For more than a quarter of a century, Ann Coulter has lied – time and time again – about parental rights of unmarried fathers and their offspring.
The only problem with Coulter’s claims is that they are false. The law has always upheld the biological rights of fathers, irrespective of whether the child is born out-of-wedlock. The deference is always to consider the innocent child to be part of the family.
(Seemingly, Coulter’s eldest brother was conceived out-of-wedlock. Did a shotgun wedding make him legitimate?)
As she usually does on these topics, Coulter resorts to English common law and not the American Constitution.
Under English common law, going back to 1235, any child born outside of wedlock had no rights at all, was unable to inherit, and was “looked upon as the son of nobody,” as Sir William Blackstone put it.
Further, Coulter conflates this Hunter-Navy situation with the “anchor baby argument.”
Coulter’s words are dripping with derision and vitriol – against both the mother and child.
Coulter calls Navy’s mother a “stripper” five times, and, also an “unfit mother” (without divulging the criterion for that claim.)
“Hunter’s illegitimate child — the result of drug-crazed, unprotected sex with a stripper.”
“the idea that a crack-fueled roll in the hay entitles the mother to be treated like an honored member of the family is absurd.”
“What are conservatives and Dowd imagining exactly? That the stripper — accompanying the 4-year-old child — should be invited to Biden family dinners, weddings and vacations? How will this be explained to the other grandchildren? Uncle Hunter smoked crack cocaine then ejaculated inside a woman who takes her clothes off for a living. Be polite and ask her how she enjoys her work!”
“Just because Hunter is a total degenerate doesn’t mean society should allow unfit mothers to use their capture of his sperm as a winning lottery ticket, entitling her entree into someone else’s family.”
Capturing sperm? Huh?
“How will a stripper’s “love child” showing up on the White House Christmas card affect other girls looking to upgrade with an “unwanted pregnancy”? Punish Hunter with massive child support payments, not by turning the mother and her child into heroes.”
Who said the pregnancy was “unwanted?”
Who called the mother and child “heroes?”
Ann Coulter is delusional. There are reasons why President Trump called her a Wacky Nut Job.[3]
Ardent isolationist Ann Coulter resurrects the spirit of Charles Lindbergh, who was an apologist for Hitler and shared many of his views on the preservation of the white race.
If Lindbergh was pro-Hitler, Coulter is pro-Putin.
Replying to a tweet noting the massive number (almost a million at that time) of Ukrainian refugees fleeing to Poland, Coulter tweeted:
“Yeah, but they get Ukrainians. We get the Tsarnaev brothers, the Pulse nightclub shooter, the illegal who just murdered all his kids in CA, and a million Mexican meth and fentanyl dealers.”
“I have no idea what sanctions against Putin will work at this late date, but I suggest we start with mask mandates, quarantines, and mandatory lockdowns.”
“Have you noticed a lot of the Ukraine fire footage on TV looks suspiciously like stock shots from Kenosha or Seattle?”
In the first of two back-to-back columns on Ukraine, Coulter demanded: “Stop Talking About Ukraine, Republicans!” She wrote:
“Whenever you see any media talking about Ukraine, your Pavlovian response should be, Oh, I see. They don’t want me to think about immigration or crime.”
Continuing that thought, Coulter stated:
“This year, the worshipful reverence for Ukraine’s borders has the added bonus of blocking Americans from thinking about immigration and crime.”
Coulter continued:
“In our ruling class’s ideal country, there will be nothing but defense contractors, Black Lives Matter activists and Latin American gardeners.”
Coulter even blamed Trump for Putin’s war.
Coulter also contends:
“Republicans ought to be talking their heads off about the unprecedented crisis at our border, Afghan ‘refugees’ raping little kids in our country, illegal aliens hauling meth and fentanyl into our country, rampant shoplifting, carjacking and assaults destroying neighborhoods in our country.”
Coulter concluded her first column with dripping sarcasm:
“GOP 2022 Contract With America: ‘Putin’s like Hitler.’”
In reality, Putin IS like Hitler. Both committed atrocious war crimes and were responsible for massive refugee crises.
