To listen to almost all the reporters on Fox News—and most of the Establishment Media experts—after the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton, you would have thought that President Donald Trump needed to do exactly what the Reverend Jimmy Swaggart did back a few years ago: get on TV and cry and bawl, and emotionally apologize: “I have sinned! I have sinned!” And then add, “I know in my heart that I am a ‘white nationalist’ and have unleashed all this horrible violence and murder! And I am deeply, exceedingly, profoundly, eternally, and unalterably sorry.” And as a final coup de grace: “From now on I will be a good Establishment Conservative, I will listen to great thinkers like…hmm…National Review’s David French, and Ben Shapiro and Jonah Goldberg. And I shall dwell in the House of Martin Luther King and the NAACP forever!”

Only Tucker Carlson uttered a demurer, of sorts. According to his nearly lone voice on national television (“Tucker Carlson Tonight,” August 6):

“If you were to assemble a list, a hierarchy of concerns of problems this country faces, where would white supremacy be on the list? Right up there with Russia probably. It’s actually not a real problem in America,” Carlson noted. He added that the combined membership of all the white supremacy groups throughout America could likely fit inside a college football stadium. “This is a country where the average person is getting poorer where the suicide rate is spiking,” Carlson said, drawing light on the real pressing problems that face Americans. With Russian collusion fantasies no longer gaining traction, this is another attempt by the political establishment to demonize President Donald Trump and cling to power. “This is a hoax, just like the Russia hoax. It is a conspiracy theory used to divide the country and keep a hold on power. That’s exactly what’s going on.”

Of course, being on Fox did not keep Carlson from being attacked by other Fox personalities, and, unsurprisingly, the most direct hit came from Shepard Smith, the notoriously open Leftist who handles Fox News in the afternoons. Without naming Carlson specifically, Smith zeroed in for the kill:

[I]n direct contrast to Carlson’s comments, Smith [endorsing Joe Biden’s criticism of the president as a racist] demanded that we “recognize that white nationalism is real, that white nationalism is on the rise, that white nationalism is without question a very serious problem in America and [we must] beat down those who would help facilitate it and encourage it.” [Italics mine]

The usual luminaries from Establishment Conservatism also eagerly jumped in to trash the president—and his supporters, those unruly and unwashed “deplorables”—as witness just a couple of selections from the dozens of our supposed “betters” who lead the “conservative opposition,” but in actuality normalize and deaden us to the Leftward progressivist madness that engulfs and destroys more of our historic culture and heritage each day.

There was the insufferable David French, senior writer and senior fellow at the National Review Institute. Here are some of the choice things he said about Trump and those who have in the past supported him. I quote him at length because he symbolizes what most major voices of the “Conservative Movement” are saying:

The United States is now facing a deadly challenge from a connected, radical, online-organizing community of vicious white-nationalist terrorists. They are every bit as evil as jihadists, and they radicalize in much the same way….[W]hite-supremacist terror… a new youth movement of hate…the ‘alt-right’…targeted Jews, it targeted African Americans and Hispanics, and it targeted critics of Donald Trump. It obsessed over immigrants from south of the border. It used words like “invasion” to describe immigration, and words such as “replacement” to describe the imagined fate of white America. It thrilled to Trump’s rhetoric, and parts of Trump’s movement loved it right back….

Think of the thrills, energy, and inspiration they’ve experienced from the highest office in the land…since Trump came down the escalator in 2015. His announcement speech cast immigrants collectively as dangerous and deficient, with only “some” exceptions. He has used the language of invasion frequently, even to the point of invoking a military response….

Alt-right support for Trump wasn’t random. It wasn’t arbitrary. It was directly related to his rhetoric, and it was cultivated by his allies, and it was cultivated in part because it was a new way to fight….[O]ur nation’s leaders need to focus on reconciliation and unity, and if they are not up to that most basic and fundamental aspect of their job, then they must be replaced. [Italics mine]

Then, there was little Ben Shapiro who fancies himself an up-and-coming major player in the moldering and pallid Movement. Shapiro did not employ the colorfully Leftist vocabulary that French utilized, but he still managed to get in his licks against the “Chief-white-nationalist-in-charge.”

