WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah begged readers today to vote against Hillary Clinton in November, calling the former secretary of state “annoying,” “unbearable” and “shrill.”
Indeed, Farah wrote that if “this witch” ever became president, it may do great damage to his health because “the mere thought of her in power will make me sick to my stomach and shorten my life.”
“It’s enough to make me sick that she is even in the race,” he wrote.
Earlier this week, Farah claimed that he will “fear for my life” if Clinton is elected president.
If you’re like me, you are just plain sick and tired of this woman. You find her annoying, insufferable, unbearable, DEPLORABLE, detestable, arrogant, intolerable, haughty, imperious, pompous, presumptuous, shrill, cold, calculating, contemptuous, self-important, autocratic and lacking any appeal whatsoever.
Do I have that about right?
And the big question I have for every American – from those already supporting Donald Trump to those who supported her opponent, Bernie Sanders, in the Democratic primaries – is this: Can you even imagine enduring four years of this witch as president?
I’m sorry, it’s that personal for me.
I don’t really care about her health. I care about mine.
It’s not just that I know she is a vindictive, petty, intolerant monster who will target those with whom she disagrees for all manner of calamity. It’s that the mere thought of her in power will make me sick to my stomach and shorten my life.
Just exactly why would anyone vote for Hillary Clinton?
It’s enough to make me sick that she is even in the race.
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah wrote today that while he has felt the burden of persecution under President Obama, “I never once feared for my life because Obama was president.”
That will change, however, if Hillary Clinton is elected president, he said.
Farah claimed that Clinton critics in the 1990s experienced all forms of abuses: “Offices were broken into, some were harassed in their homes, pets were killed, threats were made, careers were ruined and some died under mysterious circumstances. The Clintons got away with it all. Therefore, we can be sure it will be worse if they are allowed back into power.”
“I don’t see how America could survive as anything remotely reminiscent of a self-governing free society,” he wrote. “If Hillary wins, we’re done.”
I’ve endured the inevitable Internal Revenue Service audits and watched in shock as Republicans did nothing to hold him accountable. In fact, I watched as they rolled over and authorized Obama to borrow and spend endlessly to his heart’s content.
But, during those eight years, I never once feared for my life because Obama was president.
Let me take you back to the 1990s and tell you what it was like being a dissident, a critic, a political adversary of Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Yes, you could expect to be audited. But that was just the warning shot.
People like me who investigated and exposed the Clinton administration scandals could expect much, much worse.
Offices were broken into, some were harassed in their homes, pets were killed, threats were made, careers were ruined and some died under mysterious circumstances.
The Clintons got away with it all.
Therefore, we can be sure it will be worse if they are allowed back into power.
Expect a scorched-earth policy.
I don’t see how America could survive as anything remotely reminiscent of a self-governing free society.
Yesterday, WorldNetDaily founder Joseph Farah appeared on E.W. Jackson’s “Awakening” radio program to warn that the U.S. will witness national devastation and divine judgment if Hillary Clinton is elected president.
“This is an evil woman,” he said of Clinton. “We will not be able to recognize this country and what it was if we give her four years in the White House. Slam the door shut on a future America that has any semblance of liberty and justice.”
While he said the election of Ronald Reagan “brought a blessing on this country” that “lasted more than 10 years,” Farah predicted that Clinton’s election would lead to God’s judgment.
“If we reward her non-accomplishment, her non-achievement and her self-interested self-dealings that are so evident, we are asking God to judge us very, very sternly,” he said.
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah is obsessedwith the conspiracy theory that President Obama intends to remain in office indefinitely, writing yet another column today in his signature just asking the question style about how Obama may remain president past his second term.
In the latest version of his claim, Farah alleges that Obama may have Hillary Clinton indicted over the relationship between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation after she wins the presidential election.
That way, he says, Obama “will create a constitutional crisis” and attempt to stay in the White House.
So what if – and it’s a big “if” – Obama is holding something back? Suppose he has actually authorized a probe of what she did as secretary of state to benefit herself and the Clinton Foundation.
Is it possible he might use the findings – and, believe me, they are not hard to find – to indict her between Election Day and Jan. 17, while he is still president?
