you automatically open a savings account at the Fed in the amount of the security. When the T-security matures, the Fed pays interest on it by simply crediting your savings account. The Fed creates that interest money out of thin air by crediting your account. All savings accounts together are misleadingly named the “national debt.” No individual will pay a single penny on this “national debt.”


          1. @Elizabeth…

            “An example is the multi-billion-dollar “black budget” for intelligence agencies. There is also the “Overseas Contingency Operations fund,” through which billions (trillions?) of dollars are funneled for wars and military purposes. No one knows how much. ”

            I don’t think this is correct. I am pretty sure that the total amount is known but what the money is spent is not known. Also that does not mean that although they may have a budget that they stick to that buget or do not go over that budget but that when the books are reconciled I believed the total amount is known.


  3. Thank you, John,

    The German people were as sanguine as you are, now. I’m sorry you can’t visualize the warning signs.

    Perhaps you feel safe because Trump has not instituted death camps. Neither did Hitler in the beginning.

    Then again, what about this: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-quick-cuts/watch/trump-supporter-internment-camp-is-precedent-for-muslim-registry-811543107885

    Trump actually is moving faster than Hitler did at first.

    If you’re among the “Trump-really-didn’t-mean-what-he-said” crowd, I hope you’re right.

    I also hope you don’t have any friends who are Muslim, Latin, undocumented, black, brown, gay, pregnant, fat, or liberal. They will find their lives a misery under Trump.


      1. As I was saying . . .

        US Jews grapple with election-year eruption of anti-Semitism

        American Jews gathered Thursday to wrestle with how they should confront an election-year surge in anti-Semitism, a level of bias not seen in the U.S. for decades.

        At a national meeting of the Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish civil rights group, about 1,000 people listened to talks expressing shock at the hatred expressed during the presidential campaign and questioned what they thought was a high-level of acceptance by other Americans.

        “I’m struggling right now in this American moment,” said Yehuda Kurtzer, president of the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America, an education and research organization, in his talk at the event. “I wonder whether I have been — and I think the answer is probably yes — a little bit naive.”

        During this past year, anti-Semitic imagery proliferated on social media, Jewish journalists were targeted and longstanding anti-Jewish conspiracy theories got a fresh airing.

        Much of the bias originated with the alt-right, or alternative right, a loose group espousing a provocative and reactionary strain of conservatism. It’s often associated with far right efforts to preserve “white identity,” oppose multiculturalism and defend “Western values.”

        Hmmm . . . the alt-right. Which candidate did they back? Now let me think.

        Donald Trump’s campaign came under scrutiny since much of the harassment came from accounts tied to his supporters.

        Your comments parallel those of pre-war Germans. But, I don’t need to argue the point. Time will be the best educator.


        1. @ Rodger, Although I don’t agree with everything regarding MS/MMT, It has a number of big flaws, regardless I do come to this site every now and then because at times there are interesting posts and in some instances thought provoking posts along with an occasional insightful comment by your readers.

          However you do seem to have an attitude with some of the commenters when they disagree with you and a lot of times it is like banging a head against a wall when they try to point things out to you it is as if you often think you know everything about everything and no one else can have a legitimate point which is why the last time I posted mentioned out loud if I should even bother posting or not.

          Further since Trump became the nominee you really have started to loose your mind and most of your posts on Trump are total BS!!

          Since supporting Hillary and becoming part of the establishment and 1% that you keep warning us about you have lost a lot of credibility and these post on Trump, to actual thinking people, are making you look ridiculous.

          As mentioned most of your posts on Trump are either just flat out wrong, made up nonsense or again just completely ridiculous!!

          That is not to say there aren’t any issues with Trump but those issues are not getting discussed because of all the nonsense, most of which you are parroting from the MSN especially MSNBC without actually thinking about what you are writing or saying.

          There is just too much to debunk but take this post for example (without going through it point by point), It is not Godwins law per se but the comparison of conditions you claim that exist that make the parallels to Trump “uncanny” that is just plain wrong. If you actually looked into what Trump has actually said as opposed to what the MSN has reported he said and you actually thought about it you would see that the condition’s are not the same and the parallels to Hitler are not the same. If any politician could be compared to Hilter it would not be trump but Clinton but even as crazy as she is that is still a bit of stretch!

          It is interesting that you mention a few cases of hatred/violence towards Muslims to create a narrative towards Trump but you have not mentioned any the cases of violence towards Trump supporters or the riots which in some case have been violent, all courtesy of those peace loving progressives that are suppose to love and accept everyone.

          In any case I would take John and Elizabeth’s suggestion and stick to economics, maybe criticize trump on economics but either way stick to economics before you loose the little credibility you have left!