Coulter said the 24/7 media coverage of the Russian-Ukrainian War is a diversion designed to help Biden and Democrat Party prospects in the upcoming election. This is conspiracy theory nonsense. Wars always get intense media coverage, especially one as dramatic and impactful as Putin’s War.
“And it’s silly to think that the war has distracted Americans from the country’s festering domestic woes. Sillier still is the idea that the Russia-Ukraine conflict is Biden’s means of offloading the troubles he’s created. Biden and his hapless White House handlers would surely love to pin Biden’s across-the-board failures on a distant war. But a majority of Americans aren’t suckers.”
“Moreover, importantly, all politics are local and personal. Middle- and working-class Americans are seeing their paychecks shrink daily as their family budgets continue to stretch. That’s happened for many months now.”
Coulter’s opening paragraph in her second column managed to diminish the import of the Russian-Ukrainian War and … attack Jared Kushner!
“As World War III looms in Europe, we must put narrow partisan differences aside and tap the brain power of the greatest minds among us. It is time for the Biden White House to call upon … Jared!”
Coulter recounted U.S. policy vis-à-vis Russia from Obama to Biden and remarkably gave credence to the Russia Hoax, writing,
“(This was absolutely NOT an insane conspiracy theory supported by zero evidence.)”
Coulter’s conclusion?
“Unlike the experts and journalists whose deep study has led them to a sophisticated take on Russia (that flips back and forth with the politics of the moment), my position on Russia has been as unchanged as the Rock of Gibraltar, at least since the end of the Cold War. Coincidentally, it is exactly the same as my position on Taiwan, Haiti, Uganda and North Korea.”
“It is this: Tens of millions of illegals are pouring across our border and must be stopped.”
Ann Coulter played a crucial role in the impeachment of Bill Clinton.
First, she betrayed Paula Jones by leaking attorney client-privileged information to scuttle the settlement that Jones’ desired in her case against President Clinton. This meant that Jones’ case could be used in the impeachment.
Second, Coulter had illegal access to Linda Tripp’s illegally-recorded tapes of conversations with Monica Lewinsky and there is the possibility that she tampered with one or more of those tapes to remove exculpatory material or make portions of those tapes more damaging then they really were.
A rather curious sequence of events enabled Coulter to gain access to those critical tapes illegally recorded by Linda Tripp before they were turned over to the OIC. Coulter recommended one of her closest friends, Jim Moody, to represent Tripp, who accepted that recommendation despite his inexperience in that field of law. Moody replaced Kirby Behre as Tripp’s attorney.
Moody soon took possession of Tripp’s tapes. Behre confirmed that while the tapes were in his possession, no unauthorized individuals had access to them and no copies of those tapes were made.[1]Within hours, Coulter had access to those very tapes from Moody, whom she herself had suggested represent Tripp.
Coulter would later engage in damage control, writing,
“Moody came in to the case, Toobin says, when New York lawyer George Conway ‘remembered an old friend in Washington’ – Jim Moody. George Conway barely knew Jim Moody; the two had met only briefly once or twice before in group settings. It certainly was not George Conway who thought of suggesting his name to Tripp.”[2]
Coulter is right. It was Coulter herself who thought of suggesting Moody as Tripp’s lawyer. And it was Coulter to whom Tripp’s tapes were brought.
Early Morning Rendezvous
One of Coulter’s “greatest moments” had national implications and international repercussions. In the early morning hours of January 16, 1998, Coulter illegally listened to illegally-recorded audiotapes of conversations between Linda Tripp and her friend, Monica Lewinsky, who was President Clinton’s lover. Those tapes would prove crucial to impeaching Clinton and would pave Coulter’s path to glory, a glory which would somehow never transcend Coulter’s deep insecurity and low self-esteem.
Coulter could not contain her joy over gaining possession – secretly and illegally – of such a critical piece of evidence. She exclaimed,
“I must say, I don’t mind reliving the greatest night of my life over and over again. I was dancing a jig. I was bouncing off the walls.”[3]
To this day, it remains unknown whether Coulter tampered with those tapes prior to them being turned over to the OIC.