If she is indicted on serious charges, she will not be permitted to take the oath of office. Neither will Tim Kaine be permitted to assume the office of the president because he will not yet be vice president.
The whole thing will create a constitutional crisis. The next in line, House Speaker Paul Ryan, will not be allowed to assume the presidency, either, because there is a sitting president.
If this admittedly unlikely and far-fetched scenario occurs, it will demonstrate that Obama has been planning it for quite some time. That’s why I’m telling you about the remote possibility now.
Had Hillary been indicted during the campaign, as she should have been, this whole scenario would not have been possible. The Democrats would have been forced to nominate another candidate – probably Bernie Sanders. Of course, we know the Democratic Party establishment would not have allowed that under any circumstances.
Continuing in his news organization’s long history of promoting conspiracy theories by “ just asking the question,” WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah yesterday took it upon himself to ask “the obvious question no one’s asking Obama”: Will the president leave office if Donald Trump is elected?
Farah speculates that the president’s recent criticism of Trump may indicate a plan to ignore the Constitution and maintain power even after November’s election. While Farah claims that Obama’s recent comments about Trump’s fitness to serve as president are responsible for his third-term fears, this is far fromthe first time he or his outlet have speculated that the president will attempt to stay in office past January 2017.
It’s clear Obama has no use for Donald Trump. But that’s not really the point here.
Like it or not, and I don’t like it, Obama is the sitting president of the United States until Jan. 20, 2017.
The question this harsh, unprecedented attack by a sitting president on a major-party nominee to succeed him raises should be obvious: What happens if Donald Trump wins the election in November?
Given what Obama has said about Trump, would he not have an obligation to prevent Trump from assuming office? And what would that mean to the peaceful process America has enjoyed for more than two centuries of transitions of power?
These are questions Americans have never before been confronted with in American history.
Should we not be concerned about what Obama might do?
Should he not be asked pointedly about the implications of his stunning statements?
Should he not express exactly what his intentions are beforehand rather than to leave any doubt in the minds of the people?
If no one else will ask the question, I will: “Mr. President, if Donald Trump wins the election to become the next president of the United States, will you willingly and peacefully leave office and cooperate fully with the transition of power the way all of your predecessors in the White House have done in the past?”
It’s a simple question that needs to be asked and answered – given Obama’s highly inflammatory rhetoric over the last week.
There should be no doubt in the minds of the American people. There should be no veiled threats hanging over the heads of the citizenry as we prepare for the next election. It’s time for Obama to lay his cards on the table.
Will America follow the rule of law and the will of the people after the November election no matter what Obama might think about his successor?
Christian Broadcasting Network reporter David Brody hails Donald Trump Jr. as “the GOP JFK Jr.”
Pat Buchanan is thrilled that Donald Trump has dispensed with the “Bush idea of remaking America into a more ethnically, culturally, diverse nation through mass immigration, rooted in an egalitarian ideology.”
Joseph Farah says if “black lives matter – and they surely do – the logical, rational, historical and practical course of action in 2016 is to vote Republican.”
Phyllis Schlafly bravely declares that America is “the ‘land of the free and home of the brave.’ We don’t need to adopt Muslim policies.”
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah dedicated his column yesterday to arguing that the Justice Department shouldn’t get involved in investigating the recent police shootings of two African American men, Philando Castile in Minnesota and Alton Sterling in Louisiana, in part because the DOJ “and its boss, Barack Obama, have only served to fan the flames of racial division for the last eight years, thus becoming part of the problem rather than part of the solution.”
Farah not only blamed Obama for fanning “the flames of racial division,” but he managed to connect the president to the shootings themselves, noting that both men were carrying weapons when they were shot and it is Obama who “has helped perpetuate this notion that armed civilians automatically represent danger to the public and the police.”
There’s one more critical facet of these two recent police killings that are worth noting.
In both cases, the men killed had guns in their possession – and that fact led directly to their executions. For victim Castile, it was particularly heartbreaking. He had a concealed carry permit and offered to the police officers who had stopped his vehicle with his girlfriend and child aboard that he had in his possession a firearm and a permit for it. He was trying to be forthright, candid, helpful.
It cost him his life.
