Oliver Stone heaps compliments on Vladimir Putin, calls news reports about hacking FAKE NEWS

Oliver Stone heaps compliments on Vladimir Putin, calls news reports about hacking FAKE NEWS

BBC Fake News reporter Laura Trevelyan, is taken aback by Oliver Stone’s positive comments on Putin and the Russia FAKE NEWS

 

Oliver Stone agrees with Pres Trump and Putin - election intervention is FAKE NEWS

Oliver Stone agrees with Pres Trump and Putin – election intervention is FAKE NEWS

The Liberal Fake News BBC’s Laura Trevelyan spoke to the filmmaker Oliver Stone about his upcoming documentary with Vladimir Putin. Oliver Stone asked the Russian president about the US election hacking situation. The liberal fake news journalist was not ready for what she heard.

Oliver Stone interview with Vladimir Putin, Stone was extremely complimentary of the man, yet the BBC/PBS pushed it, and Stone said the Russia election thing was all smoke with no fire, Russia had nothing to do with Trump and the 2016 election. And he even labeled the coverage of it as FAKE NEWS

Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!

0-00

Vladimir Putin is a former KGB operative

0-02

he understands the importance of

0-04

television he understands the importance

0-05

of image is it possible that he’s using

0-07

you to send a message

0-09

perhaps you that isn’t really a true one

0-11

that he doesn’t really want okay well in

0-12

one he certainly know it’s an elaborate

0-14

ruse but I’m he knows that I’m not going

0-17

to change American policy but what I

0-18

should I’d like to do is contribute to a

0-20

consciousness of what he’s saying you

0-25

have had unparalleled access to Vladimir

0-28

Putin for a Western filmmaker what do

0-31

you hope all that access is revealing

0-34

about him I hope to it would lead to a

0-36

serious interesting and discussion about

0-39

world affairs particularly US and Russia

0-42

she wouldn’t yeah at the instability she

0-44

is previously understood tell me it’s I

0-46

use Nick over he lays out a world that

0-49

we don’t know you know Russia’s referred

0-51

to rather than eleven only in the

0-52

Western media but let’s get beyond those

0-55

those images those caricatures and

0-57

that’s what I wanted to do is it your

0-59

impression from these hours of

1-01

interviews that Vladimir Putin genuinely

1-03

wants a better relationship with the

1-04

West absolutely there’s just no doubt in

1-07

my mind he referred to the United States

1-09

consistently as our partner I never

1-11

heard a bad word there was some

1-13

criticism under Miss unjust he said I

1-15

didn’t understand why our partners were

1-17

doing this and the Ukraine point and the

1-20

Syrian point when he explained

1-21

Ukrainians it in a way that perhaps a

1-24

westerner can understand that the

1-25

Russians look at this completely

1-26

differently than we do so I have to

1-28

wonder where is the the threat that we

1-30

talked about where the NATO commanders

1-32

are perhaps exaggerating this to get

1-35

make sure that the Alliance stays

1-37

together and they’ve implied that

1-40

Russia’s behind everything in the West

1-42

that was wrong what’s their concerns not

1-44

it’s not bespoke with practically any

1-46

traditions you are Adam a Putin directly

1-49

did Russia hack the u.s. election and he

1-52

tells you it’s all lies do you accept

1-55

that he didn’t put it that way but he

1-57

thought it was a preposterous statement

1-59

but did you believe him when he said I

2-01

probably I absolutely believe that

2-03

there’s all smoke and no fire are there

2-05

would you agree with President Donald

2-06

Trump them when he says that stories

2-08

about Russia hacking to influence the US

2-11

election a fake news

2-13

oh definitely as Putin said I think it’s

2-16

an internal political battle in America

2-18

and I think it’s worked I mean it’s

2-20

obscured the possibility of resetting

2-23

the relations it’s installed everything

2-26

you’ve spent all this time with a man

2-28

who has been called a ruthless opponent

2-31

accused of killing his political

2-33

opponents did you ever worry that you

2-35

might be unwittingly a tool of Putin

2-38

propaganda if I was and you know it’s

2-41

certainly an adventure but I don’t buy

2-43

those old spy Wars you know the English

2-47

are great at inventing James Bond sort

2-49

of scenarios I didn’t see him as doctor

2-51

no no he’s a very rational man

 

