Final Thoughts on Nikki Haley…

In the grand scheme of things, the move of U.N. Secretary Nikki Haley to resign is a typical move of a professional politician on the establishment side of the GOPe political continuum.

Ms. Haley comes from the political house of Bush; hence the original Rubio support in 2016 etc. She is a political animal from the establishment wing.

Within the traditional political class the customary approach to a White House run is to gain about five years of wealth in advance of a presidential run. Haley would be following a wealth process for a 2024 presidential run.

During this wealth accumulation period the cocktail party circuit (the billionaire crowd) will front-load wealth, purchase homes and all expenses etc, for the future candidate. This ‘Five Year Plan‘ was the same historic approach done for Ronald Reagan.

With a candidate in the private sector, the professional donor-class make investments in the candidate while it is legal to do so. The investments are made in anticipation of future influence.  This is simply how money influences politics.

With the “Me Too” movement in high political value, the currency of Nikki Haley, as an investment candidate, is at the apex.  Haley checks the right boxes; she is making a predictable move to capitalize on that process, politics and timeliness.

The U.N., as an institution, is also in alignment with the high-brow Prescott Bush clan. Ms. Nikki Haley is regarded by this clan as a very valuable commodity. If they can’t get Jeb, or another Bush (ie. Rubio) over the finish line, they will be much better positioned with investments in Nikki Haley.

It goes without saying the U.N. is not MAGA. In many ways the interests of the U.N. run counter to the more nationalistic MAGA movement. Hence, it was smart for President Trump to put a non-MAGA ambassador into the U.N. while simultaneously, and smartly, using the position to keep the globalists from attacking MAGA policy.

It was a strategic move when it was done and the benefits have been visible.

Moving forward, despite the success of President Trump in taking over the Republican party, the political apparatus still has factions (ie. Never Trump etc.). Those GOPe types will back Nikki Haley in 2024 as they did Jeb in 2016. The outlooks are same/same. This is all entirely predictable.

Due to the increasing success of the MAGA or Trump Republican apparatus, Haley will need to carefully position herself as a stealth Decepticon and not upset the vulgarian hordes; ie. the new republican party base voter. As a smart and tactical politician Haley will invest heavily in the optics of supporting the MAGA movement; and embrace President Trump to avoid any conflict.

Much like the primary of 2016 (w/ Jeb), the primary race of 2024 will determine if Haley can con enough people into not seeing her elitist Decepticon position.

The Bush clan and professional political cocktail circuit was rebuked in 2016, so we can anticipate their strategy in 2024 will be with those strategic lessons at the forefront.

/End.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Decepticons, Deep State, President Trump, Uncategorized, United Nations. Bookmark the permalink.

410 Responses to Final Thoughts on Nikki Haley…

  1. Doreen Scott says:

    I would like to see one of President Trumps sons run in 2024. Keep the Trump train running.

    Liked by 6 people

  2. fakenoozisforfools says:

    If the country reverts to career politicians filling the position after Trump leaves, it is toast. There is rarely a penalty for failure in any government job, so people who spend several years in “public service” (serving themselves) while working their way up to the pinnacle have no experience with getting anything done.

    I keep hoping that someone from outside the Trump family and in the private sector is observing Trump and saying “I can carry on that legacy.”

    Liked by 11 people

    • svenwg says:

      Hopefully Mike Pompeo throws his hat in the ring in 2024 as he has the same swagger as President Trump and is learning at the Maestro’s knee how to continue MAGA or KAG!

      Liked by 2 people

    • Paqul Killinger says:

      You are recounting exactly what took place at the conclusion of the Reagan Rebolution. It only took them 4 years before it was “like it never even happened.”

      Like

      • Paqul Killinger says:

        The sad fact being no one can replace Donald Trump, any more than they could replace Ronald Reagan.

        So my advice is to SAVOR it, and ENJOY IT while it lasts!