As he reportedly reached for his wallet at the instruction of an officer who demanded his license and registration, he was repeatedly shot and left to bleed to death without any medical attention from officers. They never even checked his pulse.
What attracted cops in Baton Rouge to the other victim, Sterling, was a call placed by a homeless man to police about a man with a gun. Sterling never drew his gun on officers. He can’t be seen reaching for it as two cops tackle him to the ground. Then he is shot point black in the chest at least five times while he is subdued.
There is no excuse for this.
Cops like this are unfit to wear a uniform and carry guns themselves. Again, who has helped perpetuate this notion that armed civilians automatically represent danger to the public and the police?
I can think of no one more responsible for creating that climate of hysteria than Barack Obama.
In the lead-up to the last presidential election, conservative bloggers thought they had discovered a grand conspiracy among pollsters to suppress Mitt Romney’s polling numbers, a claim that Romney’s campaign appeared to have embraced as well, and declared that the polls must be “unskewed” to find the truth.
Yesterday, radio host Alex Jones and WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah urged Jones’ listeners not to believe the polls showing Trump trailing Clinton, saying that in reality the two are either neck-and-neck or Trump has a double-digit lead.
Jones said that liberals are “attacking” and “stabbing people” in hopes of intimidating Trump supporters from voting because they know “Trump’s going to win with a Reagan-style landslide.” Trump campaign sources, according to Jones, tell him that “Hillary is just trying to act like she’s really winning and have the media say it because they’re looking at stealing the election.”
The bogus polls, he said, will help Clinton get away with the theft. He added that he wears his Trump hat in “communist areas” to inspire people to be more open about their support for the presumptive GOP nominee.
On Fox News host Sean Hannity’s official website, a blog post complained the poll “is heavily skewed.” On his June 27 radio show, Hannity cited the partisan breakdown and described it as a “misleading poll” because the media is “in the tank for Hillary.”
Hannity apparently didn’t learn his lesson about attempting to unskew polls in 2012, when he was saying things like, “These polls are so skewed, so phony, that we need to start paying attention to what’s going on so that you won’t be deflated.”
In a post purporting to highlight “More Polling Tricks” from an “EXTREMELY SKEWED” poll, conservative blogger Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit complained this week that “Reuters freighted their poll with 20 percent more Democrats than Republicans” and concluded that “we can safely say that Trump appears to be in much better shape than the poll suggests and could likely be headed to a landslide victory in November.”
Hoft made a similar argument in September of 2012, complaining that a CNN poll showing Obama leading Romney “drastically oversampled Democrats to get this stunning result.” He then went on to cite Dean Chambers, who said that when “unskewed” the CNN poll showed Romney leading by eight percent.
Yesterday, Joseph Farah of the fringe outlet WorldNetDaily spoke with Alex Jones, whose radio broadcast is a haven for right-wing paranoia, about their shared love of Trump, whom Farah claims is energizing people across the political spectrum thanks to “his outspokenness” and “forthrightness.”
“Look at that speech he gave about Hillary last week,” Farah said. “That was amazing.”
“You could have been listening to Alex Jones or Joseph Farah give that speech!” he added.
Sunday marked the first anniversary of the Supreme Court’s landmark marriage equality decision, which, if Religious Right activists were to be believed, was to usher in a horrible tyranny that would lead to mass deaths and war.
Of course, the Right’s doomsday predictions about what would happen if same-sex marriage became legal nationwide were totally unfounded, and only a tiny contingent of conservativescame to a protest the ruling in Washington, D.C., this weekend.
While the conservative movement certainly hasn’t given up on the fight against LGBT rights and is thrilled by Donald Trump’spromise to appoint anti-LGBT judges who would oppose the marriage ruling, many activists have once again shown that they are more interested in stirring up fears about the LGBT community than in the facts.
Here are just five of the craziestpredictions that conservative politicians and pundits made about Obergefell v. Hodges, all of which are yet to come true.
Many “mainstream” Religious Right leaders said that if the Supreme Court were to strike down state bans on same-sex marriage, Americans should prepare for a revolution.
“We’ve got to fight to our deaths to save this great country,” said Cliff Kincaid of the conservative group Accuracy In Media, while Vision America’s Rick Scarborough vowed that he was willing to “burn” in defiance of gay marriage, which he said would “unleash the spirit of hell on the nation.”
