Tag Archives: defamation

An Open Letter to Ann Coulter

Dear Ann:

You are willing to sacrifice all of your conservative principles and Christian beliefs to get Trump elected president, solely on the premise that Trump is the only candidate who is “good on immigration.” You admit that Trump is not a conservative and that he does lie.[1] Is Trump lying on immigration?

OpenLetter

Trump’s record and rhetoric on immigration suggest that he is lying about both the wall and deportation[2] of illegal immigrants.

Trump supported the Gang of Eight bill that you despise.

Trump hired illegal aliens at the expense of American workers.

Trump favors H-1B visas.

Trump would “negotiate” on both the wall and immigration.

Trump seeks touchback deportation to bring them back as quickly as possibleahead of the line: amnesty!

So, having sacrificed every principle and ideal you once held dear, you are supporting the one person you claim is good on immigration, and he is actually the worst on immigration.

If Trump wins the presidency, America gets a liberal similar to Hillary and amnesty![3]

You have sacrificed everything for nothing!

Moreover, you have viciously[4] attacked[5] the one candidate[6] who has a proven record of opposition to amnesty and fought for the preservation of American sovereignty: Ted Cruz![7]

You regard Trump as your and America’s Savior[8] and claim that you would marry Trump if he were available. You exalt Trump[9] above the heavens and absolve him of all his faults.

At the very same time, you demonize an actual conservative who is a strict constitutionalist and devout Christian and, ironically, is the only candidate who would do what you claim you want done about immigration.

Instead, you promote a bully[10] and a charlatan.[11]

If Trump wins the nomination and is victorious in the election, America has you to blame!

But it is not too late! Will you forsake your pride,[12] reverse course, and support the candidate who would actually do what you want to accomplish on immigration and who is also an actual conservative, constitutionalist, and Christian?

What is more important to you, Ann? Your pride or America’s future?

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Coulter Admits Trump is a Fraud” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cf.

[2]               See “Trump’s Phony Wall” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cn.

[3]               See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

[4]               See “Coulter’s Desperate Lies About Cruz” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-c8.

[5]               See “Coulter Bashes Cruz – Again!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-aZ.

[6]               See “Birther Coulter Births More Lies” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bI.

[7]               See “BrotherWatch Endorses Ted Cruz” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-dw.

[8]               See “Meet Ann Coulter’s Savior” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bM.

[9]               See “Coulter Crazy Over Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-c5.

[10]             See “How to Talk to a Bully (if you must)” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bY.

[11]             See “Bully Boy Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cv.

[12]             See “Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-3k.

Coulter’s Know-Nothing American Party

Ann Coulter, head cheerleader for a new Know-Nothing American Party,[1] champions a faux conservative as America’s savior,[2] calling him a “real American,” as opposed to Trump’s opponents, and she again conflates being conservative with being Republican.

Coulter's Know-Nothing American Party

In her current column[3] – this week’s shtick – Coulter heralds yet another grand conspiracy theory, this one by the “liberal and conservative media.”

Coulter repeatedly attacks “conservative news outlet(s)” which break “fake Trump scandal(s),” decries “the ‘conservative’ media calling him a socialist, a Democrat, a flip-flopper, a fake conservative,” and asserts that all such accusations are merely “name-calling” and non-substantive.

According to Coulter, “the accusers never include examples, not true ones, anyway.” This is the exact same tactic Coulter used to defend Romney,[4] boldly asserting that Romney’s flip-flops and gaffes were all imaginary.[5]

Coulter again confuses “conservative” with “Republican,” regarding them as synonymous. One would think that she would have learned by now that electing RINOs[6] (the very non-conservative Republicans Coulter is prone to promote) does not further a conservative agenda.

Still, Coulter vilifies “Conservative pundits [who] keep assuring clueless viewers that Trump is not a ‘real Republican.’” Trump may be a “real” RINO, but he is not a conservative!

Nevertheless, Coulter envisions a time when the next generation will invoke “Trump Republicans[7] with adulation. (Ann, Trump = Rockefeller = Eastern.)

Coulter warps herself and her savior in the American flag to shield both of them from criticism for their non-conservative views. Coulter reprised her nativist[8] politics,[9] asking, “Wouldn’t it be nice to have a president who likes us more than he likes foreigners – and the rich donors who employ them?”

Coulter concludes her hit piece with this paragraph:

“Looking at what the party has become, I certainly hope he’s not a ‘real Republican.’ I know he’s a real American. Those used to be the same thing.”

Conservatives criticize Trump for not being a real conservative, not a real Republican. Further, Coulter suggests that anyone opposed to Trump is not a real American.

Real conservatives – those who defend the Constitution and support a traditional, biblically-grounded American culture – recognize the dangers of Trump’s anti-Constitutional, non-Christian, non-conservative approach[10] to solving the manifold problems besetting America today.

Endnotes:

[1]               See “First, Jews; Now, Catholics?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-ah.

[2]               See “Meet Ann Coulter’s Savior” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bM.

[3]               Ann Coulter, “Liberal and Conservative Media Unite Against Trump,” 1/20/16.

[4]               See “Adios, Ann: Only Mitt for Me” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-70.