        Like

  3. Jan says:

    I knew she was an anti-Trumper before he was elected. I was somewhat impressed with Haley’s performance in the UN. But now that I know she’s a Bush girl & hangs with the Mitt, I’m looking for someone else in 2024. I’m sure she doesn’t understand economics, etc.

    Liked by 7 people

  4. Raycheetah says:

    Now apply the same filter to Lindsey Graham. While I loved his performance in the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, the sudden appearance of his backbone puzzled me. Now I have a hunch as to why, and I expect similar, miraculous transformations from other, formerly unreliable GOPers, as well, positioning for a post-Trump America. ='[.]’=

    Liked by 6 people

    • Finbar O'Shaunnessey says:

      The good news is, they’ll have to behave until the 2024 campaign begins. The other good news is, we get to dump them again in 2024.

      Liked by 2 people

    • 6x47 says:

      I take issue with the simplistic “Congressman X is a swamp creature, he works for K street, he’s no good at all for anything, ever”. It’s more accurate IMHO to say that Congressman X is malleable, but on certain issues there isn’t a K Street angle. So, for example, Congressman X sucks on immigration and trade but he’s a hardcore social conservative, is pro-life, supports the 2nd Amendment, and likes originalist judges.

      So Congressman X supports 1 leg of the MAGA agenda, which is 1 more than the Democrats support. So he’s no great shakes but on those rare occasions where the issues are completely in his conservative wheelhouse he’s a GD rock star. Sen. Lindsey Graham on judicial appointments is a prime example. He probably still sucks on immigration, but on Justice Kavanaugh he was not only good he was superb.

      Like

      • Covadonga says:

        That’s a fine argument for holding one’s nose tactically in a general election against a left Dem.

        IMO, it’s not a valid argument in a Republican primary for any office.

        Like

  5. AKM says:

    An alternative view: Haley was not pro Trump in the primaries, but then very few people ever were. Remember there were 16 candidates. Of those, several are now pretty much Trump supporters, if not fully MAGA (Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, maybe post-epiphany Lindsay Graham, Mike Huckabee, if his daughter is anything to go by).

    So, on the positive side of this argument, Nikki Haley may be positioning herself for 2024 (as Sundance says), but with some big endorsement from Trump, in exchange for as near to a MAGA candidacy as possible. From Trump’s viewpoint, if a GOP woman becomes the 1st lady President, how better to screw Hillary Clinton.

    I admit that, against this argument is the timing of Haley’s resignation. Why just before the midterms? That might be see as a hit at Trump.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Beverly says:

      She’s announcing it now but will stay until the end of the year.

      She is a liberal Republican, and was hostile to Carolina’s history: she’s one of the Purgers. I don’t like or trust her.

      She was good at the UN for the reasons Sundance stated, but she should have stayed there.

      Liked by 5 people

  6. jackbeowulf says:

    Niki can’t be president, not a natural born citizen. Her parents were both aliens and not US citizens when she was born. No way she can get around that.

    Liked by 3 people

    • G. Combs says:

      “…. No way she can get around that……”

      ERRRRrrrr
      Remember Obummer the INDONESIAN????

      Remember Cruz the CANADIAN????

      If they want her the records will be ‘altered’ and anyone who says different will be called a conspiracy nut.

      Liked by 2 people

    • AdamSelene says:

      A natural born citizen is someone who was a citizen from the moment of birth. While I may not like birthright citizenship, that’s the law as it stands. Haley was born in Bamberg, South Carolina, and for the purposes of law, is a natural born US citizen. She is definitely eligible to run for President.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Lindenlee says:

        Nope. There is extensive history on this, although it should be defined by legislation, or a SC ruling. Her parents were not citizens when she was born, just like Rubio. Therefore, they could not pass their US citizenship to her. They were still under the jurisdiction of India. Same with Jindal. To be NBC, you must be BOTH “born on the soil” (juis soli), AND “born of the blood” (juis sangine), with at least one US citizen parent.

        This is a VERY SERIOUS MATTER, and given all the anchor babies born here from illegal parents, we had better get this in law, and soon.

        Liked by 1 person

        • completelytrue says:

          Nobody bought your nonsense the first time.