President Trump’s personal attorney Marc Kasowitz response to Comey Testimony

President Trump’s personal attorney Marc Kasowitz response to the former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation James Comey Testimony at the Senate

Mark Kasowitz attorney to President Trump

0-00

ladies and gentlemen I’m mark Kassovitz

0-03

president Trump’s personal lawyer

0-06

contrary to numerous false press

0-09

accounts leading up to today’s hearing

0-12

  1. Comey has now finally confirmed

0-15

publicly what he repeatedly told

0-18

President Trump privately that is that

0-22

the president was not under

0-24

investigation as part of any probe into

0-28

Russian interference the president he

0-32

  1. Comey also admitted that there is no

0-34

evidence that a single vote change as a

0-38

result of any Russian interference

0-40

  1. commies testimony also makes clear

0-44

that the president never sought to

0-47

impede the investigation into attempted

0-50

Russian interference in the 2016

0-53

election and in fact according to mr.

0-57

Comey the president told mr. Comey quote

1-00

it would be good to find out close quote

1-04

in that investigation if there was quote

1-07

some satellite Associates of his who did

1-11

something wrong

1-12

close quote and he President Trump did

1-17

not exclude anyone from that statement

1-21

consistent with that statement the

1-24

president never in form or substance

1-27

directed or suggested that mr. Comey

1-31

stop investigating anyone including the

1-36

president never suggested that mr. Comey

1-39

quote let Flynn go close quote as the

1-45

president publicly stated the next day

1-46

he did say to mr. Comey quote general

1-51

Flynn is a good guy he has been through

1-54

a lot close quote and also quote asked

1-58

how general Flynn is doing close quote

2-01

Admiral Rogers testified today that the

2-05

president never quote directed him to do

2-09

anything illegal immoral

2-13

unethical or inappropriate close quote

2-17

and never never quote pressured him to

2-22

do so

2-22

close quote director Coates said the

2-25

same thing the president likewise

2-29

never pressured mr. Comey the president

2-33

also never told mr. Comey quote I need

2-38

loyalty I expect loyalty close quote

2-41

he never said it in form and he never

2-44

said it in substance of course the

2-47

office of the president is entitled to

2-50

expect loyalty from those who are

2-52

serving the administration and from

2-55

before this president it and from before

2-58

this President took office to this day

3-01

it is overwhelmingly clear that there

3-04

have been and continue to be those in

3-07

government who are actively attempting

3-10

to undermine this administration with

3-13

selective and illegal leaks of

3-17

classified information and privileged

3-20

communications mr. Comey has now

3-23

admitted that he is one of these leakers

3-27

today mr. Comey admitted that he

3-31

unilaterally and surreptitiously made

3-35

unauthorized disclosures to the press of

3-38

privileged communications with the

3-41

president the leaks of this privileged

3-44

information began no later than March

3-47

2017 when friends of mr. Comey have

3-51

stated that he disclosed to them the

3-55

conversations that he had with the

3-57

president during their January 27th 2017

4-02

dinner and February 14th 2017 White

4-06

House meeting today mr. Comey admitted

4-10

that he leaked to friends of his

4-13

purported memos of those privileged

4-16

communications one of which he testified

4-19

was classified mr. Comey also testified

4-24

that immediately after

4-26

was terminated he authorized his friends

4-29

to leak the contents of those memos to

4-33

the press in order to in mr. commis

4-36

words quote prompt the appointment of a

4-40

special counsel close quote although mr.

4-43

Comey testified that he only leaked the

4-46

memos in response to a tweet the public

4-50

record reveals that the New York Times

4-52

was quoting from those memos the day

4-55

before the referenced tweet which belies

4-58

  1. commis excuse for this unauthorized

5-01

disclosure of privileged information and

5-05

appears to be entirely retaliatory we

5-09

will leave it to the appropriate

5-12

authorities to determine whether these

5-14

leaks should be investigated along with

5-17

all the others that are being

5-19

investigated in some it is now

5-22

established that the president was not

5-25

being investigated for colluding with or

5-28

attempting to obstruct any investigation

5-32

as the committee pointed out today these

5-35

important facts for the country to know

5-37

are virtually the only facts that have

5-40

not been leaked during the course of

5-42

these events as he said yesterday the

5-46

president feels completely vindicated

5-48

and is eager to continue moving forward

5-51

with his agenda with the business of

5-55

this country and with this public cloud

5-57

removed thank you

 

