Jewish columnist proud to be human scum

The Intercept posts a rant against Trump:

Take Trump’s tweet on September 28:

Can you imagine if these Do Nothing Democrat Savages, people like Nadler, Schiff, AOC Plus 3, and many more, had a Republican Party who would have done to Obama what the Do Nothings are doing to me. Oh well, maybe next time!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 28, 2019

To be clear: More than 200 House Democrats have signed onto an impeachment inquiry and yet the president chose to target only three of them by name, two of whom are Jewish: Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler, chairs of the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees. The third target was — surprise! — a woman of color, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Shamefully, he attacked all of them as “savages.”

How is such rhetoric not racist?

On October 2, Trump escalated his brazenly anti-Semitic attack on Schiff. “We don’t call him ‘Shifty Schiff’ for nothing,” the president told reporters in the Oval Office. “He’s a shifty, dishonest guy.” ...

(Can you imagine the reaction if Omar had called, say, Trump’s Jewish Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin “shifty” or a “savage”?) ... There’s nothing funny or cute about the president’s mocking of “shifty” Schiff or his mainstreaming of crazy conspiracy theories.

Those two Jewish congressmen are the two House impeachment leaders. Schumer in the leader in the Senate.

AOC is known mostly for things besides "color". She is a light-skinned Puerto Rican American.

It is really bizarre that the Trump-haters can't find anything Trump did wrong, and instead complain that he criticizes those who are trying to destroy him.

Schiff has been holding secret hearings in order to try to frame Trump on impeachment charges. He lied about his handling of Eric Ciaramella, the supposed CIA whistleblower. This is not something that any Christian congressman has ever done. "Shifty" is a mild word for it.

Jewish (and Israeli) NY Times columnist Bret Stephens says he is proud to be called "human scum" for being a Republican never-Trumper, but I don't think that term was aimed at Jews. Mormons or feminists, maybe. He says Trump will be morally defeated if four Republican Trump-hater senators join an entirely partisan impeachment effort.

They are human scum if they vote, as Stephens suggests, against Trump out of pure hatred for Trump. Stephens doesn't even mention the possibility of evidence of Trump committing a crime. His main gripe against Trump is "the coarseness of speech and crudeness of character".

Again, are there any non-Jews with such ridiculous reasoning? This is a Jewish coup in progress.

If the NY Times and CNN were run by Mormons, and Mormons were chairing the committees to impeach Trump, and if a Mormon ideology were the basis for impeachment, then I would be complaining about a Mormon coup. But the Mormon Trump-haters are just spectators, and Jews are running the impeachment show.

The above Intercept article starts with this joke:

“Prime Directive: Always Blame the Jews for Everything.”

That was one of the especially disturbing headlines in a 17-page “style guide” written by Andrew Anglin, editor of the neo-Nazi website the Daily Stormer.

“As Hitler says, people will become confused and disheartened if they feel there are multiple enemies,” Anglin argued, according to a copy of the document obtained by HuffPost in December 2017. “As such, all enemies should be combined into one enemy, which is the Jews.”

Anglin is a troll, and he says stuff like that to be funny. It is not meant to be taken literally. Obviously there are also non-Jews trying to impeach Trump, and not every stupid impeachment argument originated with Jews. Trump's ex-lawyer Cohen is obviously Jewish, and so are the lawyers who wrote the Mueller report. Alan Dershowitz is very Jewish, and he says the impeachment is bogus.

Update: To give an insight to what is euphemistically called "the New York media clique", see this NY Times article about ostracizing anyone not conforming to the Ctrl-Left:

In May 2016, Mandy Stadtmiller wrote a first-person essay about her husband being a supporter of Donald Trump. She was inundated with messages urging her to divorce him. She lost a couple of “close” friends. She grew increasingly disillusioned from the New York media clique she was once eager to join.

“It was crazy-making to have a lot of people telling me, ‘You’re wrong, you’re wrong, you’re wrong,’” Ms. Stadtmiller said.

She also experienced a “chill in work,” she said.

She wasn't even supporting Trump, but merely choosing to remain married to a Trump supporter. The NY Times makes Anglin seem broad-minded.

Update: Here is another Jewish conservative never-Trumper. He says that Trump is innocent of any crime, but should apologize anyway. Is that some kind of a weirdo Jewish thing, to force gentiles to apologize? That Jews want to subjugate him to the Deep State? Strange.

Update: Here is a Trump-hater immigrant presenting Jewish opinion as it it were evidence against Trump:

First, as discussed below, Vindman’s testimony about the July 25 call between the two presidents does not add any new facts. So, what does he say? He offers his opinions about the wisdom of the call. That’s it. His testimony about the substance of that call consists of five sentences at the end of his prepared testimony. Those five sentences basically comprise two opinions.

Here is what he said: “I was concerned by the call. [1] I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine. [2] I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation ...

Vindman is in on the Jewish coup. We should be using loyal Americans in these jobs.