Connect with us

News

‘Make Them Pay’: JD Vance Says ‘Destroy’ Those Who Oppose Values That Make America Great

Published

on

In a fascistic, nationalistic, and anti-“woke” speech to a right-wing pro-MAGA think tank in 2021, JD Vance decreed the conservative movement should destroy those who are “fighting the values and virtues that make this country great.”

Vance’s remarks to the Claremont Institute were unearthed Thursday by The Christian Science Monitor, which reported on his views about Amazon supporting Black Lives Matter, and companies that are pro-choice.

But his full 21-minute speech (video below, full published text here), which he delivered just two months before launching his successful U.S. Senate campaign, is much more broad and ideologically-driven. In it, he attacks globalization, Critical Race Theory (CRT), the Black Lives Matter movement, and the “digitalization of the American economy.”

In it, Vance, now the Republican Party’s vice-presidential nominee, alleges ideas that progressive institutions promote are the cause of America’s ills, and decrees the power those institutions have over society should be negated – or they should be destroyed.

READ MORE: Trump’s Latest Sentencing Delay Request Spurs Debate: ‘Not an Easy Call’ or ‘Hard Pass’?

“One of the biggest capital allocators in the world is that woke social justice hedge fund known as Harvard University, which has over $120 billion under management, which funds some of the most destructive ideologies all across our country, which literally trains the next generation of priests in the woke seminary that’s dominating our professional class,” Vance told the audience listening to his speech, “Fighting Woke Capital.”

After targeting institutions that he says are “woke social justice hedge fund[s],” like Harvard University, and the Ford Foundation, which allocate “woke capital,” Vance says, “I think there are some obvious solutions, and it should start from a fundamental premise that if you are fighting the American nation state, if you are fighting the values and virtues that make this country great, the conservative movement should be about nothing if not reducing your power, and if necessary, destroying you.”

In his remarks Vance does not appear to differentiate between institutions and the people who run them.

“We cannot let the people who are driving this country into the ground continue to benefit from special benefits,” Vance says, “from tax breaks, from subsidies, or from liability protections. That is the simple rule that we should follow. Harvard University’s $120 billion endowment is ammunition for our enemies, and we can’t let the enemy have that much ammunition or we’re going to lose. It’s that simple. This principle should guide all of our policies. If you cannot go after the pocketbook of these people, if you cannot make them pay, then you are accepting defeat. It’s that simple. We’re never going to beat them unless we go after them.”

READ MORE: ‘My Wife Had This Baby’: JD Vance Trounced for ‘Misogynistic’ Views on Women and Family

“We should eliminate all of the special privileges that exist for our non-profit foundation class,” Vance, who ran an unsuccessful nonprofit, adds. “If you’re spending all your money to teach racism to our children in their schools, why do we give you special tax breaks instead of taxing you more? When Biden raises taxes, the rich won’t pay the brunt of this. They’ll give money to their foundations, which will use it to push their progressive agenda. They’ll be saved from the consequence of the tax increase even as it will empower institutions that hate us. We need to stop that. The decision to give those foundations and those organizations special privileges is a decision made by public policy. We need better public policy, and a willingness to actually go after the institutions that are trying to destroy the American way of life.”

Commenting on Vance’s speech in 2021, Esquire’s Charles P. Pierce warned: “Fascism doesn’t die just because it loses an election here and there. Here it comes, America. Be ready. Because J.D. Vance knows what’s good for you.”

Watch Vance’s full speech below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Underestimating Harris’: Former Bush Strategist Warns Polls Off as Enthusiasm ‘Skyrockets’

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

These 19 Democrats May Already Be Jockeying for a Presidential Run: Report

Published

on

The November midterms are more than nine months away, but already there are well over a dozen Democrats who could be showing signs of interest in running for the White House in 2028.

That’s according to Zenith Research pollster Adam Carlson, who identified nineteen Democrats with varying degrees of proximity to a presidential race.

The list includes current and former U.S. Senators, Congress members, governors, and mayors. One former cabinet secretary, one former ambassador, and one former astronaut. But overall, the list is heavy with executive experience — not just Washington politicians. That could be a feather in the cap for Democrats, as the GOP’s current bench appears to be drawn largely from inside the Trump administration — and voters may not want four, if not eight, more years of the same.

Nearly all have accumulated years — and in some cases, decades — of experience in government, spanning local, state, and national offices, yet none is older than in their mid-60s. The youngest is currently just one year beyond the Constitution’s 35-year age threshold. And today, after nearly a decade of some of the oldest U.S. presidents in history, that age range could bring a sigh of relief for many voters.

Many also hail from across the country, rather than being concentrated among so-called coastal elites — a longstanding critique often leveled at Democrats.

READ MORE: ‘Damage Control’: Trump Mocked for New Weekly Barnstorming Blitz Months Ahead of Midterms

Carlson divided the list into categories. Five are “clearly running,” six seem likely, four fall into a “wouldn’t be surprised” section, and just one is seen as “unlikely.” The future of two could depend on the 2026 race, and one is a “wildcard.”

Here are Carlson’s predictions:

Those clearly signaling a run include Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear; former U.S. Transportation Secretary and former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg; former Chicago mayor and U.S. ambassador Rahm Emanuel — who also served in the Obama White House; California Governor Gavin Newsom; and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro.