Five people, all lawyers, listened to those explosive tapes during the early morning hours of January 16, 1998. Conway and Moody were physically present with Coulter in her apartment, while Marcus and Porter participated via telephone conference call. Significantly, with the exception of Moody, all of those present (either in person or via telephone) have refused to comment on those events for this book.
Given Moody’s paranoid cloak-and-dagger evasive tactics[4] after obtaining the tapes from Kirby, why would he wait till the afternoon of the 16th to turn them over to Starr’s office? He certainly wasn’t listening to them at his home on his antiquated tape recorder (the stated reason for playing them at Coulter’s apartment). Where were they and what was done with them?
The details are murky, but it is unquestioned that Coulter was in possession of those tapes – without the approval of Linda Tripp – before they were turned over to Ken Starr’s office.
The critical time frame – January 15-16, 1998 – has escaped serious scrutiny because the story is complicated, with overlapping sequences and a conflation of events. The three midnight meetings make for a good thriller, but confusion arises over which date each of those late night/early morning meetings actually occurred. Proper sequencing simplifies the complicated.
1/15/98 Moody acquires the Tripp tapes from Tripp’s previous lawyer (Behre).
1/16/98 At 2 a.m., the elves (Coulter, Moody, Conway, Marcus and Porter) listen to the tapes in Coulter’s apartment.
Moody gives one tape to the FBI in the morning and the remainder in the afternoon. (Where were those remaining tapes during the interval?)
Tripp tricks Lewinsky into a meeting at the Ritz-Carlton, where the FBI interrogates Lewinsky from 12:30 p.m. to 12:23 a.m.
That evening, Moody and Conway meet Jones’ attorney (Wesley Holmes) at Tripp’s home. Moody does not have the tapes which Holmes wanted to hear.
1/17/98 At a midnight meeting, the FBI gives a copy of the first tape back to Moody (with Conway hiding in the foyer). Around 12:30 a.m., that tape is played at Newsweek (Moody, Conway, Isikoff, McDaniel, Klaidman, Thomas) are present.
Disinformation from Moody
In late January, the Washington Post published this interesting piece of disinformation from the elves:
Moody is uncertain how Tripp learned about him, but he scoffs at the notion that he got the job because of ties to conservatives. His best guess is that while Tripp worked for the White House counsel’s office during the Bush administration, she was impressed with his success in badgering officials to drop decades-old regulations in the citrus industry.[6]
Everything Moody told the Washington Post was a lie. He knew who recommended him to Tripp (Coulter) and who was involved (all the anti-Clinton elves). His cover story was clearly concocted to preserve the identity of the (conservative) conspirators.
Citrus industry-deregulation as a prerequisite for pressing a sexual harassment case against the POTUS? Is it merely coincidence that Coulter would later publish a column in George magazine attacking Isikoff with these words:
“It’s not like we secretly disliked Clinton because of his administration’s position on California’s citrus cartels or something, and then set to work on some crazy scheme to destroy him using a pathological intern as our Mata Hari.”[7]
For the next six months, the elves operated in secrecy as Coulter wrote her book advocating the impeachment of President William Jefferson Clinton. During that time, she appeared on scores of TV shows to discuss the Clinton scandals and no one knew about her secret involvement with those scandals.
Coulter’s First Book
In High Crimes and Misdemeanors,[8] released in August, Coulter has surprisingly little to say about the Tripp tapes. The two most significant passages follow:
“Jones’s attorneys hadn’t deposed either Lewinsky or Tripp on the eve of Clinton’s deposition. That night, however, one of Jones’s lawyers [Wesley Holmes] informally interviewed Tripp to fill in the details of the anonymous phone calls.”
[REALITY CHECK: Holmes wanted to hear the tapes, which Moody no longer possessed.]
“Tripp had agreed to an informal meeting with Jones’s attorneys in hopes of avoiding a formal deposition. She had only recently discovered that her home state of Maryland was one of the few states that prohibit people from taping their own phone conversations without telling the other people on the line; she had not told Lewinsky …”
[REALITY CHECK: The elves, including Coulter, facilitated that meeting. Coulter left out their involvement, and their conflict of interest.]
Interestingly, Coulter later bragged about “getting a best-seller out of” her involvement with the elves.
