Browse By

Another Day, Another NeoNazi For Trump

Today, we discover yet another Nazi supporter of Donald Trump. This one calls himself the “Awakened Saxon”, in homage to the “The Wrath of the Awakened Saxon”, a poem by Rudyard Kipling, beloved by white supremacists on either side of the Atlantic.

Awakened Saxon is a member of the Lion Guard, that group of Donald Trump fans who have pledged to use force against protesters in “defense” of Donald Trump.

Lion Guard neoNazi

Subtlety is not a characteristic of white nationalists, and so we see, plastered across Awakened Saxon’s twitter profile, the phrase “Heil Hitler” written in runes, the favored alphabet of Nazi sympathizers.

In a related account, Whites For Trump reacted to the news of the nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court by noting that he is “a Jew”, and observing that “Jews are constantly afraid of White authority and White success,” and “You’re all just faggots who are afraid of real American nationalism.”

antisemitism in trump for president campaign

These are the voices that are enabling Donald Trump to take over the Republican Party.

28 thoughts on “Another Day, Another NeoNazi For Trump”

  1. ella says:

    But that isn’t the reason why Republicans should not entertain the notion of sitting another SCOTUS judge now. As Biden said, and has been precedent throughout the past, it is time to wait for the elections to end and the new President to make recommendations.

  2. Korky Day says:

    Peregrin Wood wrote, ‘These are the voices that are enabling Donald Trump to take over the Republican Party.’
    You mean White supremists are dominant and well-respected in the Republican Party?
    No, Trump would do better without them. If he is as smart as I think he is, he’ll figure a way out of the corner.
    He’s no racist, as I have been saying without intelligent refutation in Irregular Times for months..

    ‘ella’ seems to say we should wait for the new president to nominate a new justice of the Supreme Court.
    Why? Because there isn’t enough time to go through the constitutional process now?
    No, there’s plenty of time now. Rather, it’s obviously and purely and crassly a partisan tactic.
    If there were a Republican president now, that party would all welcome a quick appointment.
    Trump is wrong on this point, too.

    1. ella says:

      That is exactly the point, Democrat Presidents in the past have made a rule of sorts, that when an election is in progress, no appointments to the Supreme Court are to be made by the exiting President. Speaking of the exiting President, Obama has in fact now requested a significant raise for his remaining time in office. While he is at it, he has also requested the tax payers increase his retirement paycheck and expenses for the rest of his life. “…an increase of $588,000 (17.9 percent) from the FY2016 appropriation level.”
      While the press is busy slandering the candidate that wants to save American finances, the sitting President is finding ways to stuff his, and former Presidents, pockets with taxpayer money. Here is a chance to look behind the smokescreen.

      1. Korky Day says:

        Which Democratic presidents have done that, ella? (Not ‘Democrat Presidents’, as you erroneously wrote.)
        And how close to the elections were those cases? We’re 8 months away. Plenty of time.

        1. ella says:

          The Court can function nicely with only 8 jurors. A majority can be reached and if there is a tie, it goes back to a lower court. There are many cases which take longer than 8 or 10 months to settle. Any life or death decisions that DO end in a tie, can be settled at a later date. What is the rush? Especially with an election in process.

          1. Jim Cook says:

            The Senate has a job to do. The Senate should do its job. Everything else is obfuscation.

          2. Dave says:

            Democrats in 1960 passed a resolution in the Senate hoping to defer any more appointments by Republican Eisenhower to the court. Wikipedia has an interesting article called “George W. Bush judicial appointment controversies.” What the Dems have been doing to block conservative nominations is appalling. Now the Dems are appalled. What else is new?

          3. Jim Cook says:

            Did Democrats ever in the Eisenhower Administration actually not consider an Eisenhower Supreme Court nominee? Answer: NO.
            Did Democrats ever in the George W. Bush Administration actually not consider a Bush Supreme Court nominee? Answer: NO.

            What the Senate Republicans are currently actually doing is a historical first.

          4. ella says:

            “The Senate should do its job. Everything else is obfuscation.”

            Three cheers for obfuscation! The Senate has a job to do concerning the propriety and priority of its’ actions. The American public is also involved in the process of selecting each Supreme Court Justice. The Senate and the Public need to wait until the focus in on such an important decision. Not for it to be done under the shield of and in the shadow of, an ongoing election. There has been too much hidden action in the past seven years. Can they stand being seen in the light of day?

          5. Jim Cook says:

            “Three cheers for obfuscation! … there has been too much hidden action in the past seven years. Can they stand being seen in the light of day?”

            “Obfuscation” refers to the clouding up of a description or perception of a phenomenon so that it can’t be seen clearly in the light of day.

          6. Korky Day says:

            Sure, the court CAN work with 8, but why should it, ella? Just in the hope that the Republicans can get one of theirs on? Not a good enough excuse for stalling.

          7. ella says:

            That is a matter of opinion.