          Liked by 1 person

        • MeJane says:

          Lindenlee, you are absolutely correct but I don’t agree that there should be a ruling on it, we have to get our political parties and Congress to enforce what historically has been the definition and we already have our history to show us what that is.

          A natural born citizen is a special subset of US citizen. To be an Article II natural born citizen a person must be born on US soil to two US citizen parents, who are citizens at the time of the child’s birth. The parents can be naturalized citizens. So naturalized citizens bestow natural born citizenship upon their children born on US soil.

          The revolutionary first citizens of the US, were NOT natural born citizens even though they were born on US soil and that was because the original 13 colonies belonged to England and the revolution era patriots were originally British subjects. The father of our country George Washington was NOT a natural born citizen, he was a citizen. That is why the founding fathers put the “Grandfather Clause” into Article II, to allow founding citizens who were not natural born the ability to be President. Anyone who was NOT in the US at the time of the signing of the Constitution MUST BE a natural born citizen. History backs up this definition/requirement. All natural born citizen Presidents (non revolutionary era first citizen Presidents) were born to 2 US citizen parents on US soil except: Obama (father a foreign national non US resident) and Chester A Arthur, who’s father was not a US citizen at the time of his birth. Arthur burned his birth records and hid the truth which only came out 15-20 years ago. These two are considered to be usurpers for that reason.

          Article II was instituted into the Constitution by our founders to perpetuate our country with into the future and to ensure that there could be no “foreign influence” in the Presidency.

          It is very interesting that the Establishment Republicans are at it again with pushing a non-natural born citizen candidate into the Presidency. McCain, Rubio, Cruz, all had NO objections or scrutiny from the Republican party concerning their Constitutional ineligibility of not being natural born citizens. We should BEWARE of ANYONE who is not natural born entering the race for the Presidency because the end game eroding the protection of Article II through ignorance to the point of allowing a non-citizen to be a US President in the future.

          If Haley’s parents were not US citizens at the time of her birth, she is not a natural born citizen, she is a US citizen through the 14th amendment, and therefore by Congress. She cannot possible be a natural born citizen because Congress cannot ” BESTOW, DEEM, MAKE or CREATE” a natural born citizen, they only have the ability to bestow citizenship through the naturalization process. That is why that Naturalization Act of 1790 was rescinded by Congress and replaced with the 1795 version replacing making children born across the sea to US citizens, only citizens and not the same as natural born. They had no Constitutional instrument or power to do so.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Lindenlee says:

            Exactly correct, BUT there has been some argument about the ability of ONE citizen parent qualifying a US born child as NBC. I think it needs Constitutional clarification. I am furious at the Republicans KNOWINGLY foisting these frauds on us, and especially Furious with Cruz, “Mr. Constitutional Conservative”, for sealing his records, KNOWING HE WAS INELIGIBLE, and running anyway.

            Like

      • Peter Lettkeman says:

        Only definition of natural born CITIZEN you will find available at the time of the Convention is this.
        § 212. Citizens and natives.
        The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. – Emmerich de Vattel’s The Law of Nations or The Principals of Natural Law (1758)

        It was available to all those at the convention as the book had been in the hands of the Continental Congress since 1775. – Benjamin Franklin to Charles William Frederic Dumas dated 9 December, 1775. ” I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations. Accordingly that copy, which I kept, (after depositing one in our own public library here, and sending the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed,) has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author.”

        http://petesresearchonnaturalborncitizenship.blogspot.com/2015/01/keep-it-simple-stupid.html

        Like

    • justafly says:

      Had “natural-born citizen” been equal to that of “citizen” then either there was no need for the exception clause in Article II eligibility for commander-in-chief or Article I eligibility for Congress should have also included the exception clause. The fact that the president’s eligibility needed to except the original citizens is proof the two types of citizen are different. Consider Congress needed to be elected and seated prior to writing any naturalization laws so the term citizen in Article I were not naturalized citizens.

      Liked by 1 person

    • 6x47 says:

      Nikki Haley was born in South Carolina to parents who were legally in the United States.