Coulter Outed
Meanwhile, hidden from public view, was Coulter’s intimate knowledge of, and clandestine connection with, the now-infamous Tripp tapes. Ironically, it was the Starr Report which exposed her involvement:
“[Tripp] said she subsequently learned that Moody, before turning the tapes over to Starr’s office, had given them to Ann Coulter – a conservative lawyer and frequent talk show guest who has since written a book outlining the case for Clinton’s impeachment – for copying.”[9]
The Starr Report included Tripp’s testimony which revealed that Coulter once had access to the tapes which ultimately led to Clinton’s impeachment. For a few weeks, the question was “What did Coulter hear and when did she hear it?” In the Starr Report, Tripp testified:
Q: And your information was that he (Jim Moody) and a woman named Ann Coulter had copied the tapes, and that Ann Coulter had a complete set of tapes?
A: Well, I was told from a couple of different sources – asked, actually, was I aware that … he had Ann Coulter make high speed dubbings of each tape … but has since listened to all the tapes.
“Tripp later testified that they [Coulter and Moody] did so [make copies of the tapes] contrary to her instructions.”[10]
Only the five conspirators knew of the early morning rendezvous when they listened to Tripp’s tapes in Coulter’s apartment. How, then, did Tripp hear rumors of that event? After all, the elves were almost pathological in keeping their activities and identities secret. So, who told what, when, and why?
Perhaps Coulter could not contain herself over what she described as the “greatest night” of her life. She was, you will recall, the elf who gave the elves their name in her hint to Isikoff in 1997. The baby princess had to prove her worth despite the need for secrecy.
The media’s suspicions were initially aroused when, in a Crossfire debate, [11] Coulter refused to give a direct answer on this topic: “A real quick question on the tapes. Have you ever personally listened to the Linda Tripp tapes? … How’d you get them?” Caught off guard, Coulter gave a Clintonesque evasion. When she was first publicly questioned about her connection with the Tripp tapes, Coulter was speechless! Then she asked a delaying question: “Which tapes?” Then she gave a non-responsive Clintonesque admission: “Well, do you think it’s OK for a president to perjury himself under oath? So what do you think of a political pundit lying on TV?”
Why such obfuscation if there’s nothing to hide? Was Coulter concerned about the legal ramifications of her actions? Why not speak the truth? Even the Washington Post reported that event:
“On a recent edition of ‘Crossfire,’ Coulter was briefly speechless when asked if she had heard any of Tripp’s tapes before the story became public. She now admits she heard one of the tapes, saying that an unidentified friend needed her recording equipment to copy it.”[12]
Three days later, towards the end of her book tour for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, Coulter gave a speech in which she tried to dismiss her own involvement with the tapes which led to the subject of her book:
“In this document dump on Friday I made my debut in Volume III in which I was accused in Linda Tripp’s testimony of making copies of all of her tapes. She had heard rumors that I made copies of all 17 tapes back in January, which I can assure you if it had been true they would have been – all over the world – air-dropped by January 22nd. And apparently that’s what Ken Starr’s prosecutors thought because I never heard from them. But, you know, suppose I were asked, “Did you make copies of these tapes?” Well, I suppose, you know, I could just say “No,” then later say, “Well, when you said tape I mean a track tape and listen, really what, what does it really mean to listen? Listening is one of the great mysteries of life.”[13]
Evasion, wrapped in humor and blanketed by rationalizations. If the President of the United States can debate the definition of the word “is,” surely Coulter can play the same semantic game. After all, she’s one of the “good guys.”
Denials and Smokescreens
On Rivera Live,[14] Coulter first denied hearing the Tripp tapes, then admitted to hearing one tape, and lied about her source for the tapes.
RIVERA: “Did you ever listen to and/or make copies of those tapes?”
COULTER: “No, I literally would have had them air-dropped across America and I’d probably be a millionaire by now. … they would have been on EntertainmentTonight, they would have been on your show and I’d be a multi-millionaire.”
Interestingly, just hours before I had interviewed Moody about whether Coulter had copied the tapes. His reply was almostidentical – “If she had them, believe me, she would have been the first to release them wholesale. I mean, she’s doing a book on the Clinton scandals.”[15] – the very same argument used by Coulter on Rivera Live later that night.