[5]               See “Case Study # 6: Romney v. Everyone Else,” Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, 2014, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.

[6]               See “Coulter Discovers RINOs will be … RINOs” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-56.

[7]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[8]               See “Coulter: All Immigrants Are Bad” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8w.

[9]               See “Ann Coulter’s Xenophobic Anti-Gospel of Hate” at http://t.co/aQGhLuWwtD.

[10]             See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

Birther Coulter Births More Lies

Erstwhile anti-birther Ann Coulter, worshiping at the idol of The Donald, has become the premiere birther attacking Ted Cruz. Why? She wants to scuttle Cruz’s presidential ambitions and stop his burgeoning support before her own Savior, Trump, loses the nomination.

Birther Ann Coulter

(Coulter has, after all, tied her future – and that of America[1]to a Trump victory,[2] however wise or foolish that might be.)

Just two days ago, Coulter burst out, “Thank God for raising up Donald Trump and giving us a chance to save the country.”[3]

It’s Really Not About Ted, But All About Ann

Seemingly on emotional steroids, Coulter has turned her attack dog persona on Trump’s most formidable Republican foe, all the while professing an “Ah, shucks, I don’t want to do this, but it’s the right thing to do” attitude even has she sticks a shiv in Ted’s side.

Coulter dodges claims that she changed position on Cruz’s eligibility solely to support Trump by asserting she took her current position prior to Trump’s candidacy. That is a red herring.

Just yesterday, Coulter wrote: “I said so long before Trump declared for president, back when Cruz was still my guy.”[4] Coulter claims, “It’s not that I want him not to be a Natural Born Citizen.”[5] Except, Coulter’s later claim is patently false and demonstrably untrue.

In reality, Coulter was obsessed with recruiting Romney for president, so much so that her close friend, Sean Hannity, was aghast at the depth of her obsession. Ted Cruz was becoming an impediment to Coulter’s plans for Romney.

Coulter first sought to disqualify Cruz as a presidential contender to force her idol, Mitt Romney, to run again[6] in 2016. At that time, she wanted Romney – and only Romney![7]

Now, she wants Trump – and only Trump![8]

In fact, just three days ago, Coulter boasted that she still wants a Trump-Romney ticket: “In fact, my ideal ticket is Trump-Romney. That’s what I’m really hoping for. That’s the dynamite combo.”[9]

Bob Woodward recently said, “History is character; behavior is character.”[10] Coulter’s history, and her behavior these past two decades, proves Coulter’s own lack of character.[11] Coulter lied about the Constitution and Supreme Court cases during the 2000 election[12] and she is doing the same thing now.

Why would Ann lie? Donald Trump[13] is her new political savior.[14] In Ann’s words: “[Donald Trump is] America’s savior.”[15]

Nevertheless, Coulter hypocritically attacks those who correctly interpret the Constitution, lamenting, “It’s kind of annoying me that we are all Ruth Bader Ginsburg now and people interpret the Constitution based on what they want the Constitution to say, not what it does say.”[16]

1608 or 1790; Blood or Soil?

According to Coulter, “In the U.S., also in Great Britain and in France, citizenship is determined by soil. … Congress can write laws for naturalization. That is also in the Constitution. But if Congress has to write a law to make you a citizen, you’re not natural born. … It is determined by a law written by Congress; not by the common law, not by the Constitution. So that is not natural born.”[17]

Except, the law written by Congress (and empowered by the Constitution) establishes who is natural born! In 1790, Congress established citizenship by blood.

Coulter asserts: “The phrase ‘natural born’ is a legal term of art that goes back to Calvin’s Case, in the British Court of Common Pleas, reported in 1608 by Lord Coke. The question before the court was whether Calvin – a Scot – could own land in England, a right permitted only to English subjects.”[18]

The case which Coulter cites – Calvin’s Case (1608) – has to do with English subjects, not citizens. Americans are not subjects. Our Founders took those portions of English common law with which they agreed and modified or dispensed with those portions which were incongruent with the new American constitutional system that they were creating.

Chief Justice Joseph Story wrote, in an 1829 Supreme Court opinion: “The common law of England is not to be taken, in all respects, to be that of America. Our ancestors brought with them its general principles, and claimed it as their birthright; but they brought with them and adopted, only that portion which was applicable to their situation.”

Coulter claims that a 1608 case in England is the basis for America’s definition of Natural Born Citizen.[19] Consequently, Coulter asserts that the 1790 law enacted by Congress is irrelevant. Does Coulter seriously believe that a 1790 American law enacted by the Founders is nullified by an English case law from 1608? Really?

According to the Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities (emphasis added), “In Britain, even before Calvin’s Case, various acts and proclamations provided that a child born out of the territory of England could also be a natural-born subject, as long as the child’s parents owed allegiance to the sovereign of England. This is an example of the jus sanguinis [blood] operating alongside the jus soli [soil]. In the history of both Britain and the United States, the jus sanguinis has always been established by statute, never by judge-made law.

The 1790 statute by Congress, which Coulter dismisses as “irrelevant,” precisely establishes the principle of right of blood which Coulter denies!