      She is therefore a “natural born citizen”.

      During the Obummer birther controversy it was established that the precise definition of “natural born” had never been officially resolved. It was generally understood to mean a person born a citizen of the United States (i.e. not a foreigner naturalized later in life), but there are some nebulous aspects.

      For example, does it mean the very restrictive “native born, to native born parents” (2nd generation)? Obviously, no, since the presidency of Barack Obama clearly established the precedent that one need NOT meet that requirement. Fun fact: Under that very restrictive interpretation, Donald J. Trump isn’t natural born, either: His mother was a naturalized citizen. And, also worth noting none of HIS children would be natural born, either: Ivana Trump was an immigrant; Melania is an immigrant; only daughter Tiffany with Marla Maples has a native born American mother.

      Also: What of someone born to illegal aliens? Probably NOT:

      Like

      • Peter Lettkeman says:

        For example, does it mean the very restrictive “native born, to native born parents” (2nd generation)?–
        That has never been the interpretation of the term.
        The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.

        Obviously, no, since the presidency of Barack Obama clearly established the precedent that one need NOT meet that requirement–
        Breaking a law does not set a precedent.

        Fun fact: Under that very restrictive interpretation, Donald J. Trump isn’t natural born, either: His mother was a naturalized citizen.–
        She was a citizen at the time of his birth. The requirement is a child born in the country of which the parents are citizens.

        And, also worth noting none of HIS children would be natural born, either: Ivana Trump was an immigrant; Melania is an immigrant; only daughter Tiffany with Marla Maples has a native born American mother.–
        This is the only thing you got right. Tiffany is the only Trump child born to two U.S. citizens. All the rest were born to Immigrant mothers who had not obtained citizenship at the time of the child’s birth.

        http://petesresearchonnaturalborncitizenship.blogspot.com/2015/01/keep-it-simple-stupid.html

        Like

      • Covadonga says:

        6×47,

        “native born, to native born parents” is not a “2nd generation” rule, as you state. It is, in fact, an nth generation rule, in that it is recursive.

        To see what I mean, consider what it would take to establish that you, for example, were qualified to serve as president, if this were to be the governing rule:

        i.) You would need to prove that your parents – plural, notice the suffix “s” – were native born.

        ii.) To do this, you would have to prove that your father was native born, which includes proving that his parents – likewise, plural – were native born.

        iii.) To do this, you would have to prove that your paternal grandparents – plural – were native born, which would include proving that your paternal grandfather’s parents were native born, etc.

        In short, all of your ancestors would have to be native born, the recursion not stopping until considering those born before 1788, the year the Constitution was ratified, or until considering those born before 1776, the year of American independence, or else never stopping, a condition known to computer programmers as an infinite loop!

        Like

  7. DeploraTex says:

    Haley sucks. I have no idea why Trump nominated her. She has no class, as she had an affair while Gov. To much Never-Trump in this one. She is no great loss to our cause.

    Like

  8. Kent Clizbe says:

    Sundance,

    Thanks for your fantastic work. Your research and analysis on the Deep State anti-Trump machinations are the best, most realistic, clearest in the country.

    You’ve exposed the utter corruption and self-preservation operations of the Deep State.

    You’ve laid bare the cooperation of fake “conservative” Republicans with their PC-Progressive counter-parts.

    You’ve consistently noticed and remarked on the anti-Trump, anti-Normal stances of the establishment GOP.

    Yet, you seem not to accept the reality of the neo-conservative, Never-Trump, false conservative, war-forever clique that has stolen the Republican party and pretends to be “conservative.”

    The neo-cons, led by the Trotskyite Kristols and crew, took over the Republican Party, and use it to serve their foreign master (hint: it ain’t Russia!).

    Haley is a product, creation, and creature of the neocon power and money operation.

    Her mission, after penetrating the Trump administration, was the same as all neocons: War in the Middle East! Now! War in Syria! War in Iran! War!