One year later, no anti-gay revolution has occurred and Rick Scarborough has not self-immolated.
Just before the ruling, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah called on governors “to secede” from the union in order “to offer a refuge” for the “millions of Americans” who he believed would flee the country as a result of marriage equality. “The rewards could be great. I would certainly consider relocating. How about you?” he asked. “If not a state, are there any nations in the world interested in a pilgrimage by millions of Americans?”
Focus on the Family founder James Dobson warned that the U.S. could witness a second civil war over a same-sex marriage decision and televangelist Rick Joyner predicted that the court would “start an unraveling where our country fractures like it hasn’t since the Civil War.”
Radio host Rick Wiles predicted that “God will cut off America’s food supply and this nation will be hit with disease, pestilence, drought, natural calamities and a great shaking” and urged people to flee the country.
Following the passage of the 2009 law that expanded hate crime protections to LGBT people, many right-wing politicians and analysts falsely claimed that the act legalized pedophilia. Of course, it did nothing of the sort and child abuse is still a crime.
Many of these same people claimed years later that the Obergefell ruling would also legalize pedophilia, which, obviously, it did not do.
If the courts rule that people have a civil right not only to be a homosexual but a civil right to have a homosexual marriage, then a homosexual couple coming to a pastor who believes in biblical marriage who says ‘I can’t perform that wedding’ will now be breaking the law. It’s not just saying, ‘I’m sorry you have a preference.’ No, you will be breaking the law subject to civil for sure and possible criminal penalties for violating the law…. If you do practice biblical convictions and you carry them out and you do what you’ve been led by the spirit of God to do, your behavior will be criminal.
No pastor has been arrested for refusing to officiate a same-sex couple’s wedding, reading from the Bible or preaching against homosexuality, all things that conservatives predicted would happen.
Many pundits, however, have wrongly used the case of Kim Davis to claim that their fears were realized.
Davis, a Kentucky county clerk, was temporarily incarcerated by a federal judge when she refused to abide by court orders which found that she was unlawfully denying same-sex couples marriage licenses. Davis, who boasted that she was defying the Supreme Court decision and subsequent rulings because she was working under “ God’s authority ,” was released after deputy clerks in the county office agreed to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Davis was not incarcerated because of her religious objections but because, in her role as a government employee, she clearly defied the rule of law. She was not attempting to exercise her religious freedom as a private citizen but was trying to impose her personal religious beliefs on the functions of government, and make all the people in her jurisdiction abide by her faith.
Phillip Jennings explains why God would vote for Donald Trump.
Joseph Farah guarantees that "Trump is going to win. Hillary is not. It won’t be close."
Cliff Kincaid wonders why President Obama "gets emotional talking about Islam" and "gets emotional when talking about Islam being blamed for killing Americans."
Linda Harvey is very upset about gay-friendly Christians: "Proud homosexual rebellion is taking many people’s lives to the edge of eternal danger but, unfortunately, people who call themselves Christians are now jumping in front of this parade with a twisted version of the gospel, one that poses a great threat: becoming comfortable with God-offending sins."
Finally, Scott Lively says the massacre in Orlando happened because America has abandoned God: "What claim does any person or society have to protection by God if it doesn’t actually belong to Him — or in America‘s case, has pushed Him forcefully from every aspect of public life?"
Joseph Farah says that times are tough over at his conspiracy theory website and that WND now faces an "existential threat."
Sure, Richard Viguerie once said that Donald Trump was totally unstable and had "serious psychological problems," but that was before; now he says that anyone who won't vote for Trump should just "drop the charade and have the guts to defend your choice to advance Hillary Clinton's campaign and take ownership of the destruction of liberty and constitutional government that her election will surely bring."
The latest column from David Lane: "The recent SCOTUS ruling codifying into law same-sex intercourse and marriage, and the revelry that followed by corporate America each serve as perfect examples of how our nation stands on the bring [sic] of a moral collapse. Instead of deep grief and remorse over the immorality of five Supreme Court Justices, big business gloated in the systematization of sexual deviancy and abnormality."