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I AM MARC KASOWITZ. PRESIDENT TRUMP’S PERSONAL LAWYER. CONTRARY TO NUMEROUS FALSE PRESS ACCOUNTS LEADING UP TO TODAY’S HEARING, MR. COMEY HAS NOW CONFIRMED PUBLICLY WHAT HE REPEATEDLY TOLD THE PRESIDENT TRUMP PRIVATELY THAT IS, THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT UNDER INVESTIGATION AS PART OF ANY PROBE INTO RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE. THE PRESIDENT — MR. COMEY ADMITTED THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT A SINGLE VOTE CHANGE AS A RESULT OF ANY RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE. MR. COMEY’S SYSTEM TESTIMONY ALSO MAKES CLEAR THAT THE PRESIDENT NEVER SOUGHT TO IMPEDE THE INVESTIGATION INTO ATTEMPTED RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 ELECTION. IN FACT, ACCORDING TO MR. COMEY, THE PRESIDENT TOLD MR. COMEY, QUOTE, “IT WOULD BE GOOD TO FIND OUT” IN THAT INVESTIGATION IF THERE WERE SOME SATELLITE ASSOCIATES OF HIM WHO DID SOMETHING WRONG. AND HE, PRESIDENT TRUMP, DID NOT EXCLUDE ANYONE FROM THAT STATEMENT. CONSISTENT WITH THAT STATEMENT, THE PRESIDENT NEVER INFORMED OR SUBSTANCE DIRECTED OR SUGGESTED THAT MR. COMEY STOP INVESTIGATING ANYONE INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT NEVER SUGGESTED THAT MR. COMEY “LET FLYNN GO.” AS THE PRESIDENT PUBLICLY STATED THE NEXT DAY, HE DID SAY TO MR. COMEY, QUOTE, “GENERAL FLYNN IS A GOOD GUY AND HE’S BEEN THROUGH A LOT” AND ALSO “ASK HOW GENERAL FLYNN IS DOING.” THE PRESIDENT NEVER DIRECTED HIM TO DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL, IMMORAL AND UNETHICAL OR INAPPROPRIATE CLOSED QUOTE AND NEVER, NEVER, QUOTE, PRESSURED HIM TO DO SO.” DIRECTOR COATS SAID THE SAME THING. THE PRESIDENT LIKE WISE NEVER PRESSURED MR. COMEY. THE PRESIDENT ALSO NEVER TOLD MR. COMEY, QUOTE, “I NEED LOYALTY, I EXPECT LOYALTY.” HE NEVER SAID IT IN FORM OR SUBSTANCE. OF COURSE, THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT LOYALTY FROM THOSE WHO ARE SERVING THE ADMINISTRATION. BEFORE THIS, PRESIDENT TOOK OFFICE TO THIS DAY, IT IS OVERWHELMINGLY CLEAR THAT THERE HAVE BEEN AND CONTINUED TO BE THOSE IN GOVERNMENT WHO ARE ACTIVELY ATTEMPTING URN MIND THIS ADMINISTRATION WITH SELECTIVE AND ILLEGAL LEAKS OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND PRIVILEGE COMMUNICATION IS. MR. COMEY HAS NOW ADMITTED THAT HE IS ONE OF THESE LEAKERS. TODAY, MR. COMEY ADMITTED THAT HE UNILATERALLY MADE UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURES TO THE PRESS OF PRIVILEGE COMMUNICATION COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE PRESIDENT. THE LEAK OF THIS PRIVILEGE BEGAN NO LATER THAN MARCH OF 2017 WHEN FRIENDS OF MR. COMEY STATED THAT HE DISCLOSED TO THEM THE CONVERSATIONS THAT HE HAD WITH THE PRESIDENT DURING THEIR JANUARY 27TH, 2017 DINNER AND FEBRUARY 14TH, 2017 WHITE HOUSE MEETING. TODAY, MR. COMEY ADMITTED THAT HE LEAKED TO FRIENDS OF HIS PROPORTED MEMOS OF THOSE PRIVILEGED IMMUNE COMMUNICATIONS. ONE OF WHICH HE TESTIFIED WAS CLASSIFIED. MR. COMEY ALSO TESTIFIED THAT AFTER HE WAS TERMINATED, HE AUTHORIZED HIS FRIENDS TO LEAK THE CONTENTS OF THOSE MEMOS TO THE PRESS IN ORDER TO MR. COMEY’S WORDS PROMPT THE APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL. ALTHOUGH MR. COMEY TESTIFIED THAT HE ONLY LEAKED THE MEMO IN RESPONSE TO A TWEET. THE NEW YORK TIMES WAS QUOTING FROM THOSE MEMOS, THE DAY BEFORE THE REFERENCE TWEETS WHICH — IT APPEARS TO BE ENTIRELY RETALIATORY. WE’LL LEAVE IT TO THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES TO DETERMINE WHETHER THESE LEAKS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHERS THAT ARE BEING INVESTIGATED. IN SOME, IT IS NOW A ESTABLISHES THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT BEING INVESTIGATED FOR COLLUDING WITH OR ATTEMPTING TO OBSTRUCT ANY INVESTIGATION. AS THE COMMITTEE POINTED OUT TODAY OF THESE IMPORTANT FACTS FOR R THE THE COUNTRY TO KNOW ARE VIRTUALLY THE ONLY FACTS THAT’S NOT BEEN LEAKED DURING THE COURSE OF THESE EVENTS. YESTERDAY, THE PRESIDENT FEELS INDICATE VITAMIN VINDICATED AND EAGER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BUSINESS OF THIS COUNTRY AND HIS PUBLIC CLOUD REMOVED. MR. MARC

Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!

BUILD THE WALL Charles Krauthammer with an ending from Bill Clinton

BUILD THE WALL

BUILD THE WALL Charles Krauthammer with an ending from Bill Clinton

Can America solve its illegal immigration problem both justly and humanely? Yes, but it requires first building a border wall. Washington Post columnist and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Charles Krauthammer explains why.

 

Presented by

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER

Charles Krauthammer - Prager U - BUILD THE WALL

Can America solve its illegal immigration problem both justly and humanely? Yes, but it requires first building a border wall. Washington Post columnist and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Charles Krauthammer explains why.

Every sensible immigration policy has two objectives: 1) to regain control of our borders so that we decide who enters; and 2) to find a humane way to deal with the 11 million illegal immigrants who now live among us. 

Start with the second. For both practical and moral reasons, America cannot and will not and should not expel 11 million people.  That leaves us with two choices: ignore them or figure out a way to legalize them. Ignoring them hasn’t worked. But there is also a huge problem with legalization: it creates an irresistible incentive for new illegal immigrants to come.

We say, of course, that this will be the very last, very final, never-again, we’re-not-kidding-this-time amnesty. And everyone knows it’s phony. That’s what was said in 1986, when we passed the Simpson-Mazzoli immigration reform. It turned out to be the largest legalization program in American history — nearly 3 million people got permanent residency. There was no enforcement. We now have 11 million new illegal immigrants in our midst.

The irony of this whole debate, which bitterly splits the country, is that there is a silver bullet that would not just solve the problem, but also create a national consensus behind it.

A vast number of Americans who oppose legalization and fear new waves of immigration would change their minds if we could radically reduce new — i.e., future — illegal immigration.

And we can.

First, build a barrier. Call it a wall. Call it a fence. Call it what you will. Add cameras and sensors. Add drones. Beef up the patrols. All that matters is that we regain control of the border.

Fences work. The triple fence outside San Diego led to a 90 percent reduction in infiltration. Israel’s border fence with the West Bank produced a similar decline. Even holier-than-thou Europeans have conceded the point: Hungary, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Austria, Greece, Spain ? why, even Norway — have all started building border fences to stem the tide of Middle Eastern refugees.

Then enforce two other measures: a national E-Verify system that makes it just about impossible to work if you are here illegally, and a functioning visa tracking system, since 40% of illegal immigrants are visa overstays.

The wall/fence will, of course, be ugly. So are the concrete barriers to keep truck bombs from driving into the White House. Sometimes function has to supersede form. 

And don’t tell me that this is our Berlin Wall. When you build a wall to keep people in, that’s a prison. When you build a wall to keep people out, that’s an expression of sovereignty.

