General

Tucker’s interview with Sergey Lavrov

/6 Comments/in /by

Tucker’s interview with Lavrov is important given the Biden administration’s very dangerous recent escalations. The full interview is here  and on X, linked below. There is no transcript so I thought this summary from ZeroHedge would be worthwhile. Notice in the section on Syria that Lavrov notes that some have suggested Israel’s involvement, motivated by distracting from what they are doing in Gaza. I think it’s far more than that. Israel has been bombing Syria for years in opposition to Assad’s regime. Lavrov also notes that Israel has killed far more Palestinian civilians in one year (~45,000) than have been killed in the entire 10 years of the conflict since the coup of 2014.

Tucker Carlson first unveiled Wednesday that he had traveled to Moscow to interview Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and the full interview has subsequently been published Thursday night.

Among the most important messages conveyed was directed by Lavrov toward Washington and its allies, which “must understand that we would be ready to use any means not to allow them to succeed in what they call strategic defeat of Russia.” [In other words, the Ukraine war is existential for Russia in the sense that they feel they cannot lose it without also losing their sovereignty and place in the world. Any and all means will be used to this end.]

And referencing Russia’s recent use of its Oreshnik hypersonic missile, Lavrov expressed hope that Kiev’s backers took “seriously” the new weapon, for which Russia says there is no defense, as Moscow remains ready to use “any means” to defend itself. “We are sending signals and we hope that the last one, a couple of weeks ago, the signal with the new weapons system called Oreshnik… was taken seriously,” Lavrov emphasized. Full interview:

The very opening question posed by Tucker got straight to the main point which is surely on the minds of many viewers:

Tucker Carlson: Minister Lavrov, thank you for doing this. Do you believe the United States and Russia are at war with each other right now?

Sergey Lavrov: I wouldn’t say so. And in any case, this is not what we want. We would like to have normal relations with all our neighbors, of course, but generally with all countries especially with the great country like the United States. And President Vladimir Putin repeatedly expressed his respect for the American people, for the American history, for the American achievements in the world, and we don’t see any reason why Russia and the United States cannot cooperate for the sake of the universe.

Tucker Carlson: But the United States is funding a conflict that you’re involved in, of course, and now is allowing attacks on Russia itself. So that doesn’t constitute war?

Sergey Lavrov: Well, we officially are not at war. But what is going on in Ukraine is that some people call it hybrid war. I would call it hybrid war as well, but it is obvious that the Ukrainians would not be able to do what they’re doing with long-range modern weapons without direct participation of the American servicemen. And this is dangerous, no doubt about this.

We don’t want to aggravate the situation, but since ATACMS and other long-range weapons are being used against mainland Russia as it were, we are sending signals. We hope that the last one, a couple of weeks ago, the signal with the new weapon system called Oreshnik was taken seriously.

In the context of these statements he invoked the undesired and catastrophic possibility of the standoff between Russia and NATO entering nuclear territory:

“The message which we wanted to sell in testing, in real action, this hyper sonic system is that we will be ready to do anything to defend our legitimate interest. We hate even to think about war with the United States which will take nuclear character… [but] since some people in Washington … seem to be not very capable to understand [Russia’s interests], we will send additional messages if they don’t draw necessary conclusions.”

And other interesting moment came when the top Russian diplomat outlined his country’s motives in Ukraine vs. Washington’s…

“They fight to maintain global hegemony over every region, while we fight for our legitimate security interests. Senator Lindsey Graham even said Ukraine’s rare earth metals must not be left to Russia—openly admitting their goal is resource exploitation. They support a regime willing to give away natural and human resources. We fight for the people whose ancestors built and developed these lands for centuries.”

“In any case, this is not what we wanted,” he elsewhere said on the question of war. “We would like to have normal relations with all our neighbors—but generally, with all countries, especially a great country like the United States.”

…”We don’t see any reason why Russia and the United States cannot cooperate together for the sake of the universe,” Lavrov emphasized in a key moment.

* * *

Some highlights…

“An Invitation to Disaster”: Sergey Lavrov commented on talk of a limited exchange of nuclear strikes between the US and Russia in the interview…

Escalation fears… the central question

Russia’s real key condition for lasting peace in Ukraine

Biden administration is seeking to leave as big a mess at it can for incoming Trump administration

The permanence of the Russia-China alliance in the face of Washington aggression

Cooperation for the sake of the peace of the universe

Continue by watching the full interview here.