Bert Farias mourns that Muhammad Ali died without converting to Christianity becuase "Islam is a big fat lie from the pit of hell."
Finally, some helpful child-rearing advice from James Dobson: "It is not inappropriate for a man to feel things deeply or to reveal his inner passions and thoughts ... Tell him it is great to laugh and have fun with his friends, but advise him not to be 'goofy.' Guys who are goofy are not respected, and people, especially girls and women, do not follow boys and men whom they disrespect ... [G]irls should not call boys on the telephone—at least not until a committed relationship has developed. Guys should be the initiators, planning the dates and asking for the girl’s company."
Farah declared that without such a law, “[i]t’s the end of the First Amendment and the constitutional principles that make the country a sanctuary of liberty for 300 years.”
The LGBT community, according to Farah, is practicing “bigotry of the worst kind” and “persecuting” conservative Christians: “This kind of terrorism, and I use that word advisedly, is going to cause a major backlash.”
“Long gone are the days when homosexuals faced discrimination,” he added. “Today, some of them are actively targeted [sic] others with something worse. And they are being actively encouraged by corporate interests and weak-kneed, limp-wristed politicians like Gov. Deal.”
It’s sickening to see this happening in America.
It’s coercion of the worst kind.
It’s bigotry of the worst kind.
It’s the end of the First Amendment and the constitutional principles that make the country a sanctuary of liberty for 300 years.
You cannot establish individual rights by trampling on the rights of others. It’s a simple principle.
In America, everyone’s God-given rights are to be protected. But no one has the right to demand that a bakery make a cake that is morally offensive to the baker. Get a life, for heaven’s sake. Go to another baker who shares your view of the world. Don’t force your will on others.
Isn’t that supposedly what the LGBTQ crowd is all about – doing your own thing?
It’s not the bakers who are breaking down the door of the homosexual couple and persecuting them. It’s the other way around.
And this must stop.
This kind of terrorism, and I use that word advisedly, is going to cause a major backlash.
Long gone are the days when homosexuals faced discrimination. Today, some of them are actively targeted others with something worse. And they are being actively encouraged by corporate interests and weak-kneed, limp-wristed politicians like Gov. Deal.
We could only laugh when Joseph Farah, the editor of WorldNetDaily and one of the most vocal anti-Obama birthers, decided to endorse Ted Cruz, a candidate for president who, unlike President Obama, was actually born abroad.
Farah has devoted years of activism to claiming that Obama was ineligible to serve as president because he was purportedly born outside of the U.S., floating the conspiracy theory that the president was secretlyborninKenya:
Why won’t a birth hospital in Hawaii come forward to verify the historic event – the birth of the baby who would become the first black president? Why the secrecy even after Obama wrote a public letter to the hospital claiming to have been born there?
Let me just say this in closing: The Constitution is precious. It is the basis for the rule of law in America. If we discount clear provisions like the one offered in Article 2, Section 1 on presidential eligibility, we might as well scrap the document altogether and just allow ourselves to be ruled by men, rather than law.
Farah even said that he wouldn’t support fellow conservatives like Marco Rubio or Bobby Jindal because, according to him, they are “by chance of birth, 100 percent, totally and inarguably ineligible” to be president since “both are sons of parents who were not U.S. citizens when they were born.”
But it appears that Farah has abandoned his own stance, arguing in his latest column that Cruz is eligible to serve as president, despite his Canadian birthplace, because the Texas senator “loves America” and he “could never say that about Obama.”
You will not hear me criticize Trump. I agree with him on much of what he says. He’s brutally honest. His presence in this race has been healthy for the country. If he should win the nomination, I would enthusiastically support him.
But Ted Cruz has a clearer vision for America. He is dependable based on his life experience and his consistent rhetoric.
He is the antithesis of Obama, Hillary and Sanders. And that’s what America needs.
Many have asked me, “What about the question of constitutional eligibility?”
My answer is direct: Obama and the establishment media have made a mockery of the Constitution in many ways, but none more than their attacks on the “natural born citizen” requirement. So much damage was done to that simple clause in the last eight years, I don’t believe there’s any going back.
You can’t even have a serious conversation about the eligibility issue any longer. So be it.