The Congressional Research Service published its findings on this issue (emphasis added):

“From historical material and case law, it appears that the common understanding of the term ‘natural born’ in England and in the American colonies in the 1700s may have included both the strict common law meaning as born in the territory (jus soli), as well as the statutory laws adopted in England since at least 1350, which included children born abroad to British fathers (jus sanguinis, the law of descent).”

Cleverly, Coulter very subtly suggests that those defending citizenship by blood are nascent Nazis, saying, “The two methods are soil or blood. Curiously, in Germany, it’s, it’s blood.”[20]

Coulter Lies About ANOTHER Supreme Court Case

Coulter writes: “As the Supreme Court said in Bellei, a case about the citizenship of a man born in Italy to a native-born American mother and an Italian father: ‘It is evident that Congress felt itself possessed of the power to grant citizenship to the foreign born and at the same time to impose qualifications and conditions for that citizenship.’”[21]

Coulter uses this case to prove her contention that Cruz is ineligible, when, in fact, it proves the opposite!

As noted in ROGERS v. BELLEI, (1971) (emphasis added):

“Section 301 (a) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1401 (a), defines those persons who ‘shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.’ Paragraph (7) of 301 (a) includes in that definition a person born abroad ‘of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States’ who has met specified conditions of residence in this country.”

The plan thus adopted by Congress with respect to a person of this classification was to bestow citizenship at birth but to take it away upon the person’s failure to comply with a post-age-14 and pre-age-28 residential requirement. It is this deprival of citizenship, once bestowed, that is under attack here.”

“The very first Congress, at its Second Session, proceeded to implement its power, under the Constitution’s Art. I, 8, cl. 4, to ‘establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization’ by producing the Act of March 26, 1790, 1 Stat. 103. That statute, among other things, stated, ‘And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.’” [Subsequent statutes extended it to either a citizen mother or citizen father.]

Cruz Is Eligible!

Gary DeMar is perhaps the foremost expert on America’s Founders. DeMar recently offered a history of originalist thought on Natural Born Citizen and reached this stunning conclusion: “Ted Cruz [is] more of an American than some of the drafters of the Constitution.”

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

[2]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[3]               Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[4]               Ann Coulter, “We’re All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now,” 1/13/16.

[5]               Ann Coulter, Hardball, MSNBC, 1/11/16.

[6]               See “Coulter Stumps for Romney – Again!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4V.

[7]               See “Adios, Ann: Only Mitt for Me” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-70.

[8]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[9]               Ann Coulter, Hardball, MSNBC, 1/11/16.

[10]             Bob Woodward, Fox News Sunday, FNC, 1/10/16.

[11]             See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

[12]             See “Coulter Lies About Supreme Court Case” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bE.

[13]             See “Coulter Trumped Up” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7Q.

[14]             See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

[15]             Ann Coulter, Peter Tilden Show, KABC, 8/28/15.

[16]             Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[17]             Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 1/8/16.

[18]             Ann Coulter, “We’re All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now,” 1/13/16.

[19]             Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[20]             Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 1/8/16.

[21]             Ann Coulter, “We’re All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now,” 1/13/16.

Coulter Lies About Supreme Court Case

Ann Coulter leads the charge of those seeking to crush a Cruz candidacy with a lie!

When she thought she could foist Romney on us again in 2016,[1] Coulter began to attack Cruz on his citizenship. With Cruz posing a serious threat to Trump, her new-found soul-mate,[2] Coulter has shifted into high gear, stridently claiming Cruz is ineligible to be president.[3]

Supreme Court Case

This isn’t Coulter’s first attempt at subverting the Constitution for political purposes.[4]

Backdrop: Elián González

The Elián González case became international political theater during the 2000 presidential race. It rekindled the Cold War in miniature. Coulter fed into that political hysteria by telling lies of her own, lies which fit into her own ideological sensibilities. Those lies included turning a Supreme Court decision on its head, claiming it said the exact opposite of what the Court decided.[5]

The heart and core of Coulter’s case for denying Juan Miguel González custody of his own son rested on Coulter’s decades-long belief that fathers have absolutely no rights or responsibilities to their own children except through marriage.

On talk TV – contrary to what the law actually says – Coulter continually insisted that putative fathers have no rights to their children: “The law used to account for these things by saying the father doesn’t have rights to a child unless he’s married to the mother. That’s how a man can claim his heritage and his claims on a child. … That’s how a father gets the right to children, by being married to the mother.”[6]

Coulter reaffirmed – again and again – that only marriage confers custodial rights: “First of all, the idea that a father has rights to a child by donating sperm; No! A father gains rights to a child by being married to the mother. … He has absolutely no rights to the child! Fathers gain rights to children by marrying the mothers.”[7]

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.