Doc Drops COVID Truth Bombs: “Everything Was A Lie From The Beginning…”

/9 Comments/in /by

Via The Burning Platform,

Dr. Richard Urso shares some truth bombs about COVID-19, vaccines, lockdowns, masks…

“Everything was a lie from the beginning. The asymptomatic people don’t transmit. Kids were not harbingers of the disease. They don’t actually, they’re like a break on the disease. Lockdowns were a farce. Masks don’t work.”

“I tell people, I joke sometimes I say masks do work. A lot like bathing suits work to keep pee out of the pool. They’re not very effective. So that’s one of those things that, you know, it was a farce. Pretty much everything they said was a farce. I know we’re still recovering from it. Just yesterday we walked into a pharmacy and they were advertising COVID-19 vaccines.”

“Well if you want to destroy your immune system, take a COVID-19 vaccine. It will destroy your immune system. It distributes widely in your body. It can’t be broken down because it’s a genetically modified RNA. There are contaminants, process-related impurities, what I usually call them, but contaminants for most people, that they haven’t gotten out of the vaccines.”

“The drug that I invented took eight years for us to get the process-related impurities out. It’s hard to do and I knew this would be a problem early on when they were trying to push this so fast because nobody had ever made these vaccines in anything bigger than a blender. What we had is found is even worse.”

“They put an SV40 promoter in the vaccine, Pfizer did, that [is] actually well known for the last five decades to bind P53 to Guardian the genome and cause cancers. They know that. We just kept them in the head of the Human Genome Project [which?] did this discovery with a few other molecular biologists.”

“This is really big news because the contaminants and the impurities in the vaccine are very dangerous and there’s design flaws like I just pointed out. Wide distribution to the brain, the bone marrow, the ovaries, the testes and long term production six months or more in the last study that we did. So there’s a lot to talk about. Do not get the vaccines unless you just want a crummy immune system. ”

“I think the main thing is these vaccines are dangerous. They have process-related impurities. They cause cancer, strokes, heart attacks. The data is in 40% more deaths in 2021 between 18 to 64. This is just data we can’t ignore, so please stay away from the vaccines.”

Elder Rape Is a Strength!

/5 Comments/in /by

Yet another example of how importing the Third World wrecks everything

As part of the Biden administration’s push to make everything worse and more expensive, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) — not to be confused with Congress, which writes the laws because we live in a democracy ha ha ha — issued a prospective rule requiring nursing homes to hire more staff.

Because who better to determine the staffing needs of the country’s 15,000 nursing homes than Chiquita Brooks-LaSure, Biden’s CMS administrator? Also supporting the new rule are “patient advocates,” i.e. the Service Employees International Union, looking to increase its membership rolls.

Chiquita Brooks-LaSure

Fortunately, The New York Times reports, President-elect Donald Trump is expected to repeal the Biden staffing mandates.

Also fortunately, I have a much better idea! Like Brooks-LaSure, my expertise does not come from running nursing homes. It comes from reading the news.

Such as …

In 2018, hardworking Kenyan immigrant Billy Chemirmir enriched elderly nursing home patients in Texas by allegedly murdering at least 22 of them and stealing their jewelry. (Who will care for the elderly without mass third world immigration?) He was convicted in the first two trials and then killed in prison.

The year prior, Ethiopian immigrant Adeladilew A. Mekonen got 25 years after pleading guilty to sexually assaulting two patients at Providence St. Vincent Medical Center in Portland, Oregon, women aged 89 and 94. (By the way, why is an Ethiopian living in Portland?)

Third world immigrants are hard workers, though. Liberian George Kpingbah was a ripe old 77, but still managed to rape an elderly Alzheimer’s patient at the Walker Methodist Health Center in Minneapolis. This guy is a walking TV commercial for Cialis.

At the 2015 sentencing hearing, Kpingbah’s lawyer sought leniency on the grounds that the perp had “devoted much of his life to ensuring that his three daughters migrated to America,” as The Minnesota Star Tribune put it.

How can we ever thank you, Mr. Kpingbah?

In 2017, Parkpoom Seesangrit — you’ll never believe it, but yup, another immigrant — was convicted of raping a 69-year-old dementia patient at the East Longmeadow Skilled Nursing Center in Massachusetts. When the Thai national was caught by a nurse, he said, “I know I’m in trouble. This looks bad.”

Like so many immigrants, Seesangrit created another job right here in America: He needed a Thai interpreter at his trial. (Turns out our country is fairly bristling with Thais.)