What I do know is that Ted Cruz loves America.
I could never say that about Obama.
The eligibility requirement of the Constitution was intended to protect the nation from foreign corruption, entanglements, intrigue, suspicion and conflicts of interest.
I don’t believe anyone in their right mind thinks Ted Cruz has any allegiance to either Canada or Cuba. This guy loves America with all of his heart, mind and soul.
Cruz, unlike Obama, was actually born abroad, and his Canadian birth has become an issue in the campaign thanks to Farah’s fellow birther, Donald Trump.
But apparently this inconvenient fact doesn’t seem to bother Farah, who in his endorsement didn’t even try to explain why he’s backing someone who doesn’t meet his eligibility criteria — despite obsessing over Obama’s imagined birth outside of the U.S.
That’s why it’s time for Republicans to stop eating their own. To win in November will require unity among the top vote-getters and a healing of the bad feelings of record numbers of GOP voters who turned out in what is the equivalent of a grass-roots rebellion against establishment, business-as-usual politics.
I am preparing myself for what appears to be inevitable – nominee Trump or nominee Cruz. Who is my preference?
I think Ted Cruz’s history demonstrates he has the clearest, most Reaganesque vision of where the country needs to go in its much-needed recovery from eight years of Barack Obama. Cruz is principled, sophisticated and a solid conservative whose understanding of and commitment to the Constitution is unshakeable.
At a time when one of the three branches of the federal government, the Supreme Court, hangs in the balance, it is Ted Cruz who, without question, can be counted upon to nominate justices who will uphold the high standards of Antonin Scalia and the originalists.
Ted Cruz is the real deal. That’s not to slight Donald Trump, who has played an invaluable role in this campaign – breaking the back of political correctness, presenting a positive vision forward for America and standing up to those who would prefer to see the nation borderless and rudderless.
If Trump turns out to be the winner of the GOP nomination, I will unhesitatingly support him.
But it’s time to choose – between two.
For me the choice is clear – Ted Cruz.
America, as we have known it, simply can’t survive another corrupt and lawless White House – not four years and certainly not eight years. Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, who have far more common ground than differences, need to start the healing process in the best interests of the country.
Last night, Rachel Maddow called out Donald Trump for touting the “amazing honor to be named man of the year” by the far-right conspiracy theory site WorldNetDaily. She noted that while Trump has gone silent about his discredited birther conspiracy theory, which he raised when floating the idea of a campaign against President Obama in 2012, he is proud to stand with WorldNetDaily, which is “the headquarters for the Obama birth certificate conspiracy theory.”
“That belief of [Trump’s], his association with the whole birther conspiracy theory movement, that was crazy to the point of journalists laughing in his face about it in 2011,” Maddow said. “Now, though, he is the prohibitive frontrunner to be the Republican presidential candidate this year, even though noting about him has changed.”
Yesterday, we noted that Donald Trump will be delivering the keynote address in March at an event honoring WorldNetDaily founder and editor Joseph Farah, who has been a leader in driving birther conspiracy theories about President Obama. Today, WND returns the favor, naming Trump its “ Man of the Year.”
(President Obama already took the “Muslim of the Year” honor from WND columnist Larry Klayman.)
Trump told WND that the recognition was an “honor” and that he appreciates the publication’s “informative polls and coverage.” (We’ve compiled some highlights of that “coverage” here.) From WND:
They treated his campaign announcement as a joke. They tried to destroy his business. They called him every foul name they could come up with. But at the end of 2015, the biased journalists, political consultants, leftist activists, snarky comedians and embittered critics of every stripe had to concede one man had beaten them all.
Donald J. Trump is the Republican favorite for president of the United States. There’s no indication he’ll fall from the top spot any time soon. And he’s the WND 2015 Man of the Year.
“It is my great honor to be named Man of the Year by your publication,” Trump said in a statement to WND. “I very much appreciate your informative polls and coverage. Together, we will Make America Great Again.”
WND specifically praised Trump for having “changed the accepted history of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks by forcing the media to report Muslim celebrations in the United States that day.” In fact, the media has repeatedlydebunked Trump’s claim that he saw “thousands and thousands” of American Muslims celebrating the 9/11 attacks in New Jersey.