Lying About Supreme Court Cases

Coulter’s view of parental rights was her principal argument to separate a son from his father, but that core point of her position, that central concept, was an outright lie! To buttress that lie – which she has consistently expressed for almost twenty years – Coulter lied about a Supreme Court ruling which any layman can read and see that reaches the exact opposite conclusion. Coulter wrote:

“Let’s just consider the initial presumption that a father gets custody of his son. The law is indeed clear, at least to this extent: That ‘law’ refers only to legitimate children. … The Supreme Court last weighed in on the legal rights of unwed fathers in 1989 when it cut off all of the father’s rights to his child, including visitation.”[8]

In her essay, Coulter literally reversed the decision of the Court, falsely claiming it denied those custodial rights. Contrary to Coulter’s fiery opinion, the law says otherwise. The Supreme Court, in five cases, upheld the principle of paternity rights for putative fathers. Those cases were all cited in the Supreme Court case cited by Coulter.

In a rather remarkable display of truth twisting, Coulter took this Supreme Court case which affirms the custody rights of natural fathers and declared it the definitive denial of those rights![9]

The father in Coulter’s cited case was not denied parental rights due to illegitimacy but because his claim of fatherhood was filed after the filing deadline. That father had failed to assert his rights within two years of his daughter’s birth. Illegitimacy was never the issue. The Supreme Court has consistently confirmed custodial rights of natural fathers, both in principle and in practice. So, the case Coulter cited says the exact opposite of what Coulter claimed.

“Bald assertions about the very question under dispute,” Coulter once wrote, “is an odd method of argument,”[10] yet that is precisely what Coulter did (and continues to do). According to Coulter, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion; everyone is not entitled to his own facts.”[11] Apparently Coulter is not above making up her own “facts.”

Strangely (or not, for Ann), Coulter recently asserted, “Apparently that’s the way constitutional analysis goes these days. You determine, we’re all Ruth Bader Ginsburg now: Whatever you want the Constitution to say, that’s what it says, miraculously. Well, that has never been me!”[12]

Sorry, Ann, but you are the allegedly “conservative”[13] Ruth Bader Ginsburg!

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Adios, Ann: Only Mitt for Me” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-70.

[2]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[3]               See “Coulter Claims Cruz Ineligible” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9j.

[4]               See a series of case studies in Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[5]               For greater details on the González case and Coulter’s perversion of constitutional law, see “Case Study # 4: In the Name of Elián (González),” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[6]               Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 1/22/97.

[7]               Ann Coulter, MSNBC, 1/25/97.

[8]               Ann Coulter, “The bastardization of justice,” 4/26/00.

[9]               Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 410 (1989).

[10]             Ann Coulter, “Miranda Not a ‘Constitutional Straightjacket,’” 12/15/99.

[11]             Ann Coulter, High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton, Regnery, 1998, pg. 3.

[12]             Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 1/8/16.

[13]             See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

Coulter Betrays, Then Attacks Paula Jones

In her first column of the year,[1] Ann Coulter missed a scoop right under her aristocratic nose! She did so trying to avoid exposing her own shenanigans during the Clinton sex scandals of the 1990s.

Betrayal

Coulter took Chris Matthews to task for his incredulity over accusations that Hillary enabled Bill in his sexual escapades. But she missed a scoop by trying to hide her own past. (One might call it, “Ann Coulter’s Ann Coulter Amnesia.”) Coulter wrote:

“That’s why no one under 30 has ever heard of Gennifer Flowers, Juanita Broaddrick, Dolly Kyle Browning, Elizabeth Ward Gracen, Sally Perdue, Kathleen Willey and Monica Lewinsky. Nor have they heard that Hillary’s explanation of all these alleged rapes, molestations (proved), gropings (proved) and sexual affairs (proved) was that there was a ‘vast right-wing conspiracy, conspiring against my husband.’”

Coulter citations missed one of the most prominent cases, charges of sexual harassment by Paula Jones, the one person on that singular list whom Coulter personally knew, professionally betrayed, and profoundly demeaned.

The exclusion of Paula Jones from Coulter’s list is striking! Jones received a substantial out-of-court settlement.

Even more striking, Coulter extensively quoted Matthews on Hillary but missed the best Matthews quote out there, a scoop which exposes the very character of Hillary Clinton.

But first,

Coulter v. Jones

Coulter’s involvement with both the Paula Jones sexual harassment case against Bill Clinton and Linda Tripp’s taped conversations with Monica Lewinsky would prove crucial to not only undermining the Clinton agenda and tarnishing the Clinton legacy, but would also provide the impetus for impeachment of the President and, not coincidentally, provide Coulter with her first best-seller.

During the scandal, Coulter expressed not one word of empathy for Jones. Indeed, Coulter gloried in Paula’s misery because Paula became a weapon to use against the President. Coulter divulged attorney-client privileged information to the press with the express purpose of thwarting her client’s desire for an out-of-court settlement.

As a result of the sabotaged negotiations, Jones reluctantly went to court, the Lewinsky scandal erupted, and Jones’ life was radically altered. Rather than receiving the settlement she so desperately desired, Jones entered media hell and gained a fractured family. Coulter, however, benefited, later boasting that she “got a bestseller out of it.” Meanwhile, Jones remained in media hell.

Coulter publicly commiserated with Jones: “It seems to me, after seeing this in a practical matter, what Paula Jones went through, I don’t think any of them would bring a lawsuit. I certainly wouldn’t. How would you like to be called ‘trailer park trash,’ and have the entire White House apparatus focused on you as one sole little woman without a capacity to respond?”