Trump, wrote Shapiro, is a flaming “xenophobe” whose tweets “All too often…are bad, both morally and politically.”

The comments by French and Shapiro represent a range of “conservative” response, and in between you will find exhortations by such worthies as Steve Hayes, Martha MacCallum, Matthew Continetti (married to zealous NeverTrumper Bill Kristol’s daughter), Karl Rove, and a long list of others, most of whom are Neoconservatives.

At the very least, as a first step, they demanded that the president roundly condemn “white nationalism.” So President Trump did come out and condemn it, generically. He should not have done so. Such a cave in was never going to be enough to satisfy his critics on the Democratic Left or many in the weak-kneed, ideologically poisoned “conservative movement.”

As Tucker Carlson almost alone pointed out: the issue of white nationalism is a politically-motivated charge and a hoax. And the statistics—which you will never hear quoted by the media, including on Fox—confirm this.

Christopher DeGroot has researched this question, and he discovered the actual figures, and they contradict what you have heard. From the Mass Shooting Tracker, here is the information (reported by writer Daniel Greenfield) that should, but isn’t, being discussed:

The perception that mass shootings are a “white man’s problem” lingers around the country because white mass shooters tend to get more publicity. And, the twisted young male who goes on a public shooting spree fits a certain kind of media narrative. But when we actually study the mass shootings that took place in 2019, it’s clear that Patrick Crusius and Connor Betts are not the norm, but aberrations.

Mass shooters have no particular ideology. Crusius and Betts were opposites ideologically. (Though both cared deeply about the environment.) Nor are mass shooters a white problem or a black problem. Over the same bloody weekend, William Patrick Williams, who is African-American, appeared in court after being arrested by the FBI for planning to shoot up a Texas hotel with an AK-47 rifle.

Looking at the data from the Mass Shooting Tracker, widely utilized by the media, as of this writing, of the 72 mass shooters, perpetrators in shootings that killed or wounded 4 or more people, whose race is known, 21 were white, 37 were black, 8 were Latino, and 6 were members of other groups.

51% of mass shooters in 2019 were black, 29% were white, and 11% were Latino.

DeGroot continues, citing Colin Flaherty in The American Thinker:

In the two-week run-up to Gilroy there were 36 other mass shootings from coast to coast—and 34 of those shooters were black. One was white and one Hispanic. These results echo a ‘New York Times’ story from 2016 that stated, much to the surprise and chagrin of the reporters, that whenever there are three or more victims of gunfire, 75 percent of shooters in America are black.

Notice the extreme discrepancies between the real statistics and what you hear broadcast uniformly by the media—a media which engages in a not-so-subtle effort to foist on a gullible public a fake, highly ideological narrative that: (1) all or almost all “domestic terrorism” is by white males, (2) white nationalism (and white supremacy) is the root cause of it, and (3) Donald Trump gives go-ahead “dog whistles” to white nationalists. It is a narrative that the Establishment “movement conservatives” fully participate in, even if they protest that they don’t go quite as far as, for example, the loony Beto O’Rourke.

From whence comes the greatest danger of domestic terrorism, from whom comes the greatest danger to our already profoundly threatened liberties and our heritage as a people? What—who—is the, by far, major threat not only to what remains of the shredded American Constitution, but also to us, individually and in family?

Just as the perfervid conversations about the shootings in Dayton and El Paso were reaching a fever pitch, news came from NBC Universal Studios that it would be releasing a major motion picture nationwide in September. Titled “The Hunt,” the film graphically depicts a “killing game” in which rich, limousine Leftist millionaires take weekends off at a posh resort and engage in the sport of hunting down, brutally torturing, and murdering “deplorables”—that is, folks like you and me who oppose the aberrant progressivist assault on and perversion of our culture.

Here is how Brandon Showalter at The Christian Post describes the movie:

“The violent, R-rated film from producer Jason Blum’s Blumhouse [production company] follows a dozen MAGA types who wake up in a clearing and realize they are being stalked for sport by elite liberals,” The Hollywood Reporter noted. Characters in the movie that are considered prey for the hunters are referred to as “deplorables,” a term former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used to describe supporters of presidential candidate Donald Trump during the 2016 election.