Directly challenged by Rivera, Coulter conceded listening to one of the tapes: “I heard the same tape that was described by Newsweek.”
But Coulter adamantly denied getting the tape from Moody: “I got nothing out of him [Moody] and I must say being one of his friends that did annoy me.” Is it coincidental that Moody also spoke of Coulter’s annoyance at him over the tapes? Moody told me, “She’s kind of annoyed at me for not giving her the tapes so she could put them in her book.”[16]
Still, Coulter continued to blow smokescreens, claiming she got the tapes in her capacity as a journalist/investigative reporter (“people send me things”). In fact, she got the tapes because of her friendship with Moody.
In discussing the tapes, Rivera said, “You got a bestseller out of it.” Coulter boasted: “Yes, I did.”[17] Coulter herself noted the exquisite timing of High Crimes – “Yeah, it was good timing”[18] – and, tongue-in-cheek, admitted “I thought impeachment might be in the news this year.”[19] How and why did she think so? And did Coulter orchestrate to some degree the events which thrust her into the limelight and her book to the top of the best-seller list?
What is the truth behind the Tripp tapes and what exactly was Coulter’s role? To what extent has Coulter manipulated the media and the judicial system for her own personal gain? And to what degree has Coulter changed history for the benefit of her own career?
Coulter admitted she “had” (indicating active possession and not passive audience) “them” (i.e., more than one). Furthermore, Coulter and Moody BOTH admit that she asked him for the tapes. They BOTH said she didn’t get the tapes. They BOTH said she was “annoyed” at his refusal. They BOTH said that if she had gotten the tapes she would have published them and made a fortune. They BOTH lied. Repeatedly.
Link Between Tripp and Jones
Two days later a Washington Post profile of Coulter exposed her secret connection with both Jones and Tripp.
She referred Linda Tripp to her attorney friend Jim Moody (Coulter and Moody are both Deadheads who followed the Grateful Dead to dozens of far-flung concerts, she says). Coulter says she suggested to Moody that Tripp take her tapes of Monica Lewinsky to independent counsel Kenneth Starr; he had already thought of the idea.[20]
She advised Paula Jones’s lawyers in their suit against Clinton and helped Jones find new attorneys when the first pair quit.[21]
“I was a little concerned about the ‘right-wing cabal’ appearance of things,” Coulter says. Although Starr is examining whether Tripp lied about how the tapes were made, Coulter says she’s not worried about being questioned.[22]
Both Coulter and Moody say he was not the source of the tape she heard. “She’s kind of annoyed at me for not giving her the tapes so she could put them in her book,” Moody says. Still, he says, “I always enjoy her because she doesn’t pull her punches. We all want to appear dignified and thoughtful and contemplative, and Ann is just Ann.”[23]
From the beginning, the elves secretly and zealously conspired to topple the Clinton presidency. They also desperately sought to keep their involvement secret. When their involvement came to light, they stonewalled – refusing to cooperate with legitimate investigations into their actions.
Flip-Flop on Tapes
Once Tripp’s tapes had served their purpose – furthering the cause of impeachment – Coulter downplayed their importance. Months earlier Coulter was a one-woman ad campaign promoting their significance.
“23 hours of tapes. On C-Span, over and over and over again. … and there are 23 hours of tapes. … It’s not Clinton vs. Starr. It’s not even Clinton vs. Congress. It’s C-Span playing all of the evidence that Ken Starr has, including, at a minimum, 23 hours of tapes of Monica Lewinsky weeping and crying – on the phone. … But moreover, the important point is – Look! The most important point of what you just said was that Monica denies it. Well, no, actually, she’s on tape admitting to it when she doesn’t know she’s being taped. She has said nothing since then … But she’s on tape. This is why tapes are such amazing evidence.”[24]
Pressure became so intense that Coulter became desperate not to talk about the Tripp tapes. Again, on Rivera Live, Coulter said:
“[Asked about her source for the tapes] I will stipulate to the fact that I’m a drug-dealing serial killer so that we can talk about something other than me [laughingly]. … [asked about testifying before OIC] Let’s assume I’m the devil incarnate [laughingly]. … I don’t want to talk about the tapes. I want to talk about Clinton.”[25]
Why the flip-flop?
