Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I have written frequently on both the blog and here on the forum about the central thread of Catholicism that forms a form of constant 5th column in not only the USA, but in Protestantism, since at least the time of Henry VIII's fake separation from the Catholic Church. This is consistent with the history laid out by the late Tupper Saussy in his Ruler's of Evil, regarding the role of the Society of Jesus from its foundations till as of the book's writing. Saussy also did a good job of discussing the prior connecting historical thread dating much before the time of Jesus (aka the amalgamated caesars).

In this regard I have mentioned all the Catholics sitting on the Supreme Court, of which there will now likely be 6, with Sonia Sotomayor being the only liberal one of them. The remaining three liberals are Jewish, leaving not a single Protestant save Gorsuch being a nominal one.

Kennedy's retirement has a curious nexus to his son having had a significant financial relationship to Trump via Deutsche Bank and its massive laundering of Russian money.

As with most being psychologically blind to Trump's witting realpolitik agency with Russia, most are equally blind to the extent that this once Protestant nation (for good or bad is beside the point) is now completely under the control of the Vatican, with its ultra-conservative elite branches taking ever more power from the traditionally liberal-leaning American Catholic polity.

American Catholicism is rather 'deviant' from the otherwise Catholic norm, for a reason. As Saussy explained the Disestablishment of the Jesuits only years before the American Revolution as a clever and effective means to shoehorn the Jesuits into position, the encouragement of the liberal lean has served to fulfill a continuity for the same motive. But now is the time to reverse that trend.

Our Liddle Bavarian, educated at Jesuit Fordham, with his Georgetown and Goldman Sachs White House cabal, is now serving up yet another conservative Catholic Supreme Court nominee. The man at the center of it is Leonard Leo, a Knight of Malta. He employs an Opus Dei couple to run one of his front groups, and gets funding from such as the ultra-conservative Catholic Koch brothers, who sponsor such as the Libertarians and the Tea Party front groups.

Ordo ab Trumpichao. (Per the Samsonian Nazarite script in the Book of Judges. See here for my typological parallels.)

Did anyone say 'Judges'?

The following excerpt is from a long article by Jay Michaelson documenting the background of Leonard Leo.

A Catholic fundamentalist who controls a network of right-wing groups funded by dark money has put three justices on the court. He’s about to get a fourth.

When President Donald Trump nominates a justice to the Supreme Court on Monday night, he will be carrying out the agenda of a small, secretive network of extremely conservative Catholic activists already responsible for placing three justices (Alito, Roberts, and Gorsuch) on the high court.

And yet few people know who they are—until now.

At the center of the network is Leonard Leo of the Federalist Society, the association of legal professionals that has been the pipeline for nearly all of Trump’s judicial nominees. (Leo is on leave from the Federalist Society to personally assist Trump in picking a replacement for Justice Anthony Kennedy.) His formal title is executive vice president, but that role belies Leo’s influence.

Directly or through surrogates, he has placed dozens of life-tenure judges on the federal bench; effectively controls the Judicial Crisis Network, which led the opposition to President Obama’s high court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland; he heavily influences the Becket Fund law firm that represented Hobby Lobby in its successful challenge of contraception; and now supervises admissions and hires at the George Mason Law School, newly renamed in memory of Justice Antonin Scalia. ...

Paleo-conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, tends to downplay Michaelson's facts, performing the typical denial of most Americans:

Even before President Trump announced his nomination Monday of federal appeals court judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to fill departing Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s slot on the Supreme Court, the foul scent of anti-Catholicism began seeping into public commentary.

In particular, an article Monday morning that quickly earned ire in the choir came from Daily Beast writer (and Yale Law-educated) Jay Michaelson. While declaring that he didn’t want to engage in anti-papist conspiracies, Michaelson nevertheless proceeded to suggest that an effort is being fueled by dark money to name federal judges who “reflect rigid, conservative dogmas.” His subject was Leonard Leo, executive vice president (albeit currently on leave) of the Federalist Society, which has worked closely with the president to create a list of possible nominees. The well-respected Leo is painted by Michaelson as a sinister, outside secret force pushing Catholics to fill the bench.

Leo is certainly influential, but so are lots of people, and Michaelson’s article was a tad dark-and-stormy-ish. It detailed Leo’s various Catholic associations and practices, including his habit of attending daily Mass — which many Catholics do, including liberals. ...

As I stated, Parker makes the usual dismissals, based upon typical widespread ignorance of the contiguous agenda of the Roman Church, that agenda also consistent with the 'revealed' apocalyptic script (ure) in the Bible. Hence, there is no reason to base any conclusion based upon the fact that a majority of American Catholics are within the 'liberal' mainstream polity of America.