As it was, due to marital breakup, legal fees, back taxes, and a defense fund fiasco – all as a result of Coulter’s interference in her lawsuit – Jones thought the only way out of her family meltdown and financial chaos was to discreetly pose for Penthouse.

Ironically, after abandoning Jones – without ever offering her any post-impeachment aid – Coulter denounced her as “trailer park trash,” doing precisely what she had previously condemned Clinton supporters for doing. In Coulter’s own words: “Now she’s just the trailer park trash they said she was.”

(Many more details are available in “Case Study # 1: Oh, Paula (Jones)! Ann Coulter’s Betrayal.”)[2]

Coulter Missed This Scoop!

Coulter’s extensive excerpts from Chris Matthews somehow missed his most important words on the subject. On October 26, 2007, Chris Matthews outlined many of the Clinton sex scandals (emphasis added):

“But we know it has because his private matters inevitably become private. We know the name of every woman he’s been involved with – everybody.  You know, there’s never been any investigative reporting.  Paula Jones filed a lawsuit.  Gennifer Flowers had a big press conference.  Monica Lewinsky blabbed about him on some tape recording with her pal, Linda Tripp.  We have this stuff thrown at us, and they keep saying, private matter.  If it’s private, why do we always know about it?”

Matthews mentioned the person Coulter was loathe to name: Paula Jones. Matthews also affirmed the public notoriety of Clinton’s private sexual behavior with women other than his wife. But, more than that, Matthews probed deeper.

Then Matthews asked how those scandals accrued to Hillary’s benefit!

“Does she exploit it and get power by knowing that he’s always feeling guilty with her?  In other words, did she get power – I heard this from David Gergen.  She got power over health care financing, the biggest issue of that administration because he was so hooked up in the problem of Paula Jones that she just squeezed it out of [him] … Is that the kind of exploitation, or what do you call it – what do you call it, blackmail?  What  do you call it? … And she exploited it to get more power.”

Here we see that it was well known during the Clinton presidency that the First Lady was exploiting her own husband’s sexual misconduct (in particular, the Jones’ scandal) to advance her own agenda with the power of the presidency behind it! This is yet another example of Clinton’s abuse of power as First Lady and one which foreshadows what a Hillary presidency would look like.

Hillary and Ann, Enemies Forever?

Trekkies will recall the Star Trek episode, “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield,” in which “two survivors of a war-torn planet … are still committed to destroying each other aboard the ship.” Each is “half black and half white, the two halves split perfectly down the center of his body.” Why do they seek to destroy one another? Each regards the other as evil. They are, ironically, mirror images of one another. (One is white on the left side, black on the right; the other is the reverse.) Yet, they cannot see how much they have in common.

Coulter and Clinton have far more in common with one another than just enmity.

Neither Clinton nor Coulter can escape their ignoble past (except by godly sorrow, repentance, and God’s grace). The character of both is cut from the same cloth[3]narcissistic hubris[4] and ambition unbridled by scruples.[5] Coulter and Clinton share a shocking number of character traits[6] (though radically different personalities).

Like Clinton,[7] Coulter cannot be trusted![8]

Endnotes:

[1]               Ann Coulter, “Chris Matthews’ Hillary Amnesia,” 1/6/16.

[2]               See “Case Study # 1: Oh, Paula (Jones)! Ann Coulter’s Betrayal,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[3]               See “Is Coulter as Corrupt as Clinton?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-64.

[4]               See Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[5]               See “Ignorant Ideologue” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-br.

[6]               See The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[7]               See “HRC: A Caricature of the Left” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-94.

[8]               See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

Coulter Bashes Cruz – Again!

In a remarkable interview on the eve of Thanksgiving, Ann Coulter again bashed Ted Cruz, calling him a “midget” “compared to Trump!”

Extolling a Trump-Romney ticket, Coulter rejected Cruz for even the V.P. spot. The reason is astonishing!

CruzMidget

Coulter explained her logic, claiming that Trump is being self-sacrificing in running for President while Cruz and the remainder of the candidates have “got nothing else to do.” The other candidates have “nothing else to do?”

Coulter declared (emphasis added):

“I would put Reagan, Romney, Trump in the same category in this way and that is all three of them – unlike everyone else running for President – their lives are made worse by running for and becoming President. They have fantastic lives. They’re wealthy. They have beautiful families. The fact that they run for President at all suggests to me that these three genuinely love America and would like to save it.”

That’s right, Trump is a good candidate because he’s got a “fantastic” life. In what way is his life fantastic? Well, he’s “wealthy” and has a “beautiful family.” (Don’t the other candidates have beautiful families, too?)

Coulter claimed that Trump “genuinely love(s) America and would like to save it.” Does Coulter mean that Cruz hates America and wants to destroy it?

As for the self-sacrificing nature of Trump’s presidential aspirations, doesn’t he want to be President for the sake of being President?

Coulter further asserted (emphasis added), “These guys who are running because they’re got nothing else to do, they really are such midgets compared to Trump.”

Coulter, ever the elite, knows no better!