The day after her Crossfire debate Newsday reported that some of those tapes had been tampered with. “Tripp also indicated that Moody may have an explanation for the mystery surrounding her tapes – which, according to FBI forensic tests, have in some cases been duplicated or tampered with.”[26] Apparently nine of 27 Tripp tapes “were copied from the originals” and “one tape may have been tampered with,”[27] sparking controversy over their credibility. One example of a corrupted critical passage is this one concerning Lewinsky’s fear for her life:
LEWINSKY: “I know [tape skip] [inaudible] my mom will kill me if I don’t tell him – make it clear at some point that I’m not going to hurt him, because – see, my mom’s big fear is that he’s going to send somebody out to kill me.”
The previous portion of the tape shows Tripp encouraging Lewinsky to hangup on the president, not talk to him:
TRIPP: “Well, let me put it to you this way. By hanging up and saying you’re telling your parents, and then hanging up the phone, you’re saying a whole hell of a lot more than you could ever do in a 20-minute conversation.”
Who tampered with the tapes? Was exculpatory evidence erased? Was damaging evidence fabricated? Who stood to profit?
Prior to this revelation, Coulter lied about hearing the Tripp tapes: “I was just thinking last night one thing we still have to hear are the tapes. The two most famous women in America, Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp and no one has ever heard their voices.”[28] Of course, Coulter had heard those voices.
Suspiciously, Coulter and Moody told almost the exact same story. Their cover story: absence of widespread dissemination and personal profit. Coincidental? Coulter lied about hearing the Tripp tapes, about having the Tripp tapes, and about her source for the Tripp tapes.[29]
Still, few people grasped the import of Coulter’s possession of those tapes.
[7] Ann Coulter, “Spikey and Me,” George, May 1999.
[8] Ann Coulter, High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton, Regnery, 1998, pg. 31.
[9] John Riley, “Starr Aide’s Role As Tripp Advisor,” Newsday, 10/3/98.
[10] Joe Conason and Gene Lyons, TheHunting of the President: The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton, St. Martin’s Griffin, 2000, pg. 351.
2020 has been a pivotal year for provocateur Ann Coulter. She has always prided herself on being a conservative Christian. Coulter once worshiped Donald Trump. In recent years she has despised him.
Now, Coulter has firmly embraced Joe Biden. Her latest book title: In Biden We Trust!
Much of Coulter’s recent commentary is, frankly, delusional.[1]
Despite the utter chaos precipitated by the Biden administration, Coulter blames Trump!
Millions of illegals stream across our southern border and Coulter blames Trump – even though Trump solved the problem and Biden reversed all of Trump’s policies.
Somehow Trump is to blame for everything Biden does: explosion of crime in Democrat-run cities, Americans killed by immigrants or first- or second-generation Americans (they’re all the same to Coulter), and, now, Afghan refugees fleeing the collapse of Afghanistan and craven and cowardly capitulation of the war on terror by Biden[4] – which Coulter fiercely lauds!
Coulter defends Biden’s debacle with Democrat talking points, using various straw man arguments. Yes, Americans wanted out of Afghanistan, but, no, they did not want a massacre and empowerment of our terrorist enemies!
Now, Coulter appeals to Biden: “Build a wall and you’ve got my vote!”
Biden’s debacle in Afghanistan has revealed something stunning: Ann Coulter loves America but hates Americans.
Biden calls his exit strategy an “extraordinary success” and Coulter agrees with him!
Moreover, Coulter repeatedly lauds Biden’s ignominious retreat from Kabul as good, necessary, and brilliantly executed … all the while blaming Trump for not getting out of Afghanistan. (Ann must have loved the Bay of Pigs!)
Here are some Coulter tweets. (Her column last week was about why we should have gotten out of Afghanistan years ago, but she did not address the lunacy of how we left!)
“The country has gone mad. I need a button on Twitter to mute tweets about Afghanistan. I DON’T CARE.”