In 2013, nursing assistant Antonio Nieto was convicted of sexually assaulting three female patients, aged 59, 73 and 93, in a Broomfield, Colorado, nursing home. In accordance with the Times Style Guide, the media refused to reveal where Nieto was from, but his lawyer said English was his second language and he needed a Spanish-language interpreter in court, so: Latin America.

In 2018, Ghanaian immigrant Fode Doukoure pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 74-year-old woman after placing an anesthesia-soaked rag over her mouth.

May I speak with the people who hired these guys? The ones who thought cheap labor was worth placing men from raging rape cultures in charge of weak, elderly Alzheimer’s patients?

Why are you crying, Grandma? Hey! Where’s your diamond-encrusted brooch?

The media would sooner praise MAGA than admit that most of the world outside of the West is a cesspool of child rape, gang rape, elder rape, torture rape, goat rape, AIDS, multidrug-resistant gonorrhea and so on. But it’s not an impenetrable mystery, and when you’re hiring employees to work with helpless dementia patients, it’s kind of important to understand this aspect of non-Western culture.

I will briefly mention some suggestive facts about only the countries mentioned here, a subject I cover in detail in “Adios, America!”

Mass rape was a regular feature of Liberia’s 14-year civil war, as it is in most wars on the Dark Continent — also in response to minor skirmishes, celebrations, election seasons and filming a music video.

Kenya’s three-month election season, for example, features mass rapes committed by police, ordinary Kenyans and militia groups. (And you thought our elections were bad.)

During the two-year conflict in Tigray, Ethiopia, government forces raped hundreds of women, in front of friends and family, holding some as sex slaves for repeated gang rapes, sometimes inserting large nails, gravel, metal and plastic shrapnel into their victims’ vaginas, among other things. (On the plus side, none of them were fat-shamed or made to feel unheard.)

Thailand is ranked among the top 10 countries for violence against women and girls. Last year, 11 Thai police officers were charged with gang-raping a 14-year-old girl.

The Inter-American Children’s Institute reports that Latin America is second only to Asia in the sexual exploitation of women and children, who are “seen as objects instead of human beings with rights and freedoms.”

In 2018, naive British teenagers paid 1,200 pounds apiece to go on a class trip to “volunteer” in … Ghana. Whereupon armed Ghanaian and Nigerian men broke into their compound, beat and robbed the males and raped the girls and their female teacher for three hours, finally leaving at around 4 a.m.

Contra Brooks-LaSure, the last thing nursing homes need is more Kenyans, Ethiopians, Liberians, Thais and Latin Americans. What’s really needed is fewer rapes.

Here’s something useful Dr. Mehmet Oz could do at CMS that would create no additional paperwork or regulatory burden for nursing homes: Investigate every one of these monstrous crimes and widely publish the names and incomes of the facility owners and operators who thought the abuse of elderly Americans was a small price to pay for all that cheap foreign labor.

 

COPYRIGHT 2024 ANN COULTER

Trust the Science: DEI Is Dangerous

/3 Comments/in /by
National Review – 11/29/24
We were told over and over again by leading institutions, high-profile figures, and the mainstream media that DEI fosters an “inclusive environment” and advances “equity” by eliminating biases and counteracting discrimination.
A booming industry emerged: About $8 billion is spent each year on diversity trainings in the United States, and more than half of Americans report that their workplace has DEI trainings or meetings. Of course, DEI is not merely limited to programming at organizations, businesses, and universities. Now, it is entrenched in our laws. President Biden has issued executive orders to promote social justice, beginning on his very first day in the Oval Office.
While DEI was celebrated, its opponents realized that it is a dangerous ideology. Some supposedly “equitable” policies have been clear examples of illegal discrimination, while the efforts to be “inclusive” have had disastrous consequences, particularly for single-sex spaces. Yet some of DEI’s terrible effects have more subtly eroded our social fabric: Most, if not all, DEI-themed trainings promote a victimhood mentality by organizing society into a hierarchy of “oppressor” and “oppressed” on the basis of immutable traits, then demonize anyone who is supposedly sitting comfortably atop the totem pole.
Regrettably, anyone who expressed even mild objections to DEI could be branded as a reprehensible bigot who needed immediate reeducation, thereby creating a demand for even more progressive-indoctrination sessions.
Now, a compelling new study confirms that DEI fosters racial and group animosity, not tolerance.
The study released on Monday by Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) and Rutgers University Social Perception Lab has devastating but unsurprising results: Across the three experiments, the researchers found that participants exposed to DEI materials were more likely to perceive prejudice where none existed and were more willing to punish the perceived perpetrators.
Even worse, the participants who read DEI materials focused on caste were more likely to agree with Hitler quotes that substituted “Jew” with “Brahmin,” the top of the hierarchy group in the Indian caste system. The study found that “participants exposed to the DEI content were markedly more likely to endorse Hitler’s demonization statements, agreeing that Brahmins are ‘parasites’ (+35.4%), ‘viruses’ (+33.8%), and ‘the devil personified’ (+27.1%).”
Since DEI programming is so widespread, the study’s findings are obviously newsworthy. Yet our own Abigail Anthony reported that both the New York Times and Bloomberg had prepared articles on the study, then axed the stories just before publication.
Why? When asked for an explanation by the study’s authors, the editor of the Bloomberg “Equality” subsection simply cited editorial discretion.
At the New York Times, the reporter admitted that he did not have “any concerns about the methodology,” and that someone on the publication’s “data-driven reporting team” had “no problems” with the study. Yet the journalist insisted that the study should undergo peer review before getting coverage, even though he had previously reported on NCRI’s reports that hadn’t been peer-reviewed.
That journalist also stipulated, “I told my editor I thought if we were going to write a story casting serious doubts on the efficacy of the work of two of the country’s most prominent DEI scholars, the case against them has to be as strong as possible.”
As it happens, the study is strong, and the truth about DEI is getting out, no matter how uncomfortable it makes its reflexive supporters.