Coulter – An Elite’s Elite

The Ann Coulter I’ve known for the better part of two decades is an elite’s elite. Coulter is an elite. Coulter loves elites. In fact, Coulter depends upon them.

Elite

Born and bred an elite,[1] Coulter graduated from high school, in the most prosperous county in America, wanting the “crème to rise to the top.” Coulter, through networking with her elite friends and colleagues, rose to the top. Those very same friends and colleagues – elites one and all – salvaged her career multiple times during many of her most outrageous controversies.

A multi-millionaire herself (many times over), Coulter’s best friends are millionaires and billionaires.

Coulter’s Dream Ticket

This Thanksgiving Eve, Coulter appeared on the Sean Hannity Show. Her friend, Mark Simone (acting as guest host) was literally speechless.

For the umpteenth time, Coulter proffered her Dream Team presidential ticket: Trump[2]Romney![3] Coulter eagerly exclaimed, “I want Trump/Romney.[4] That is an unbeatable ticket.”[5]

Taken aback, Simone said that would never happen, then broached the enmity between the two candidates.

Coulter replied: “Look, they both hate one another right now. It would be like staging the Peace of Westphalia to bring them together. But I am up to the job.”

“I am up to the job.”

Silence from Simone.

Truly delusional,[6] Coulter really thinks that she can reshape reality into her utopian ideal. Coulter – and Coulter alone – can orchestrate events to save America. Has Coulter always been this crazy or is it simply a part of her emotional, intellectual, and spiritual devolution?

But that was not the first time Coulter made that delusional claim. She told her friend, Eric Metaxas, “Well, it will take a lot of careful negotiation on my part [to get a Trump-Romney ticket] since they both seem to hate one another, but it’s a dynamite combo platter.”[7]

Since her continual defamation of innocent Christians[8] can’t stop them from pursuing God’s will,[9] it would behoove Coulter to rethink her alleged power to change the hearts of these two powerful elites. (Would she also broker peace between Ahmadinejad and Netanyahu?)

Power Broker Extraordinaire

Ann Coulter has always seen herself as the ultimate power-broker, whether in local, state, or national elections.

In 2000, Coulter attempted to run a totally sham campaign for Congress[10] simply to oust a sitting Republican who had voted against impeachment.

Coulter coronated George W. Bush as President in 1999[11] – long before anyone knew what his platform would be. She selected Bush based solely on his huge war chest.

Coulter wanted Romney for President as early as 2008[12] (Coulter: “I supported Romney back in 2008”)[13] because she viewed him as a wealthy patrician who looked presidential and, since then, she has rationalized away his non-conservative credentials.

Now, Coulter wants Trump,[14] even though he has demonstrated for over two decades that he is not a conservative.

Coulter has no faith in conservatism and consistently chooses pragmatism over principle. Hence her proclivity to promote non-conservative candidates in the guise of winning elections. Coulter is a RINO-lover par excellence.[15]

After McCain’s debacle in 2008, Coulter told Rush Limbaugh and others privately, and Sean Hannity’s radio audience publicly, that she (Ann Coulter!) would not let that happen again. As a result, Coulter foisted Romney on conservatives in the 2012 election and she is trying to foist Trump on us now. Don’t let her!

Pride’s Proverbial Fall

“I am up to the job.”

An impossible job that no one asked Coulter to undertake.

Pride has always been Coulter’s downfall[16] and it is the source of most of the dysfunctional aspects of her life.

Pride is the Devil’s greatest weapon and man’s Achilles’ heel.

I had often wondered whether wicked people know they are wicked. I found the answer in Psalm 36:1-3 (NLT), which reads (emphasis added):

“Sin whispers to the wicked, deep within their hearts. They have no fear of God at all. In their blind conceit, they cannot see how wicked they really are. Everything they say is crooked and deceitful. They refuse to act wisely or do good.”

We know that much of what Coulter says “is crooked and deceitful.”[17] Coulter truly cannot be trusted. Why? Because she believes her own lies. In her “blind conceit,” Coulter is blinded to the evil that she does.

Pray that God humble Ann, cleanse her heart, and renew a right spirit within her. Until then, never trust Ann Coulter.

Endnotes:

[1]               See Chapter 1: “The Seduction of Ann Coulter,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[2]               See “Coulter Trumped Up” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7Q.

[3]               See “Adios, Ann: Only Mitt for Me” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-70.

[4]               See “Case Study # 6: Romney v. Everyone Else,” Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, 2014, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.

[5]               Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 11/25/15.

[6]               See “Delusional – New Ann Coulter Book” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-3z.

[7]              Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 10/22/15.

[8]               See “Fake Christians” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5T.

[9]               See “Coulter Attacks Christians for Being Godly” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-az.

[10]               See “Case Study # 3: Coulter for Congress: Only Scoundrels Need Apply,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[11]             See “Case Study # 5: Raising Cain for McCain and Fascist Christians,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[12]             See “Case Study # 7: Mitt Romney – Ideal Candidate,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[13]             Ann Coulter, Washington Journal, C-Span, 10/5/12.

[14]             See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

[15]             See “Coulter Discovers RINOs will be … RINOs” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-56.