    We Normal-MAGA-Americans do NOT want never-ending war in the Middle East. We do NOT want to foment a world war with Russia. War forever for foreign interests is NOT an American value or interest.

    It would be great if you could inform your analysis with that reality.

    A great overview of Haley:

    “…Neocon barking dog Bill Kristol has for years been promoting Haley for president, a sign that something is up as he was previously the one who “discovered” Sarah Palin. Indeed, the similarities between the two women are readily observable. Neither is very cerebral or much given to make any attempt to understand an adversary’s point of view; both are reflexively aggressive and dismissive when dealing with foreigners and domestic critics; both are passionately anti-Russian and pro-Israeli. And Kristol is not alone in his advocacy. Haley regularly receives praise from Senators like South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham and from the Murdoch media as well as in the opinion pages of National Review and The Weekly Standard.”

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-29/former-cia-officer-scarer-bolton-think-haley-president

    Liked by 2 people

    • Sarah Palin sarahpalin.com says:

      Kent Clizbe:

      “… a sign that something is up as he was previously the one who “discovered” Sarah Palin. Indeed, the similarities between the two women are readily observable. Neither is very cerebral or much given to make any attempt to understand an adversary’s point of view; both are reflexively aggressive and dismissive when dealing with foreigners and domestic critics…”

      Really?
      Are you endorsing the comment, or just commenting🤔

      Liked by 1 person

      • Kent Clizbe says:

        Sarah,

        An endorsement by Bill Kristol is NOT a sign of a conservative.

        Bill Kristol is the son of the father of the neocon movement. The Kristols are neocon royalty. They despise Donald Trump and the Deplorables who supported Trump. Bill Kristol is the godfather of the Never-Trump neocons.

        Internecine squabbles among neocons–Palin vs. McCain; Horowitz vs. Kristol–are distractions from MAGA.

        Haley owes her soul to the neocons.

        Hope that helps.

        Like

      • Loved your tweet to Sen. Murky, Sarah.
        Senator Palin has a nice ring to it. 😉

        Like

      • jello333 says:

        Ha! Anyone calling you “not very cerebral” seems to be making the same mistake so many of Trump’s enemies make about him. Due to his sometimes off-the-cuff remarks, his laid back attitude, the “I don’t really care WHAT you think about me” vibe he gives off… well, all that causes some people to not take him seriously, to think he’s either crazy or… well, “not very cerebral”. But those of us who’ve grown to love him over the past few years know the truth, and realize that Don is just lulling his enemies to sleep. They want to underestimate the guy? Fine… they’ll do so at their own peril.

        I’ve always felt the same way about YOU. Even though back in ’07, ’08 I was still blind, still a full-on Dem, and therefore supported scumbag Obama, I NEVER took you for granted. While others were making jokes, I was telling them (who were my “friends” at the time), that they better stop taking you lightly. I remember even telling them that should you and McCain win, that YOU would probably be calling most of the shots behind the scenes. Hope you don’t take that as an insult… it was just my opinion about who was the “brains” behind the operation. 🙂

        Like

        • jello333 says:

          (By the way, Kent, if you read my other comment… in my first sentence I referred to “Trump’s enemies”. Having just now re-read what I wrote, it dawned on me that it kinda looked like I was implying that YOU are an enemy of Trump or Palin. Of course I don’t believe that, and it was not my intention at all… just wanted you to know that.)

          Like

    • TJ says:

      Trump brought out Kristol’s inner socialist. He’s so cute when he’s angry.

      “The history of the Trump family business is bringing out my inner socialist. Some defenses of Kavanaugh are bringing out my inner feminist. The Trump-era degradation of American conservatism is bringing out my inner liberal. IT’S HAPPENING AGAIN.”

      Liked by 1 person

      • Kent Clizbe says:

        Exactly!
        And there are naive actual American conservatives who believe that Kristol and his necon cabal are “conservative?”
        Kristol and his clique show every day that they are anti-Normal-American operatives for a foreign power.
        Nothing to do with “Conservative”.