Josh Blackman at Reason.com: Comparing Trump’s Pardon of Arpaio and Biden’s Pardon of Biden

/2 Comments/in /by

This is the best article I have seen on Biden’s pardon. Who could be surprised that Biden would lie about pardoning Hunter? He’s lied his whole life. Successfully. Just another sociopathic American politician. But the good news is that it completely opens the door to freeing the J6 people. If Trump doesn’t free them, I would lose whatever confidence I have that he will ever do the right thing.

Comparing Trump’s Pardon of Arpaio and Biden’s Pardon of Biden

The more things change, the more things stay the same.

By Josh Blackman

Today, President Biden issued a pardon to his son, Hunter Biden. In many regards, President Biden’s pardon of his son resembles President Trump’s pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The headline from the New York Times says it all: “In Pardoning His Son, Biden Echoes Some of Trump’s Complaints.”

First, President Biden issued this pardon after Hunter was convicted, but before he was sentenced. Biden has short-circuited the judicial process, taken the case out of the hand of the district court judge, and foreclosed any opportunity for appellate review. It is worth noting that both Roger Clinton and Charles Kushner were pardoned long after they had served their sentences. Back in August 2017, President Trump pardoned Joe Arpaio after he was convicted before he was sentenced. At the time, I wrote that the pardon was “premature,” as the “preemptive pardon short-circuited the judicial process.” There was outrage at the time to Trump’s actions. It is enough to copy a paragraph from the Wikipedia page on the pardon:

In response to the pardon, The Washington Post said it was “a controversial decision, one that Trump critics labeled as an example of the president’s illiberal, rule-of-law violating, authoritarian impulses.” Harvard Law School professor Charles Fried, the former solicitor general for Ronald Reagan, said Trump’s use of authority was specifically “to undermine the only weapon that a judge has in this kind of ultimate confrontation.” Another Harvard Law School professor, Noah Feldman, said the pardon “would express presidential contempt for the Constitution.” According to The New York Times, legal experts found the fact that Trump “used his constitutional power to block a federal judge’s effort to enforce the Constitution” to be the “most troubling aspect of the pardon”

Hunter should hope that the District Courts in Delaware and California promptly dismiss the case, and the Trump DOJ does not have an opportunity to continue litigating the matter. But there is adverse precedent. After the pardon of Arpaio, the district judge actually held proceedings about how to deal with the pardon. Lawyers even argued that the court should not accept the pardon! Ultimately, the district court accepted the pardon, thus preventing the sentencing, but did not vacate the conviction. The Ninth Circuit affirmed. Thus, at least in the California case, though Hunter was pardoned, under the Arpaio precedent, the conviction will stand. He will remain a convicted felon in the legal sense, even if he is pardoned.

Second, Trump’s pardon of Arpaio was criticized because he bypassed the DOJ Pardon Attorney. He unilaterally decided to issue the pardon. Hunter would have never qualified for a pardon set forth by the DOJ Pardon Attorney.

Chalk up another victory for the unitary executive.