In response to reports that Afghan Christians are facing a reign of terror by the Taliban, Coulter tweeted:
“Instead of comparing 12 U.S. servicemen killed in Afghanistan vs. 4 killed in Niger, how about a word for the 49 Americans slaughtered in ORLANDO by the son of an Afghan immigrant?’
“It [Biden’s] was a magnificent speech for anyone not blinded by partisan politics or obsessed with sending Americans to die in forever wars all over the world.”
Coulter is effectively a White House spokesperson parroting White House talking points and propagandistic narratives.
Coulter’s Apathy
As the chaos in Kabul was unfolding, Coulter explicitly stated, “I DON’T CARE.” Later, Coulter lauded Biden for what was transpiring in Kabul. The death of 13 Americans elicited not one word of outrage or sympathy from Coulter. When Biden abandoned hundreds of Americans and perhaps thousands of Afghan allies to the whims of the Taliban, Coulter again praised Biden.
Coulter explicitly expressed apathy about genuine reports of Afghan Christians facing a “reign of terror.” I guess that Coulter is an “extraordinarily good Christian” like Biden’s retreat was an “extraordinary success.”
In the Real World
Rudyard Kipling observed, “Nothing is ever settled unless it is settled right.” THIS was not settled right and will ensure that terrorism is ascendant for a long time to come.
Combat veteran Pete Hegseth warned,
“What we’ve done is legitimize a terrorist state and given them the best equipment in the world.”
Rep. John Kennedy (R-LA) called Biden’s disastrous defeat in Kabul,
“It was the biggest terrorist victory since 9/11.”
CNN’s Clarissa Ward asked,
“If this isn’t failure, what does failure look like?”
The fall of Kabul, in the spectacularly inept and bizarre way it fell, was a monumental catastrophe with seismic geopolitical ramifications as great, or greater than, the fall of the Berlin Wall and collapse of the Soviet Union.
But this time, the forces of Darkness – not Liberty – are prevailing.
Who will everbelieve us, trust us, or fear us again? Can the United States be victorious against tyranny and terrorism, or has Biden's blunder doomed our future?
One thing’s for sure: Ann Coulter doesn’t care.
For greater insight into Ann Coulter’s worldview and thought processes see Case Study: From Jingoist to Pacifist in Joker: Ann Coulter Unplugged at https://bit.ly/2TttHtF.
Never mind the utter chaos which has ensued. Forget about the tens of thousands of Americans trapped behind enemy lines. Ignore the courageous Afghan interpreters and other civilians who worked on America’s behalf are being hunted down and killed. Overlook the atrocities already being perpetrated by the Taliban and the threat to Christians in Afghanistan. Dismiss the fact that the geo-political landscape has decisively turned toward Darkness instead of Light!
But all this is good, according to Coulter, because Biden is good and Trump is evil.
Even CNN’s Clarissa Ward asked,
“If this isn’t failure, what does failure look like?”
Coulter’s column last week was titled, “Joe vs. The Swamp.” What? Joe IS the Swamp!
That day, Coulter told talk show host Mark Simone that Biden’s Afghanistan speech was magnificent, one which could have been written by Donald Trump or by Ann Coulter herself! (Yes, she praised a self-serving speech filled with lies!)
Regarding Biden’s disastrous Kabul debacle, Rep. John Kennedy (R-LA) observed:
“It was the biggest terrorist victory since 9/11.”
But Coulter regards it as a victory for America!
The fall of Kabul has as great or greater significance than the fall of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. The latter was a force and movement for Liberty; the former, for Tyranny!
Historic parallels abound: The fall of Saigon; the Bay of Pigs; Benghazi.
Has Coulter not comprehended that no one will believe us, trust us, or fear us any longer? (Ironically, no one believes, trusts, or fear Coulter any longer.)
How can Coulter be so shockingly wrong? See Case Study: From Jingoist to Pacifist in Joker: Ann Coulter Unplugged at https://bit.ly/2TttHtF.
With concise clarity and biblical wisdom, Darkness illuminates the Truth about Coulter and decisively demonstrates that she has never been the Christian she claims to be.
A short book, 42 pages from cover to cover, Darkness exposes the unfruitful works of Darkness in Coulter’s life and why she is spiritually barren.