“Did anyone see what our ratf—-er-in-chief just did?” one character in the movie asks, making an apparent reference to President Trump. “At least the hunt’s coming up. Nothing better than going out to the manor and slaughtering a dozen deplorables,” another character replies.

When the news of the film—and its trailer—surfaced, there was outrage. NBC Universal tried to explain it away; the trailer was withdrawn, and finally the September release date was postponed indefinitely, but significantly, the film was not permanently deep-sixed. And Universal, caught with its zealously ideological pants down, sheepishly tried to explain that, well, you see, it is just a satire, not really THAT serious (just like Kathy Griffin holding a model of a bloody, severed head of Donald Trump, remember that “satire”?). Even the conservative National Review bought into the weak satire explanation, and, once again, blamed the president for this film, “[which is actually] sympathetic to Trump voters,” being put aside.

Alas, those 600 movie screens across the nation and those thousands of unaccompanied teens and Millennials will just have to wait to see all the gore and mayhem maybe later on…and learn how to treat that neighbor up the street who is a “deplorable”?

But the very thought…the idea conveyed by the film, satire or not…was already there in vivid and disgusting color, ready to go, and if no one had noticed, if there had not been a popular reaction, it would have been released.

And why not? After all, a major reporter, Frank Figliuzzi, NBC’s national security expert contributor, had figured it all out and explained it to NBC anchor Brian Williams (who, of course, took it all in):

I have a piece out just tonight in the New York Times on what, sadly, I think is going to happen next if we don’t disrupt the chain of radicalization…. We have to understand the adversary and the threat we’re dealing with. And if we don’t understand how they think, we’ll never understand how to encounter them. So it’s little things and language and messaging that matters. The president said that we will fly our flags at half-mast until August 8th. That`s 8/8. Now, I’m not going to imply that he did this deliberately but I am using it as an example of the ignorance of the adversary that`s being demonstrated by the White House.

The numbers 88 are very significant in neo-Nazi and white supremacist movement. Why? Because the letter H is the eighth letter of the alphabet and to them, the numbers 88 together stand for “Heil Hitler.” So we’re going to be raising the flag back up at dusk on 8/8. No one is thinking about this. No one is giving him advice or he’s rejecting the advice. So, understand your adversary to counter the adversary.

The logic here, of course, is thus inescapable and follows directly on from the message of “The Hunt,” all the talk of putting illegals in Nazi-style concentration camps, and similar Nazi and white nationalist memes over the past two and half years:

1. President Trump and the “deplorables” are Nazis or at least implicitly Nazi supporters (as well as “white nationalists”—there is no difference);
2. Nazis, of course, are the ultimate evil and can only be dealt with by extinguishing and eliminating them;
3. Therefore, Trump—but even more so, the “deplorables”—must be “dealt with,” and ALL methods are licit, from shaming, doxxing, in-your-face and violent demonstrations, banning on the Internet (happening as we speak), legal action and lawsuits, and, yes, even to physical violence. “Nazis” cannot be allowed in the new globalist America.

Isn’t this exactly what Willem van Spronsen was attempting to do on July 13, 2019, when he attacked the ICE offices in Tacoma, Washington, with incendiaries (and was celebrated as a martyr by the Left)? Or, the attempted murder of Representative Steve Scalise in June 2017, and the dozens of violent leftist assaults since January 2017?

The sooner those of us who qualify as “deplorables” understand that, the sooner we comprehend that there is no compromise possible whatsoever with those progressivists and Leftists—the sooner we understand that the self-appointed leaders of the Establishment “Conservative Movement” are not our defenders but 5^th Column collaborationists, then, the sooner we come to the sobering realization that we hold our destiny and the future in our hands.

“Ecrasez L’infame!” –“Crush the loathsome beast!” said Voltaire about Church-State authority in pre-Revolutionary France. And, while I am, as a staunch traditionalist, definitely 100% on the other side of that historical issue, the phrase fits here: either we somehow crush the other side, or they will most assuredly crush us. It’s no longer a “cold civil war”—“total war” has begun.