Of course, no barrier will be foolproof. But it doesn’t have to be. It simply has to reduce the river to a manageable trickle. Once we do, everything becomes possible — including dealing with our 11 million illegal immigrants.

So, let’s fix that. Track the visas, do E-Verify, build the damn barrier. It’s ridiculous to say that it can’t be done.

And who would certify that the border is back in our control? I would have a neutral party, perhaps a commission of retired jurists, issue the judgment. Once they do, we legalize the 11 million, granting them the right to stay and work here.

We can’t give them citizenship. That’s a bridge too far. You don’t get to join the political destiny of the country by entering it illegally. But any children born here would be American — which means that over time the issue resolves itself.

The American people are legitimately angry at the price American society has paid due to illegal immigration. But they are also a generous people. Once they are assured that we do indeed control our borders, that anger will abate. A national consensus will emerge. 

Radical border control, followed by radical legalization. No mushy compromise. A solution requires two acts of national will: putting up a wall (along with E-Verify and visa tracking) and absorbing those who broke our laws to come to America.

This is not a compromise meant to appease both sides without achieving anything. It’s not some piece of hybrid legislation that arbitrarily divides illegals into those with five-year-old “roots” in America and those without ? or some such mischief-making nonsense.

If we do it right, not only will we solve the problem, we will get it done as one nation.

I’m Charles Krauthammer for Prager University.

Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!

President Trump Discusses his Trip Abroad Highlights

President Trump Discusses his Trip Abroad Highlights

The first sitting US president to visit the Western Wall and Church of the Holy Sepulchre

President Trump In Saudi Arabia

Country Location Date Details
Saudi Arabia Riyadh May 20?22 President Trump met with King Salman and Muslim leaders at the Riyadh Summit. He signed a $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia, the largest in world history, and was honored with the Collar of Abdulaziz Al Saud, his first foreign order.

President Trump, along with First Lady Melania Trump, visited the National Museum of Saudi Arabia.

Israel Jerusalem May 22?23 President Trump met with President Reuven Rivlin and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He was the first sitting US president to visit the Western Wall and Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The next day, the President visits the Yad Vashem and later delivers an address at the Israel Museum.

Palestinian National Authority Bethlehem 23-May President Trump met with Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Bethlehem

Italy Rome May 23?24 President Trump met with President Sergio Mattarella and Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni

Vatican City Vatican City 24-May President Trump met with Pope Francis.

Belgium Brussels May 24?25 President Trump met with King Philippe of Belgium, Prime Minister Charles Michel and attended the 28th NATO summit.

He also met with newly-elected French President Emmanuel Macron.

Italy Taormina May 25?27 President Trump attended the 43rd G7 summit. He met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Japanese Prime Minister Shinz? Abe.

0-00English

The President- From Saudi Arabia to Israel to NATO

0-03

to the G7, we made extraordinary gains

0-09

on this historic trip to advance the security

0-12

and prosperity of the United States, our friends,

0-17

and our allies.

0-19

We paved the way for a new era of cooperation among

0-22

the nations of the world to defeat the common enemy

0-26

of terrorism, and provide our children with

0-29

a much more hopeful future.

0-33

I was deeply encouraged to hear from the leaders

0-36

of many Muslim and Arab nations that they are ready

0-39

to take on a greater role in combating

0-41

terrorism and providing young Muslims, in their

0-44

region, with a future of safety and a future

0-48

of opportunity.

0-49

I went to Jerusalem, where I reaffirmed

0-53

our unbreakable bond with the State of Israel.

0-56

I was awed by the majesty and beauty of the Holy Land

0-59

and the faith and reverence of the devoted

1-03

people who live there.

1-05

All children from all faiths deserve a future

1-08

of hope and peace.

1-10

In Rome, I was inspired by the beauty, and even more

1-14

inspired by meeting with Pope Francis.

1-18

Then, I traveled to two summits.

1-20

First, at a NATO summit in Brussels, where we agreed

1-23

to improve the burden sharing among members

1-26

of our alliance, and to further confront

1-29

the shared threat of terrorism.

1-32

Next, I attended the G7.

1-34

I laid out my vision for economic growth and fair

1-37

trade and support of good paying jobs, and I called

1-41

for much greater security and cooperation on matters

1-46

of both terrorism, immigration, migration,

1-49

to protect our citizens.

