When the Trump Sounds
Last month in New York, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, for 90 minutes.
Separately, of course.
Among the items of discussion with Clinton were the Memorandum of Understanding, regarding closer cooperation between the U.S. and Israel, along with military aid. The pair also discussed ways in which Israel is being delegitimatized, primarily through the BDS movement.
Naturally, Clinton pledged support in all areas.
Besides security coordination between the two countries, Trump and Netanyahu also apparently had a lengthy talk about Israel’s success with its security fence. Trump is keen to learn as much as possible, should he emerge as president and work to fulfill his campaign pledge of a wall along America’s southern border.
This campaign is pretty easy to figure out with regard to American support for Israel: I believe Trump’s promise of close support is genuine and heartfelt, while Clinton’s is disingenuous.
From her friendliness with the Arafats, to her radical education and early affinity for the Palestinians, Clinton would likely be as bad as Obama. And remember, if she discussed BDS with Netanyahu, the Israeli premier surely knows of her far-left policies, which include begging for votes from the BDS crowd, which also is closely aligned with such radical groups as Black Lives Matter. In essence, all those worldviews are a continuation of the New Left worldview, which swept to prominence in the ‘60s, when the young Hillary Rodham was being educated both in a liberal church and on liberal campuses.
She is no friend of Israel.
This makes the recent statement from Bret Stephens of the Wall St. Journal that he would vote for her, all the more perplexing. It isn’t hard to understand that Stephens would share most of Clinton’s social issue views, but he also surely understands that she is a snake when it comes to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
But this election cycle has exposed the disdain the Establishment in New York and Washington has for “average” Americans, and vice versa. Stephens & Friends would rather opt for the status quo because with their wealth and relative isolation from the problems most Americans deal with leave them indifferent to the populist talk of Trump.
Look, I’m well aware of the infighting among evangelicals over Trump, which I think is partly by design (from the Left, which is far more radical, corrupt, and diabolical than most realize). I get the arguments against voting for Trump.
But I am voting for him, and enthusiastically.
Some conservative leaders have trashed him from Day 1, and continue to do so, but it’s impossible for me to discern how it would be better for Clinton to become president.
Among my predictions should that catastrophe happen: she will seek to radically undermine the First Amendment before she ever takes on the Second.
She will also be covertly hostile to Israel; her worldview simply does not recognize the specialness of the Bible and the Jewish people, and their claim to the Land.
Trump is no Sunday school teacher, but I believe he will do the things he says he will do. It seems to me that the man has had an epiphany here later in life, and really believes he has arrived on the political scene at precisely the right historical moment.
He will also be a friend to Israel, in myriad ways.
Those who have run our country (into the ground) for generations loathe Trump. I don’t predict Happy Days are Here Again if he wins. But I do guarantee catastrophe if the Clinton Crime Syndicate regains control of the White House. The John Podestas of the world are anti-American and anti-Christian. They will also bare their fangs to Israel.
We cannot allow that to happen.