          1. So you don’t think the election of Trump is an economic issue? https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-writes-misleading-tweet-175020325.html

            Do you realize that you have spent 9 paragraphs telling me I’m wrong and that MS has “big flaws,” without providing one concrete example?

            As for “supporting Hillary,” actually I supported Elizabeth Warren, but since she didn’t run, I was left with warning people about the least qualified candidate — now President — in American history.

            Every newspaper in America seems to agree.

            If you would like to draw up a list of parallels between Clinton and Hitler, I’ll be glad to publish it.

            Time will tell who is right.

            Thanks for your comments. Keep ’em coming.


          2. “Every newspaper in America seems to agree.” ~RMM

            Every newspaper in America agrees that the U.S. government has a “debt crisis” and is “bankrupt.” That does not make it true.

            Actually this ruse is even worse than Godwin’s law. “I am better than you, because everyone out there agrees with me.” If that was true, then Hillary would be empress now.

            As for Elizabeth Warren, she is a fake leftist Hillary-bot who says on her own web site that she wants to reduce the national debt and federal spending (i.e. reduce the deficit). That’s okay with Mr. Mitchell, since Ms. WarHen staunchly supports the War *Of* Terror, plus the routine bombardment of the Gaza Death Camp.

            Seriously, whenever I see a Trump-bashing post here (which is almost daily) I never read it. Not because I like Trump (I do not) but because I prefer to discuss economics. The only reason I’m commenting at this moment is that I scrolled down and saw that another reader mentioned economics.


          3. “WarHen”? You’ve been reading too many comments on right-wing websites. They love to use grade-school naming insults. “Libtard” is a favorite.

            Anyway, if you don’t want to read negative comments about Trump, you’d better restrict your reading to Breitbart and pro-Nazi websites.

            I don’t know why you’re defending Trump’s bigoted rants against Muslims, Mexicans, gays, browns, women, the disabled and undocumented immigrants. That bigotry will prove to be economically damaging to America.

            Economics is not just numbers. It’s people. Nations that oppress a group of people, suffer economically. The American South still has not recovered from slavery.

            But if you truly wish to defend Trump, you might take up a collection to help him pay the $25 MILLION he owes as a result of his Trump University scam.


          4. Got it.

            If I don’t attack Trump all day, every day (like you do) then I am “Defending Trump’s bigoted rants…That bigotry will prove to be economically damaging to America.”

            I have often said that I don’t like Trump. However for you, such words are a vigorous defense of Trump. For you, I am a Nazi unless I constantly call Trump “Hitler.”

            Moreover, show me a person who compulsively calls everyone around him a bigot, and I’ll show you a bigot. What’s that line from the play Hamlet? “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

            With all sincerity and respect, you have serious issues. You revealed this when you said you would hate Trump even if he instituted your “ten steps to prosperity.”

            You hate Trump. Okay. Fine. Understood. We get it. Message received, noted and logged. Can we talk about something else at least once a year maybe?

            If you want to discuss Trump from a strictly economic standpoint (and I don’t mean endlessly labeling Trump a “bigot” and “Hitler”) then great. Otherwise I just scroll down without reading.


  4. Apparently, “blind trust” issue is off the table:

    Ivanka Trump, husband sit in on Japanese PM meeting

    Critics are blasting Donald Trump’s decision to allow his daughter and son-in-law into his meeting with the Japanese Prime Minister. Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald and investigative journalist Vicky Ward join MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle to discuss.

    Apparently, the law and ethics are off the table, too:

    WaPo: Trump used money from charity to settle legal problems

    The Washington Post reports that Donald Trump used $258,000 from his charity to settle his legal problems. Reporter David Fahrenthold joins Kate Snow.

    Must be “Crooked Hillary’s” fault.


  5. Ask not what the Germans did to the Jews, but what did the Jews do to the Germans? Were the Jews just these innocent, guiltless, blameless, little special snowflakes and persecuted by the Germans unprovoked for no reason but just for their religion as they claim?


    1. Thank you, Bob. You just made my case about Trump. Much appreciated.

      Elizabeth and John, do you see what I mean?

      All it takes is a Hitler or a Hitler clone to bring out the bigots. It happened in Germany. It can happen (is happening) here.


      1. @Rodger, actually I do not see what you mean. I assume that is not sarcasm on Bob’s part and if it is not I still don’t see what you mean??


        1. Just so you know what you helped elect (by voting for a 3rd party candidate or by not voting at all):

          Jeff Sessions, as Attorney General

          If he is confirmed, Mr. Sessions, who is considered one of the most conservative members of the Senate, will most likely push for wholesale changes and hard-line stances on immigration, terrorism, crime, drugs and guns. Democrats fear he could wipe away progress in civil rights, changes in sentencing and police accountability.