        Liked by 1 person

      • jesterofthecourt says:

        Kristol is no conservative. He is a leftist infiltrator.

        Like

    • jesterofthecourt says:

      You have helped me see the divide between real Republicans and fake ones.
      You have explained that real Conservatives don’t want America to be used to control the Mid East.
      Now I understand what Kristol stands for.
      And you explain that Kristol and the fake conservatives are pro Israel and anti Russia.
      I always wondered why the emphasis to be so supportive of Israel.
      I always wondered why the left want to stop Trump building any agreements with Putin.
      This has been educational…thank you.

      Like

      • Kent Clizbe says:

        Jester,

        I’m glad.

        This issue is crucial to our country.

        Trump represented the best possible option to take back our country, and to base our foreign policy on what’s BEST FOR AMERICA.

        That was what Trump ran on. He constantly repeated: “No more foreign entanglements. I’ll get us out of Afghanistan. No more Iraqs–that was a stupid war.” etc, etc..

        He publicly rejected Sheldon Adelson’s blood money, and Adelson publicly rejected Trump.

        The Never-Trumpers were led by neocon Trotskyite fake “conservatives.”

        And Trump stomped on their throats, and cut off their oxygen supply–access to Normal-Americans.

        But they are wily and slimy. They shape-shift to adapt to realities. See Max Boot, Kristol and the rest of them suck up to the PC-Progs. Conservative? Ha! Normal Americans were fooled.

        Their goals were met, and far exceeded, by their compadre on the inside, Jared Kushner–a neocon’s neocon.

        How much longer can the perversion of “conservatism” continue?

        Sundance is on to them here. But he stops short of calling a spade a spade.

        Pat Buchanan has been onto them for years. See his “Neocon Archives” linked below for a great primer on what’s happening in full view–but likely unnoticed by most Normal-Americans:

        http://buchanan.org/blog/Topics/neocons/

        Like

        • jesterofthecourt says:

          Wow. Awesome information which Ive been trying to get a grasp on.
          I am more amazed by Trump week by week..while at first I though he was just a bully…I admit.
          Jared Kushner a neocon’s neocon!…I was wary about him. Why does trump have him so close?
          (Do you use “Trotskyite” in the sense it is a more direct and forceful variant of Marxism?
          He was incredibly ruthless but Stalin didn’t exile him for this ruthlessness).
          Thank you for the pointer to Pat Buchanan’s Archives!

          I saw your bio in WordPress..impressive sir!
          God bless you patriot!
          I have asked so many questions…thank you for taking time to answer!

          Like

          • Kent Clizbe says:

            Jester,

            Just did what I could, when I could. Thanks.

            Kushner–why so close to Trump? Kushner married Trump’s daughter! He’s the president’s son-in-law! Kushner was very, very low profile during the campaign. Not until the inauguration did Kushner slither into the policy arena.

            That said, Trump knows what Kushner and his ilk are up to. He’s the ultimate pragmatist. However, the Kushners’ (and Adleon’s) goals (Jared is a team with his ex-con felon father, James) are rapidly being achieved.

            Trotsky: No, sir. Trotsky’s flavor of communism differed from Lenin and Stalin’s in maintaining Marx’s global focus. Trotsky believed that communism would take over the world like a wild fire. Thus, he focused on international operations to spread communism as much as internal Soviet issues. Lenin and Stalin turned inward (“Socialism in One Country”) after the Russian Revolution. So, Trotskyites focus on spreading socialism throughout the world, when and where they can–destroying existing governments/cultures/people that block their goals. This directly contradicted Stalin’s flavor of communism, which hailed Stalin as the Great Leader, focused on perfecting communism in the USSR, with the rest of the world dragging along behind. Stalin took great exception to Trotsky’s approach, and saw him as a direct threat to Stalin’s power. Stalin sent Trotsky into exile, and finally had his KGB murder Trotsky in Mexico. All Stalin’s enemies were painted with the brush of Trotskyism. Many hundreds of thousands were slaughtered or sent to prison camps on those charges.