More importantly, Darkness offers Coulter an escape from the Darkness and freedom from her plight.
#WackyNutJob Ann Coulter exposed the hardness of her heart in a single tweet mocking the Tulsa Massacre.
Ann Coulter mocks Tulsa Massacre. What next? Holocaust? Pearl Harbor? 9/11?
With one tweet, Coulter revealed her heartlessness, racist views, and eagerness to exploit tragedy wherever she finds it (a decades-long pattern for her).
In doing so – as an acclaimed (faux) leader within the conservative movement – Coulter has tarnished the reputations of all conservatives. Moreover, Coulter has given ammunition to those who contend that all conservatives are white supremacists.
Likewise, as a once-exalted (faux) Christian leader, Coulter has besmirched all Christians and the body of Christ as heartless hypocrites lacking compassion and convictions.
The following observations on Twitter are spot on.
Ann Coulter, Tulsa Massacre, hideous human being
Ann Coulter, Tulsa Massacre, pitiful person
Ann Coulter, Tulsa Massacre, dead career, Alt-Right Queen
Ann Coulter, Tulsa Massacre, Holocaust, 9/11, stereotypical ugly American
Ann Coulter, Tulsa Massacre, hate-filled heart
Ann Coulter, Tulsa Massacre, NOT a good role model
Joker: Ann Coulter Unplugged provides an in-depth, detailed analysis of Coulter’s worldview and character flaws which have resulted in the abhorrent pathologies she exhibits.
See Case Study: Politics of Death
See Case Study: Alt-Right
See Case Study: America in Black and White
See Case Study: WASP America
TAGS: Ann Coulter, AnnCoulter, Coulter, Tulsa Massacre, racism, heartlessness, alt-right, WASP, white supremacy
In a bizarre tweet, Ann Coulter claimed to have only mentioned Trump twice in her columns this year. FACT CHECK: 10 times! (Several Coulter columns were devoted to Trump!)
Is Ann Coulter Going Senile?
Here are the ten times Coulter “mentioned” Trump.
(Of note, her first two columns were entirely devoted to haranguing Trump and she ferociously sought for the Senate to convict Trump on the Left’s bogus trumped-up hoax impeachment 2.0.)
January 6, 2021 title: “The Election Is Over. Here’s the Truth About Trump.”
January 13, 2021 title: “Most Disloyal Man in History Finally Finds a Cause Worth Fighting For.”
January 20, 2021 lead sentence: “Why can’t liberals ever just let Trump hang himself?”
February 10, 2021 lead sentence: “Senate Republicans should offer to convict Donald Trump in return for Democrats agreeing to fund the wall.”
February 24, 2021 phrase: “the Proud Boys officially announced they would not be attending Trump’s Jan. 6 rally”
March 9, 2021 key sentence: “Here’s a tip, Democrats: Trump was all talk, no action.”
March 10, 2021 phrase: “other presumed Trump supporters”
March 17, 2021 key paragraph: “Even the election of Donald Trump, a ridiculous creature who became president by promising to crack down on illegal immigration and build a wall (promises he ignored), hasn’t put a dent in Washington’s enthusiasm for overwhelming the country with the third world.”
May 5, 2021 key paragraph: “I’m one of those Republicans, having enthusiastically supported Alan Keyes in at least one of his three presidential runs, Herman Cain in 2012 (9-9-9!) and Ben Carson, as my backup to Trump, in 2016.”
May 12, 2021 sentence: “And of course there was the fact that Trump had floated the lab theory.”
In a flurry of late-night tweets, Ann Coulter trashes pro-Trump and pro-America Elise Stefanik.
Coulter’s fans and critics alike have skewered Coulter’s bizarre remarks and hypocrisy.
Why does Coulter support Lynn Cheney, who hates Trump and Trump’s base? Because Coulter hates Trump and Trump’s base.[1] They are both virulently anti-Trump and both zealously sought Trump’s impeachment.
Why is Coulter so opposed to Elise Stefanik, who is pro-Trump, pro-America, and zealously opposed Trump’s impeachment? Coulter’s #TDS provides the answer.[2]
CoulterWatch 