          The Senate Judiciary Committee, where Mr. Sessions has served for years and sometimes clashed with fellow members, will consider his nomination. Democrats are eager to interrogate him on the the accusations of racially charged comments in the 1980s that derailed his nomination as a federal judge.

          In 1981, a Justice Department prosecutor from Washington stopped by to see Jeff Sessions, the United States attorney in Mobile, Ala., at the time. The prosecutor, J. Gerald Hebert, said he had heard a shocking story: A federal judge had called a prominent white lawyer “a disgrace to his race” for representing black clients.

          “Well,” Mr. Sessions replied, according to Mr. Hebert, “maybe he is.”

          In testimony before Congress in 1986, Mr. Hebert and others testified that Mr. Sessions had referred to the American Civil Liberties Union and the N.A.A.C.P. as “un-American” for “trying to force civil rights down the throats of people.”

          One African-American prosecutor testified that Mr. Sessions had called him “boy” and joked that he thought that the Ku Klux Klan “was O.K. until I found out they smoked pot.”

          “He’s one of the most strident anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-L.G.B.T. voices in the Senate,” said Marge Baker, executive vice president of People for the American Way, a liberal civil rights group in Washington.

          Mr. Sessions, like Mr. Trump, has made tougher immigration policies a central priority. He has said President Obama’s Justice Department flouted the will of Congress by failing to deport millions of undocumented immigrants.

          Is this what you want for the highest law-enforcement office in America?

          Just asking.

          And did you consider this:

          Sessions also said “Fundamentally, almost no one coming from the Dominican Republic to the United States is coming because they have a skill that would benefit us and that would indicate their likely success in our society.

          They come in because some other family member of a qualified relation is here as a citizen or even a green card holder. That is how they get to come.

          They are creating a false document to show these are relatives or their spouses and they are married when it is not so.”

          Maybe it’s just me, but that sounds like classic bigoted generalities. What do you think?


  6. Mr. Mitchell, stop the blame game, PLEASE.

    The only people responsible for Hillary’s loss is the DNC. They screwed over Sanders and they decided to keep on supporting Hillary despite all the Wikileaks’ revelations.

    You say people who voted third party helped elect Trump? Christ, that is EXTREMELY disingenuous. Why should people have to stick to the same ol’ dichotomy between donkeys and elephants?

    BTW, if all of Hillary’s supporters voted for Jill Stein, then today Jill Stein would be president elect and not some inconsistent, thin-skinned, power-hungry clown; so what’s your point sir?


    1. I agree with you and in fact, said so last week HERE

      The reason why people who voted 3rd party helped elect Trump is based on simple math. I expect that the vast majority of them understood that Trump was a worse choice than Clinton.

      Since Jill Stein had no hope of winning, those people voting for Stein instead of Clinton, allowed the worst choice to win.

      I understand trying to make a statement, but if it causes the worst of all results, it’s illogical.

      Stein lost, and Clinton lost, and Trump won. What is the result you hoped for when cast your vote?


      1. Maybe Trump winning the election is the best thing that can happen to third parties. Maybe (but then again just maybe) next elections people will walk away from the same old power hegemony that exists between Republicans and Democrats.



    The privatization of state pension plans always goes like this…

    STEP 1: Tell the local news media that the state retirement plan is “unfunded” and “insolvent.”

    STEP 2: Blame this alleged “insolvency” on average people for not having voted for sufficient bond issues or tax increases.

    STEP 3: Insist that the only way to “save” the plan is via privatization and compulsory participation, plus tax increases.

    Voila: the private owner of the plan reaps billions in profits.

    We saw this in California. We are now seeing it in Arizona.



  8. As others have suggested I would like to also move on but I do have to respond…

    Rodger, again you are wrong…..

    @Rodger= “So you don’t think the election of Trump is an economic issue” –

    The election of Trump was a rejection of Hillary. A rejection of her corruption, that of the of the DNC and the establishment in general. All of which have been ignoring the middle class for many years in favor of their crony friends.

    If Hillary was not the nominee trump would have lost! Hillary Clinton is the only one to blame for her loss!

    @ Rodger -“Do you realize that you have spent 9 paragraphs telling me I’m wrong and that MS has “big flaws,” without providing one concrete example?” –

    No, I don’t and neither do you.. because I didn’t. The first paragraph I spent trying to tell you I am not a troll and I am not here just to give you a hard time.

    The other 8 paragraphs, like other commenters, I was trying to tell you, you were being ridiculous and irrational regarding Trump and I was also trying to warn you that you are quickly loosing credibility, what little you have left that is!