[16]             See Chapter 1: “Rising Crème: Narcissism – A Primer,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[17]             See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

Ann Coulter’s “Real” Americans Fallacy

While one can applaud Coulter’s efforts to reform America’s immigration policy, her conclusions are nonsensical and shameful.

RealAmericans

Coulter identifies immigration – both legal and illegal – as the preeminent, overarching challenge of our time, beyond which all other issues pale in comparison. Her passion and conviction may well carry the day for the hearts and minds of many Americans. But is she right?

Coulter summarized her thesis on the Joyce Kaufman Show,[1] again asserting that the only issue of importance is immigration. Every other issue is subordinated to her issue (and the subject of the book she is currently hawking.) Coulter claims that – once we have settled the immigration issue – everything else will sort itself out.

After we have resolved the immigration crisis, Coulter claims, “I am confident that America will do the right thing on all the issues we care about, from abortion to gay marriage to Iran deals. The rest will sort itself out. The biggest problem right now is that Americans are being outvoted by foreigners.”

Coulter made similar claims in the 2012 and 2014 elections, asserting that conservatives just need to elect Republicans[2] to restore the America she loves. A decisive GOP landslide in 2014[3] petered out on election night, with a Republican congress acceding to most of President Obama’s demands.[4] Coulter has yet to learn that a RINO is a RINO is a RINO.[5]

Coulter was wrong then and she is wrong now!

Does Coulter really think that “on all the issues we care about, from abortion to gay marriage to Iran deals” will be fixed once we’ve dealt with post-1970s immigration? All of the cultural issues Coulter claims to care about became issues prior to post-1970’s immigration.

Immigration is Not THE Problem

Coulter’s nativism and xenophobia[6] have gotten out of hand, as she vilifies all immigrants[7] and even condemns Christians[8] who are overseas missionaries.[9] With her latest book and book tour, Coulter is actually promoting restoration of a WASP culture – a white culture.[10]

With carefully-selected anecdotes and statistics, Coulter seeks to prove that immigration is the source of all of America’s woes. Moreover, she claims that even second-generation immigrants (especially those from non-Western European nations) are somehow not really “American.”[11] Her thesis is that, once immigration is halted and foreigners are deported, America will be restored to greatness by the “real” Americans who remain.

But immigration is not the problem Coulter makes it out to be and following Coulter’s prescription to counter that crisis will not achieve the utopia Coulter envisions. History itself disputes Coulter’s thesis. The problem is not immigrants but ideas.

The American progressive movement has been populated by “real” Americans for over a century.

American progressives brought us the New Deal, the Great Society, and Obamacare. American progressives created Planned Parenthood, enacted Jim Crow, and decided Roe. V. Wade.

American progressives were apologists for first Hitler, then Stalin, then Castro. American progressives were useful idiots throughout the Cold War and supported the communist regime in Cuba for half-a-century. (Coulter apparently forgot about that “massive” bestseller which posits Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism.)

American progressives led the anti-war movement and the sexual revolution. American progressives infiltrated academia, Hollywood, the media, and government.

American progressives have ruled over major metropolitan cities for over fifty years, implementing policies which have devastated cities and incited racial violence (e.g., Detroit, Ferguson,[12] Baltimore[13]) while ignoring black-on-black violence. Changing immigration policy would not reverse those trends. These problems are, at heart, ideological and cultural,[14] not racial.

The root causes of the problems and crises America faces today predate the post-1970s immigration of Third World immigrants that Coulter vilifies. Mexicans are not the monsters Coulter depicts.[15]

Coulter’s claim to fame as a polemicist and provocateur arose from her targeting of entire groups of people as evil villains seeking to destroy America and civilization itself. With her latest book, subtitled The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country Into a Third World Hellhole, Coulter impugns the motives, character, and patriotism of everyone who disagrees with her.[16]

A decade ago, Coulter blamed everything on the Left. Now, she blames everything on immigrants. In another decade, will she blame everything on space aliens?

Endnotes:

[1]               Ann Coulter, Joyce Kaufman Show, WFTL, 9/10/15.

[2]               See “Coulter Dictates” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-3E.

[3]               See “GOP Triumphs Despite Voter Fraud” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-59.

[4]               See “Coulter Discovers RINOs will be … RINOs” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-56.

[5]               See “Only One Admits to Being a RINO” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-6e.

[6]               See “Ann Coulter Auditions for U.N. Ambassador” at http://t.co/R7IDzwnUJ8.

[7]               See “Coulter: All Immigrants Are Bad” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8w.

[8]               See “Ann Coulter’s Xenophobic Anti-Gospel of Hate” at http://t.co/aQGhLuWwtD.

[9]               See “Fake Christians” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5T.

[10]             See “Adios, Ann: Coulter’s WASP Fantasy” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7H.

[11]             See “Coulter: All Immigrants Are Bad” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8w.

[12]             See “Ferguson in Flames” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-5I.

[13]             See “Baltimore ‘Purged’” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8S.

[14]             See “Propaganda Kills” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-6n.

[15]             See “Immigration More Dangerous Than ISIS” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5e.

[16]             See “Coulter’s Assault on Pro-Life Movement Continues” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9a.