The “seems likely” group ranges from former Newark mayor and current U.S. Senator Cory Booker, to former Vice President Kamala Harris, along with U.S. Senator and former NASA astronaut Mark Kelly, U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker.

Under “wouldn’t be surprised,” are U.S. Senator Ruben Gallego, Maryland Governor Wes Moore, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, (AOC), and U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen.

The “unlikely” candidate, according to Carlson, is Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

The two “depends on 2026” candidates are both U.S. Senators, and both from Georgia: Senator Jon Ossoff and Senator Raphael Warnock.

Lastly, the “wildcard”: political commentator and television host Jon Stewart.

READ MORE: ‘Can Barely Keep His Eyes Open’: Trump Mocked Over ‘Ramblefest’ Davos Speech

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

‘Damage Control’: Trump Mocked for New Weekly Barnstorming Blitz Months Ahead of Midterms

Published

on

As his poll numbers continue to drop, the White House is announcing that President Donald Trump will begin a weekly barnstorming blitz of the country to rally supporters with stump speeches designed to change voters’ perceptions that high prices are Trump’s fault.

“Trump’s first stop will be on Tuesday in Iowa, where he will deliver a speech on the economy and energy, chief of staff Susie Wiles told reporters on the way to Davos, Switzerland,” Politico reported. “The travel blitz beginning in January is much earlier than during his first term, when he began traveling aggressively to support candidates just after Labor Day.”

“Trump has struggled to articulate an affordability message that moves the needle with voters, and a purposeful tack back to domestic matters could help that perception,” Politico noted, adding that “polling has regularly shown Trump’s popularity slipping and voters beginning to blame his policies for the high cost of living.”

According to Zeteo News’ Prem Thakker, Trump is running negative — and in some cases double-digit negative — in a dozen states that will hold elections for the U.S. Senate this November. Thakker cited data from The Economist, which also shows that the president’s net approval rating is now -19 percent, down two points from last week and “the lowest it has been this term.”

READ MORE: DOJ Delay Continues as Judge Denies Epstein Files Special Master

Some of those state ratings, Thakker noted, include:
Georgia: -18.6%
Maine: -18.4%
Texas: -17.2%
Michigan: -15.8%
N Carolina: -13.6%

Meanwhile, some appeared optimistic.

“As President Trump barnstorms the country to advance his America First agenda, Republicans are poised to defy history in the midterms,” Republican National Committee spokesperson Kiersten Pels told Politico.

Others took a different view.

The Bulwark’s Sarah Longwell rejected former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) spokesperson Katie Miller’s suggestion that Trump’s travel to Iowa means that he’s “running.”

“This is a hilarious tweet,” Longwell wrote. “Trump isn’t going to Iowa because he is running. He’s going for damage control because his tariffs have made the state a pickup for Democrats.”

The Lincoln Project added, “Trump’s ‘Affordability Hoax’ heads to Iowa to tell Iowans that everything’s fine, despite their worst-in-the-country economy.”

On Tuesday, CNN’s John King reported that while Democrats understand that Iowa will be an uphill battle, they see opportunity.

“Democrats have a huge opportunity and Republicans acknowledge it,” King also told Anderson Cooper. “If the election were tomorrow, the Democrats would take back the House without question. The only part is the margin.”

READ MORE: ‘Can Barely Keep His Eyes Open’: Trump Mocked Over ‘Ramblefest’ Davos Speech

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

DOJ Delay Continues as Judge Denies Epstein Files Special Master

Published

on

Thirty-three days after the Trump Department of Justice was required by law to release the Epstein Files — but failed to produce even one percent of them — a federal judge has rejected a bipartisan effort to appoint a special master to oversee production of the documents.

U.S. Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY), authors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA), went to court to make their request. On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer declined that request, stating that he does not have the authority to appoint a special master.

“Their request is ‘important’ and ‘timely,’ but the appropriate vehicle may be a lawsuit or Congress, the judge says,” according to All Rise News editor-in-chief Adam Klasfeld.

“This criminal case does not give the Court any charter to supervise DOJ’s compliance with the EFTA,” Judge Engelmayer wrote, as New York Daily News reporter Molly Crane-Newman reported. “And the motion exceeds the bounds of permissible amici participation. This decision is without prejudice to the Representatives’ right to initiate a separate lawsuit. The Representatives are also, of course, at liberty to pursue oversight of DOJ via the tools available to Congress.”

READ MORE: ‘Can Barely Keep His Eyes Open’: Trump Mocked Over ‘Ramblefest’ Davos Speech

On Tuesday, Crane-Newman reported that attorneys for the two congressmen had renewed “their push to seek a special master to oversee the Epstein files release, saying the government ‘cannot be relied upon to act with disinterest and objectively to do what is best for the survivors. It has its own conflicting interests.'”

Former Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg, earlier on Wednesday, told MSNOW, “I don’t think we’ll see the entire file until Trump is out of office.”

“I think part of the problem here for Congressmen Khanna and Massie is that the law that they wrote is riddled with loopholes. It does not have an enforcement mechanism. So they’re trying to figure out how to get the DOJ to turn over all the documents, but there’s nothing in the law that forces them to do so under penalty of whatever,” he explained.

Aronberg called it “a real big question whether or not they, as members of Congress, have the standing to get this judge in a closed case to force the DOJ to turn over the documents.”

READ MORE: Canadian Prime Minister Warns World Order Has Ruptured

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.