    It was never my intention to discuss what I perceive as the flaws of MS, which I think you knew.

    @ Rodger =”As for “supporting Hillary,” actually I supported Elizabeth Warren” –

    As you noted Elizabeth Warren was not running for president, so your response is to say you were supporting someone for president who is not even running for president..yes it sounds ridiculous but that is the logic your using and it is nonsense!

    You have been using this and the nonsense about people voting for Jill Stein (we need change but according you to you we cannot vote for change, we have to vote for the establishment because of who might get elected??..brilliant, no wonder why the country is so screwed up) to try to deflect from the fact that you did support Hillary Clinton. You never just said you were against Trump you also said you supported Hillary,even if it was because you do not like Trump, you still supported her and sold out.

    Also lets not forget that Elizabeth Warren also sold out and supported Hillary Clinton. By the way other than talk what has Elizabeth actually done for the working class person…that is an honest question as I would really like to know because I am not aware of anything? In any case now that she sold out is she finally showing that she is one of those fake democrats you keep telling us about?

    As mentioned you didn’t just try to warn us about Trump, you also supported Hillary. Again you sold out and have become part of the establishment, you know those people you have been warning us about, which does not bode well for MS.

    If you and Elizabeth can sell out so easily what will others do using the MS banner? MS requires people of good faith to implement it and the 10 steps to prosperity, that is as far as I can tell according to MS there really is no restrictions on Gov spending except maybe inflation. So if someone runs with the promise to implement MS/10 steps and people “see the light”, once that person is elected how do we know they will not also sell out. Considering how easy you and Elizabeth sold out, what else will they try to implement since the government can afford just about anything?

    Finally for this point even when you were “trying” to warn us about Trump most of your points were/are are ridiculous or just plain BS, like trying to compare him to Hitler.

    @ Rodger = “Every newspaper in America seems to agree.” Are those the same newspapers that Hillary and the DNC bought and payed for, gave direction to and fed questions to during press conference? In any case are you now following their orders? And are these not the same newspapers that you have been telling us don’t know anything about economics or MS and spread the “Big Lie” but yet now your telling us that we should listen to them?

    @ Rodger= “If you would like to draw up a list of parallels between Clinton and Hitler, I’ll be glad to publish it.”

    Thanks, but no thanks.. since that is not what I said. Actually it is far from what I said. I believe I said…

    “If any politician could be compared to Hilter it would not be trump but Clinton but even as crazy as she is that is still a bit of stretch!”

    Since this is what you do when someone disagrees with you, I will restate it…I don’t believe Clinton is Hilter! – Got it?

    Now if I had to make a case that one is closer to Hitler then that would be Hillary and Not Trump. However, Since I don’t agree that either is Hitler, I am not going to make that case…but nice try…

    Finally @ Rodger= “You really don’t see that Bob’s comments are the words of a Jew-hating bigot? Really?”

    Again is this what you do when a disagreement does not go your way, twist things around??

    Your point was not about Bob’s Bigotry but about Trump.

    You were suggesting that Trump was either the cause of Bob’s Bigoted comments, is responsible for Bob’s Bigoted comments or that Trump is as bigoted as Bob’s comments are. In any case, It is that point that you were making (Not Bobs comments itself) that I questioned and thought was ridiculous not Bob’s comments itself.

    Finally you mention folks who may or may not be a part of Trumps administration as a reflection on Trump himself and as proof of Trumps bigotry but what about this person…. which by the way you supported…

    And in regard to Trump’s “anti-brown, anti-Mexican” positions as you put it..I wonder who sounds a bit like Trump, who had positions and rhetoric a bit similar to Trump (at least until it was inconvenient to hold those views) and who supported this person??

    Hopefully you will listen to all the other commenters and stop with the hysteria and everyone can move forward.


    1. From what I can tell, you voted for Trump because you believe:

      1. Clinton agrees with Trump about undocumented immigrants
      2. Clinton agrees with Trump about building a wall
      3. Clinton agrees with Trump about minorities
      4 Trump is more honest than Clinton, despite Trump’s having just paid a $25,000,000 (!) penalty for his Trump Univesity scam, and previously having been fined for self-dealing with Trump Foundation.

      In summary, you hate HIllary because you think she is a lesser version of Trump. Does that about cover it?

      Now you have your Trump and your Republican Congress and your soon-to-be Republican Supreme Court. Let’s see how you like your conservative rulers.

      As the saying goes, “Be careful what you ask for.”

      If you truly want the answers to your questions about Elizabeth Warren, check out the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Also, see this: http://elizabethwarren.com/issues


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s