Coulter Belittles Carson and Fiorina – as a black and a woman

Ann Coulter has proven herself to be nothing more than a political hack shilling for Donald Trump (and promoting herself and her book).

CarsonFiorina

Yesterday, Coulter revealed her true feelings about blacks, women, the GOP, and the electorate. Moreover, she justified Trump at every turn while attacking his chief competitors, without regard for either truth or decency. Just as she did with Romney, Coulter defended Trump’s many flip-flips, saying, “I think these [criticisms of Trump’s flip-flopping] are all unfair.”[1]

According to Coulter, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina are so popular with the people because they are merely novelty candidates: one is a black conservative, the other a female conservative. Yes, Coulter’s lowest common denominator is race and gender. Identity politics is at the heart of the Ann Coulter we have come to know.[2] (Do conservatives really have to emulate Hillary Clinton and the Left’s obsession with identity politics?)[3]

For many years, Coulter has promoted racist and sexist stereotypes[4] which clearly demonstrate how she views blacks, women, the GOP, and the average American voter.

Ben Carson – an Unqualified Black

Asked why she has been so critical of Carson, Coulter caustically blurted, “We’re so happy we have a little black Republican [Ben Carson].” Amazing! Coulter really thinks Carson’s surge in the polls is simply because he is black?

Coulter added, “Oh, we have a woman who’s a Republican, oh, it’s so amazing. Oh, we have a black who’s a Republican. They don’t know what their positions are!” That’s not true! Carson and Fiorina have given many interviews and press conferences espousing their views.

In effect, Coulter is saying that Carson’s only qualification is being black and Fiorina’s only qualification is being a woman. Apart from their racial/gender traits, Coulter thinks that these two individuals are unqualified.

Coulter actually denies the obvious! Ben Carson has phenomenally high favorability ratings. People like Carson. They recognize his genuineness, honesty, and integrity. They appreciate his humble, soft-spoken demeanor, his clarity of thought, and his humor. One might call him the ultimate anti-establishment, anti-Trump candidate.

Carly Fiorina – an Unqualified Girl

Asked about the Fox debate with the lower tier of candidates, Coulter said that she was unimpressed and regarded it as a snooze-fest (feigning an exaggerated snore). A record-setting television audience clearly disagreed.

As for Coulter’s opinion of Fiorina, “No, I have not been impressed with her. … Not only is she wrong on [anchor babies], she’s bossy!”

Bossy? This is the best Coulter can come up with? A sexist cliché?

If anything, Coulter and Trump are the bossy ones. Why not just call Carson an uppity black and Fiorina just a girl. Oh, but she does!

Asked what she thought of CNN revising their debate criteria to conform with reality, Coulter smugly smirked, “No, they’re adding 11 because she’s a girl!”

A girl? Coulter tried that stunt a few weeks ago.[5] (It didn’t work then, either.)

Fiorina is a successful businesswoman who has travelled the world extensively, met with world leaders far more productively than Hillary Clinton ever did, and communicates well her views and her vision for America. She is, also, perhaps quicker on her feet than Coulter. (Oops!)

Like Carson, Fiorina is not a “token” anything. Fiorina trounced the other candidates in her Fox debate. She won the debate and she deserves to be in the top tier in the next debate based upon her performance and her high ranking in the polls. Even her fellow candidates agree.

Ann Coulter – an Unqualified Hack

But Coulter has her own agenda: promoting herself and reshaping America into the image she envisions. As she has done for almost two decades, Coulter has decided who the best GOP candidate is and she is willing to foist that candidate on America regardless of what the rest of America thinks about it.[6]

Ironically, she backed George W. Bush long before his political positions were known (he had a huge war chest at the time), but now she belittles Carson, claiming no one knows his positions.

Coulter has a no-holds-barred, no-quarter-given approach to political discourse. She attacks anyone and everyone who threaten either her agenda or her Chosen One.[7] She defended Romney against all his foes[8] and is now doing so for Trump.[9]

But, truth is the very first casualty in Coulter’s campaign.[10] She gets so many things wrong![11] And, to satisfy her desperate need to have her own way, Coulter willfully risks giving the Democrats the victory in 2016.[12]

Will Coulter’s hubris be the death of America?[13]

Endnotes:

[1]               Ann Coulter, Good Day, LA, KTTV, 9/2/15.

[2]               Even though Coulter once worked for the Center for Individual Rights, she seemingly views people as part of particular groups rather than as individuals, following in the footsteps of Marx rather than America’s Founding Fathers.

[3]               See “Identity Politics Is the Problem” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1l.

[4]               See Chapter 10: “Equality: Self-Evident Truths,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

[5]               See “Ann Coulter Hates Carly Fiorina” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9z.

[6]               See “Coulter Dictates” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-3E.

[7]               See “Coulter Trumped Up” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-7Q.

[8]               See “Adios, Ann: Only Mitt for Me” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-70.

[9]               See “Coulter Claims Cruz Ineligible” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9j.

[10]             See “Propaganda: George Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4j.

[11]             See “Are Coulter’s ‘Facts’ Right?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9E.

[12]             See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

[13]             See “Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-3k.