      2. ella says:

        Looks like the link to the article was not added. So here it is:

  3. Korky Day says:

    The USA Constitution does NOT condone stalling the appointment until your party gains the presidency!

    1. ella says:

      Neither does the USA Constitution deny stalling the appointment until the ongoing election process is complete. The party, whichever wins, will be inaugurated roughly 10 months from now and the elections will be held 8 months from now. But Korky Day, it is understandable that some want a liberal Judge and some a Conservative. It seems more like a mistake all the way around. Judges are supposed to read the Constitution, not legislate law. As such, it is appropriate to say it should not be a political appointment. But as it is turning out to be in this instance, it is, as our Vice President pointed out, a Congressional appointment that needs Senate hearings and approval before the appointment can be official. To that end, the Congress and the people whom they represent should have the opportunity to proceed with the Presidential election after which they can then, turn their attention to the persons who are brought for questioning before the Senate. I add The People because it is they who write their Senators and voice their opinions. Just as though they are important.

      1. Jim Cook says:

        Ella, the American people did get to voice their opinion about who should get to nominate a justice. See “Election 2008.”

        1. ella says:

          Notice that it IS election 2016. The half that was considered in 2008 are being challenged by the other half in 2016. Do not think that one election allocated 100% of the power to the results of the 2008 election. You know, this is still a free country, that it why there are different Party’s, not just Democrat/Socialist/Progressive/Communist, even though it all goes by one name – Democratic. ^^)

          1. J Clifford says:

            Wait, are you really saying that when Barack Obama was elected in 2008, and re-elected in 2012, the Republicans were awarded a certain percentage of the Presidency? How many percent? 3%? 28%

            I’m looking for this in the Constitution, but I can’t find it, Ella.

          2. Korky Day says:

            J Clifford is right, and ella is wrong about the Congress stalling.
            If Congress wants to reject a nominee, fine, but stalling was something the gentlemen who wrote the Constitution would have scorned.

            ‘ella’ is right, though, about judges being non-partisan.
            I’m looking forward to her advice about how we can accomplish that.
            For the last 2 centuries, the appointments have been political.
            This is nothing new. Great minds haven’t found a solution yet.

            Certainly stalling the nomination will do nothing for objective judging, if such a thing is possible or feasible.

            The president may nominate a judge one minute before relinquishing office.
            Let the Senate deal with it as they may.

          3. ella says:

            The 2016 election is in progress. And no, the Democrats won’t get 3% of the Presidency.

  4. Korky Day says:

    Bill Maher, who I like, compares Trump to Hitler on television.
    Very funny, but of course not completely fair. You could compare ANY politician to Trump and make it funny.
    Donald Trump has a very good sense of humour. I think he’d laugh at this.

    1. ella says:

      It is a good thing someone can enjoy anything about Hitler and WWII. Perhaps Trump could manage to find humor in that, who knows. That anyone made that comparison in the first place is repulsive. Even those who claim to still hold to some rags of that unfortunate mans ideology, do not really know what they aspire to, or why it was possible in the first place. Trump bears no resemblance in education, social standing, work ethic, or religious base. Because a person read “The Iron Heel”, by Carl Marx, does that make that person a Nazi, a Communist? And it was well worth keeping on hand as it laid out the plans he conceived. It is good to remember how it is that, slowly and insidiously, psychology can work its’ way through society. A marker to show where we are today. The MSM control the of the masses, or at least enough to cause violent reactions. It is good to remain positive, realize that clear thinking comes with clearly seeing what is going on.

    2. Korky Day says:

      I meant to say that you could compare any politician to Hitler, but this system won’t let me correct myself.

  5. Korky Day says:

    Here in Canada, ella, Parliament is recessed for the 5 or 6 weeks of an election.
    In the USA, though, the presidential election started, in a sense, last summer. So should everything be put on hold for the last 1 1/2 years of each president’s term to focus on the ‘election’? Even if you shorten that to start with the Iowa caucuses, that’s still almost 1/4 of each presidential term. So each president should just twiddle their thumbs for the last 25% of each of their terms of office? See how silly that sounds, ella?

    1. ella says:

      ““Obfuscation” refers to the clouding up of a description or perception of a phenomenon so that it can’t be seen clearly in the light of day.”

      “Smoke and Mirrors”, and there has been a plenty of that for the past 7 years (most administrations for that matter). The rush at this time is also marred with smoke. The delay until the election is over and the people have spoken in 2016, is reasonable and in the open. Justified by the reasons already given.

  6. Stephen Kent Gray says:

    I was looking up who endorses Donald Trump and found Tila Tequila has endorsed Donald Trump. The above link says her infamous history of making pro Hitler comments.

  7. Stephen Kent Gray says:

    Proud of the Blues, a #BlueLivesMatter organization has endorsed Donald Trump.

  8. Stephen Kent Gray says:

    Even more Neo-Nazi endorsements of Donald Trump with The Daily Stormer endorsing him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!