1-52

We concluded a truly historic week

1-54

for our country.

1-56

We traveled the world to strengthen long-standing

1-58

alliances, and to form a new partnership among

2-01

nations devoted to the task of eradicating

2-05

the terrorism that plagues our planet.

2-09

And I am now more hopeful than ever

2-12

in the possibility that nations of many faiths, many religions,

2-16

and from many regions can join together

2-20

in a common cause.

 

Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!

The Inconvenient Truth About the Democratic Party

The Inconvenient Truth About the Democratic Party

Did you know that the Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, founded the KKK, and fought against every major civil rights act in U.S. history? Watch as Carol Swain, professor of political science at Vanderbilt University, shares the inconvenient history of the Democratic Party.

Democrats and the KKK at HoaxAndChange.com

When you think about racial equality and civil rights, which political party comes to mind? The Republicans? Or, the Democrats?

Most people would probably say the Democrats. But this answer is incorrect.

Since its founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.

The Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, opposed Reconstruction, founded the Ku Klux Klan, imposed segregation, perpetrated lynchings, and fought against the civil rights acts of the 1950s and 1960s.

In contrast, the Republican Party was founded in 1854 as an anti-slavery party. Its mission was to stop the spread of slavery into the new western territories with the aim of abolishing it entirely. This effort, however, was dealt a major blow by the Supreme Court. In the 1857 case Dred Scott v. Sandford, the court ruled that slaves aren’t citizens; they’re property. The seven justices who voted in favor of slavery? All Democrats. The two justices who dissented? Both Republicans.

The slavery question was, of course, ultimately resolved by a bloody civil war. The commander-in-chief during that war was the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln ? the man who freed the slaves.

Six days after the Confederate army surrendered, John Wilkes Booth, a Democrat, assassinated President Lincoln. Lincoln’s vice president, a Democrat named Andrew Johnson, assumed the presidency. But Johnson adamantly opposed Lincoln’s plan to integrate the newly freed slaves into the South’s economic and social order.

Johnson and the Democratic Party were unified in their opposition to the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery; the 14th Amendment, which gave blacks citizenship; and the 15th Amendment, which gave blacks the vote. All three passed only because of universal Republican support.

During the era of Reconstruction, federal troops stationed in the south helped secure rights for the newly freed slaves. Hundreds of black men were elected to southern state legislatures as Republicans, and 22 black Republicans served in the US Congress by 1900. The Democrats did not elect a black man to Congress until 1935.

But after Reconstruction ended, when the federal troops went home, Democrats roared back into power in the South. They quickly reestablished white supremacy across the region with measures like black codes ? laws that restricted the ability of blacks to own property and run businesses. And they imposed poll taxes and literacy tests, used to subvert the black citizen’s right to vote.

And how was all of this enforced? By terror — much of it instigated by the Ku Klux Klan, founded by a Democrat, Nathan Bedford Forrest.

As historian Eric Foner – himself a Democrat – notes:

“In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.”

President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, shared many views with the Klan. He re-segregated many federal agencies, and even screened the first movie ever played at the White House – the racist film “The Birth of a Nation,” originally entitled “The Clansman.”

A few decades later, the only serious congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats.

Eighty percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill. Less than 70 percent of Democrats did. Democratic senators filibustered the bill for 75 days, until Republicans mustered the few extra votes needed to break the logjam.

And when all of their efforts to enslave blacks, keep them enslaved, and then keep them from voting had failed, the Democrats came up with a new strategy: If black people are going to vote, they might as well vote for Democrats. As President Lyndon Johnson was purported to have said about the Civil Rights Act, “I’ll have them n*****s voting Democrat for two hundred years.”

So now, the Democratic Party prospers on the votes of the very people it has spent much of its history oppressing.

Democrats falsely claim that the Republican Party is the villain, when in reality it’s the failed policies of the Democratic Party that have kept blacks down. Massive government welfare has decimated the black family. Opposition to school choice has kept them trapped in failing schools.  Politically correct policing has left black neighborhoods defenseless against violent crime.

So, when you think about racial equality and civil rights, which political party should come to mind?

I’m Carol Swain, professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University, for Prager University.
Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!