            At that time, outside the USSR, communists divided into two main camps: Stalinist and Trotskyite. The Stalinists did as they were told by their Soviet handlers–followed the party line. Trotskyites followed Trotsky’s lead, until he died. They continued after his death–believing in an international revolution sweeping capitalism out of power, replaced with communism, irregardless of the USSR.

            Thus, Trotsky was one of the fathers of “Globalism.”

            The fathers of neo-conservativism, Bill Kristol’s father, Irving, and a few others, were all communists at NY University in the 30’s to 40’s. They split from the Stalinists, and followed Trotsky’s line. They were Trotskyites. They were affiliated with many publications, the main one was Jewish Commentary (today a neocon fake “conservative” publication now known simply as Commentary). They wrote, and wrote, and wrote, and wrote. And talked, and talked, and talked, and talked. Just like today. They cared absolutely nothing for American values, traditions, or people–except as these bent to their will.

            They adapted to changing political currents. They were “Pre-mature Anti-Fascists” against Hitler. They were “Jeffersonisan Liberals” during the McCarthy investigations. During the 60s, they were dismayed by the Democrat’s immersion in anti-war sentiment. They then morphed into the Republican party–infiltrating it, and slipping out of their communist skins. This was the birth of “neo-conservatism.”

            https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/irving-kristols-neoconservative-persuasion/

            Hope that helps. These are not secrets, but they are not commonly known.

            Like

  9. Pat says:

    How funny. Unless/until he declares otherwise, it will be Pence in 2024. All this other schlock is just gibberish.

    Like

    • DGC says:

      Given what we GENUINELY know, I would have to concur.

      At this point this article is nothing more than highly speculative and far too premature.

      Like

    • JX says:

      Pence-Haley – in whatever combination – don’t get my vote.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Pokey says:

        I bet you will be forced to think about the alternative if you don’t vote for those two in 2024. I had to choke on my vote for McCain/Palin, but I damned sure did it. “The lessor of two weevils” – from Master and Commander

        Like

  10. Kent Clizbe says:

    All you need to know about Haley:

    Israeli Defense Forces’ official Twitter yesterday:

    “Thank you @nikkihaley for your service in the @UN and unwavering support for Israel and the truth. The soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces salute you!”

    Who does she work for?

    Ask Bill Kristol. Ask David Brooks…

    Like

  11. Kent Clizbe says:

    All you need to know about Haley:

    Israeli Defense Forces’ official Twitter yesterday:

    “Thank you @nikkihaley for your service in the @UN and unwavering support for Israel and the truth. The soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces salute you!”

    Who does she work for?

    Ask Bill Kristol. Ask David Brooks…

    Like

    • Lindenlee says:

      And exactly what is wrong with defending the interests of the ONLY democracy in the ME? Unless you are one of those anti-Zionists that thinks that Jews run the world?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Kent Clizbe says:

        LLee,

        American interests, that’s what.

        MAGA, buddy!

        Not MIGA!

        Liked by 2 people

        • Lindenlee says:

          They are not mutually exclusive. By your standard, we would not aupport ANY other countries that are our friends or allies. Trump is MAGA, not MAGA ONLY. Fine line.

          What do you think about his aid to, and alliance with, Egypt and Jordan, and Saudi?

          Liked by 1 person

          • Kent Clizbe says:

            LLee,

            All American foreign affairs must be calculated to pursue and defend AMERICAN interests.

            In fact, that is exactly the platform that Trump ran on:

            “‘We will stop racing to topple foreign regimes that we know nothing about, that we shouldn’t be involved with”

            If and when AMERICA’s interests are at stake, then we should aggressively protect AMERICAN interests.

            Say, if a foreign power strafes and bombs an American warship for several hours, killing and wounding multiple American servicemen. That is an American interest to which we should respond with overwhelming firepower and massive punishing attacks–preferably to topple the attacking regime.

            American alliances with Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia are now all about protecting and defending Adelson’s country. American dollars, blood, and weapons ensure Adelson’s security.