“Has any personality ever dominated the news more than Donald Trump did in 2015?” asked WND Editor and CEO Joseph Farah. “I don’t think I’ve seen it in my lifetime. That’s why there can be no question about who 2015′s Man of the Year is – at least not if we’re being honest. He didn’t just change the debate, he became the debate. And there doesn’t seem to be any let-up in sight as we move into the presidential election year of 2016.”
As Farah observed, Trump has done what almost no other conservative has ever been able to accomplish by repeatedly forcing the mainstream media to back down. As he repeatedly brags, Trump turned immigration into a central issue in the Republican primary. Trump shifted the national conversation on terrorism by calling for a ban on Muslim immigration. He even changed the accepted history of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks by forcing the media to report Muslim celebrations in the United States that day.
WND even throws in some positive words for Trump from its chief birther correspondent Jerome Corsi, who, in addition to his crusade to prove that the president is lying about his birthplace, also thinks that Obama wears a ring from a secret marriage to his male Pakistani roommate. Corsi declares that Trump is “one of those rare people who appear in U.S. history as the right guy for the times” and that if he had lived during the American Revolution, he would have been “leading the Boston Tea Party and joining Sam Adams and Thomas Paine” in forming a new nation.
WND Senior Staff Writer and longtime political observer Jerome Corsi says Trump is the “real deal.”
He told WND: “Despite how much the Obama/Clinton leftists in the Democratic Party and the D.C. establishment leadership of the GOP hate Trump, he is not going away, he is not going to drop out, and he is positioned to win the GOP nomination and the White House despite all odds.”
Corsi believes Donald Trump is “one of those rare people who appear in U.S. history as the right guy for the times.”
“If these were the days of the American Revolution,” Corsi said, “Trump would be leading the Boston Tea Party and joining Sam Adams and Thomas Paine in carving the political room for a rebirth of the type of constitutional freedom our Founding Fathers had envisioned for the American Republic.”
Today’s challenge, Corsi stated, is political correctness. And Donald Trump is just the man to destroy it.
“Trump will succeed precisely because he is politically incorrect, because he dares to say what most Americans are thinking,” Corsi argued. “Calling Trump sexist, racist, and every phobe the leftist intolerant political ideologies can generate only boosts his popularity, as the mainstream media lose their power to control the news by calling their enemies a nasty name. He’s rising in the polls because he defies the politically correct rules ordained by pundits and exposes leftists – including those at Fox News – for what they are.”
Corsi, author of “What Went Wrong: Inside the GOP Debacle of 2012 and How It Can Be Avoided Next Time,” also says pundits are underestimating Trump’s chances to win both the primary and the general election.
“Trump will attract votes from women, Hispanics, and African-Americans,” Corsi predicted. “He has done more to improve the economic status of minorities in America than all the other candidates combined – in both the GOP and among the Democrats.”
The far-right outlet WorldNetDaily reported over the weekend that Trump and his fellow GOP candidate Mike Huckabee are both confirmed to speak at the Western Center for Journalism’s Western Conservative Conference in Scottsdale in March, at which Rush Limbaugh will present Joseph Farah, the founder of the Western Center and of WND, with the center’s “Hero of Freedom Award.” An invitation says that Trump will deliver the keynote address at the event, which is being co-chaired by Arizona Republican Reps. Matt Salmon and Paul Gosar and will also feature Rep. Trent Franks.
Farah, along with WND “reporter” Jerome Corsi, has been one of the most enthusiastic pushers of the birther myth, writing as recently as this month that Trump was right to call Obama’s birth certificate a “fake” and wondering if the promise of a payout late in life might prompt Obama to finally reveal the truth behind his “eligibility scam.”
Back in 2011, Farah credited Trump with raising the profile of Corsi’s book, “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” (published by WND), which debuted on the best seller list shortly after President Obama publicly released a copy of his birth certificate. Even after Obama made the certificate public, Farah said he was suspicious of its authenticity and added that even if it was authentic, Obama could be ineligible for the presidency anyway since his father was born abroad. (Farah quickly forgot his concerns when the Canadian-born Ted Cruz, who also has one foreign-born parent, started talking about running for president.)