Jerry Russell

Staff member
I listened to Webster Tarpley's podcast today, and he drew a distinction between the reactionary wing of the Catholic Church as exemplified by Leonard Leo, versus a more liberal faction headed by Pope Francis. Tarpley himself seems to be one of these liberal Catholics, and unable to recognize or acknowledge the schizophrenic nature of Scripture itself.

Tarpley is calling for some sort of massive public uprising to fight the Kavanaugh nomination. Likewise, I am getting all sorts of email from Democratic Party front organizations, declaring a "fight for our lives" and, of course, begging for money. But as WSWS points out, in reality the Democrats are refusing to use the procedural tools at their disposal.

There were efforts Tuesday by the Democratic Party’s media allies to present the Democrats as engaged in a terrific fight against the Trump Supreme Court pick. The Washington Post ran the banner headline, “Democrats launch all-out blitz against pick for high court,” highlighting this quote from Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer: “I will oppose him with everything I’ve got.”

A reading of the article compels the conclusion that “everything I’ve got” is very little, except his marching orders from Wall Street, which fully backs the nomination....

The New York Times headlined its report, “Senate Democrats Come Out Swinging in Long-Shot Fight to Block Kavanaugh,” thus managing to combine praise for the supposed pugnacity of the Democrats with an apology in advance for the likely failure of their valiant struggle “against the odds.” One would not know from this presentation that the Democratic Party won more votes than the Republicans in the 2016 presidential election and in the congressional elections that year to both House and Senate, and that the policies advocated by Trump, Kavanaugh and the Republicans are massively unpopular.

The incessant claims by the Democrats and their media lackeys that there is little or nothing they can do to stop the confirmation of Kavanaugh are a pack of lies. With the narrowest of Republican margins in the Senate, 50-49, in the absence of Senator John McCain due to brain cancer, there is no end of procedural delays that would push back any vote until well after the November 6 congressional elections.

If the situation were exactly reversed, and it was a Democratic president facing a 49-seat Republican minority in the Senate, the media would be filled with commentaries warning of the tenuous character of the nomination, the likelihood of its defeat or protracted delay, and the dangers of attempting to “ram through” a nomination to the highest judicial office on the basis of such a narrow majority.

In the closest recent parallel, in 2016, Democratic President Barack Obama conciliated with the Senate Republicans, who held only a narrow majority, naming Merrick Garland, the most conservative possible nominee for a Democrat. The Republican response to this olive branch was all-out war. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell dispensed with tradition, rules and “civility,” refused to allow even a hearing on Garland, let alone a vote, and the Republican Party used the Supreme Court vacancy as a tool for mobilizing religious fundamentalists in the 2016 presidential election.

The Democratic Party is incapable of such an effort because it has no real interest in doing so....

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I suspect that the 'liberalness' of such as Pope Francis is to distract from the real agenda of the Church, its long term agenda. Nancy Pelosi's 'liberalness' seems to serve more as a lightning rod for mobilizing redtards and orangetards. Same for Governor 'Moonbeam' Brown of California, with his Jesuit seminary background.

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
In what appears to be an under-toned victory lap, William S. Smith of Catholic University of America reveals what good Pharisees that Christians, and especially pious Catholics, can be. Starting with the likely confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, Smith goes on to unleash a string of half-truths making the Democrats solely responsible for America's last 16 years of useless wars, and thus responsible for the elevation of the new fake Prince of Peace, the real Prince of Piece of Ass. Certainly the D's merit responsibility, but apparently such as Dubya and Cheney bear little, especially with their false claims of WMD in Iraq.

Smith's piece is a paean to the Dictator-to-be, and as such ignores that Trump is quietly escalating US military involvements, including firing 70 cruise missiles at a dead chinchilla in Syria. Maybe Smith considers that Trumpism is Peace through Pomp and Ceremony, given Trump's fetish for Russian and North Korean style, self-aggrandizing military parades?

This is the cancer of traditionalist Catholic culture upon a democratic society. They will use any fascist hook (Putin) and crook (Trump) to return us to their (real) literal and metaphorical (fake) spiritual King.

With the nomination and likely confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, the party of Donald Trump is on the precipice of dominating all three branches of the federal government. After sweeping to victory in the 2006 midterms and then electing a popular two-term president in 2008, the collapse of Democratic influence in Washington represents an astonishing turnabout of political fortune.

A study suggests that a pivotal moment in the Democratic collapse happened in a Republican presidential debate in 2015, when Donald Trump established his reputation as an opponent of interventionism in the Middle East. During the debate, Jeb Bush chided Trump for his lack of foreign policy experience, and Trump unleashed a roundhouse punch that not only flattened Bush but ultimately Hillary Clinton.

While our infrastructure crumbles, Trump asserted that the United States spends trillions running around the Middle East “toppling” dictators. Trump doubled down and said, “We have done a tremendous disservice, not only to the Middle East. We have done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away, and for what? It’s not like we had victory.” ...