            AMERICAN interests lie only in Saudi Arabia–a large oil producer, with whom we have massive investments.

            Liked by 1 person

      • jesterofthecourt says:

        The US has probably given US$1 trillion in cash and aid to Israel since ’48.
        This is unfair to the US taxpayer.
        Israel needs to be responsible for Israel since they CHOSE to go there.

        Like

        • Kent Clizbe says:

          Amen, brother!

          And it’s growing…exponentially:

          “U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday signed into law a defense spending bill which codifies a ten-year memorandum of understanding with Israel negotiated during the Obama administration.

          The bill includes $500 million for U.S.-Israel missile defense cooperation and up to $50 million for U.S.-Israel cooperation to detect enemy tunnels into Israel. The measure was approved by the Senate earlier this month before going to Trump for his signature.

          In December of 2016, the U.S. Senate voted in favor of a defense policy bill which includes more than $600 million for missile defense cooperation with Israel.

          This aid is separate from the memorandum of understanding signed between Israel and the U.S. in September of that year, and which grants Israel $3.8 billion annually beginning in 2018 and through 2028.

          After the memorandum of understanding was signed, Republican senators said they would seek to overturn part of it so that Israel can receive even more aid.”

          https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/250495

          Like

        • Lindenlee says:

          You act as if it is a one-way street, that we get nothing from them. One-way, Joo-hating, one-dimensional thinking here, I would say. Next you’ll be saying that they are descended from the Khazars.

          Like

    • jesterofthecourt says:

      Kristol is Jewish…works for Israel I would imagine.

      Like

  12. Pokey says:

    I seriously doubt these are final thoughts on Nikki Haley. Five years is nearly an eternity in politics. She is attempting to navigate the political waters on the 5 year schedule, which will include a book tour in about three years, but her fortunes could go up and down many times before the 2024 election. Without a doubt, the Demcommies will be laying in wait for a big sabotage moment to get things going their way. Trump could do like most Presidents and decide not to care who is President after himself and MAGA could be a cute little slogan in the dust bin of political history. It is way early to speculate on who the elitist favorite is by then. Many trial balloons wills be launched before they decide which one to attach themselves to. I agree only in that she is probably being launched right now. And, right now I couldn’t care less because we have more important things to worry about. Getting the damned wall built will turn out to be Trump’s biggest accomplishment if he decides to actually do it, and his biggest failure if he doesn’t.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. 4sure says:

    Niki Haley is and always has been all about Niki. She is NEVER to be trusted. NEVER.

    ANYTHING she does is strictly to benefit her politically. She is a coniving bleatch. I will never vote for her under any circumstances. Never.

    She used the tea party and Sarah Palin to get elected Gov. in SC, and then threw both under the bus after she got elected. I donated and worked for her, but soon realized how I had been fooled. But, unfortunately, I have been fooled by many of the crooked GOPe POS’s. So, I trust no politician.

    Like

  14. ArmyJacket says:

    Nice article, wonderful perspective and definitely good thoughts to keep in mind. Being a South Carolinian I’ve watched with varying degrees of wonderment and confusion Haley’s rise up the political ladder. I don’t disagree with anything you say – especially the part about her being ambitious and looking to position herself for future advances. However, it’s that ambition that might still make her an acceptable candidate in 2024. She’s nothing if not adaptable and she seems to have learned that having a little bite in her bark is appealing to the conservative base. Six more years of Trump might well condition even more Republicans that there is actually an upside to fighting the good fight and following through on campaign promises. If Linsday Graham can get on board with that idea, there’s hope for the GOP.

    Personally I think she’ll be more appealing as a VP candidate in 2024. She’ll only be 52 years old so plenty of time to still make that historic run for the big job.

    Like

  15. jesterofthecourt says:

    So Nikki Haley is leaving at the end of the year but announced it now, just weeks before the mid terms.
    By making this announcement now is she setting herself up for a Republican loss in the mid terms?
    If she announced it after the mid terms would she look like she is either opposing a Repub win or supporting the Dems if they win majority?
    Im confused as to her motives.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s