Third, Trump was widely criticized for issuing a pardon to advance his personal interests. Arpaio was a big supporter of candidate and President Trump. The pardon was largely viewed as payback for a loyal supporter. Biden is in a similar position, though it is in many regards worse. This is not merely a political ally. It is his flesh and blood. Biden wrote, “I hope Americans will understand why a father and a President would come to this decision.” Oh yes, we understand this decision quite well. Biden assured the public many times that he would not pardon his son. This promise was no doubt part of his appeal for the 2024 election. Biden ran for President (briefly) on the platform that he was honest, could be trusted, and would not put his personal concerns before the country. Historians can now judge whether Biden kept these promises.

Fourth, President Trump lobbied Attorney General Sessions to drop the Arpaio prosecution. These communications were viewed by critics as a breach of the “independence” between the Department of Justice and the President. Sessions declined to accede to Trump’s requests. In 2024, Politico reported that Biden told “confidants that Garland should not have eventually empowered a special counsel to look into his son, believing that he again was caving to outside pressure.” Sounds familiar? Biden said much the same in his pardon statement: “The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election.” It was Merrick Garland, Biden’s Attorney General, who appointed the special counsel, not Republicans in Congress.

I don’t see how Garland continues to serve. The President publicly declared that he has lost faith in his Attorney General. I would not be surprised to see Garland resign shortly. What a tragic figure, Garland is. He was nominated for the Supreme Court, never received a hearing, stepped down from the D.C. Circuit to become Attorney General, pledged to restore the rule of law, spent his entire administration enmeshed with special counsels and January 6 prosecutions, and all of those convictions have been, or will be pardoned. If Attorney General Meese was the most influential Attorney General in American history, where would Garland rank?

Fifth, Trump’s pardon was viewed as an attack of Judge Susan Bolton. Adam Liptak wrote in the Times, “It was the first act of outright defiance against the judiciary by a president who has not been shy about criticizing federal judges who ruled against his businesses and policies.” President Biden’s statement managed to criticize the federal judge in Delaware who presided over Hunter’s trial: “a carefully negotiated plea deal, agreed to by the Department of Justice, unraveled in the court room – with a number of my political opponents in Congress taking credit for bringing political pressure on the process. ” This statement is flat-out false. The plea deal unraveled after it became clear the prosecution and defense did not agree how the plea agreement would be interpreted. Biden has no basis to insinuate that the District Court judge, who was supported by both Delaware senators, was politicized. Would Biden call Judge Norieka, who was appointed by President Trump, a “Trump Judge”? Cue Chief Justice Roberts.

Sixth, Trump’s pardon of Arpaio concerned his conviction, and “any other offenses under Chapter 21 of Title 18, United States Code that might arise, or be charged, in connection with Melendres v. Arpaio . . . in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.” In other words, this pardon would prevent a prosecutor from bringing future charges related to that case. Biden’s pardon of his son was far, far broader:

For those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024, including but not limited to all offenses charged or prosecuted (including any that have resulted in convictions) by Special Counsel David C. Weiss in Docket No. 1:23-cr-00061-MN in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and Docket No. 2:23-CR-00599-MCS-1 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

This pardon immunizes Hunter from prosecution for any conduct he committed between January 1, 2014. If Hunter shot someone on Fifth Avenue during that period, he could not be tried for murder in federal court. I haven’t studied pardons closely, but I am skeptical there has ever been such a broad, prophylactic pardon over the course of a decade. Even President Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon was limited to offenses “committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974.”

And President Andrew Johnson’s 1868 pardon and amnesty of former confederates was limited to the offenses of insurrection, rebellion, and treason, during the four-year long Civil War. (Johnson’s pardon had the effect of cutting short the pending appeal to the Supreme Court of the criminal prosecution of Jefferson Davis.) Finally, there is a longstanding debate about whether a pardon can be issued without enumerating a specific offense. Professor Phillip Kurland raised this issue after Ford pardoned Nixon. He said, “It is certainly not clear that the power to pardon an individual may properly, i.e. constitutionally, be invoked prior to indictment and conviction.”‘

Seventh, Trump’s pardon was part of a long-term campaign to charge that the DOJ was politicized. Here, Biden said “I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice.” Again, this is Biden’s Attorney General. Biden’s remarks about the politicization of his own DOJ provide more credence to what Trump has said, and what he will do after January 20.

***

The more things change, the more things stay the same. For what it’s worth, this pardon does not prevent Hunter from facing charges in state court. Nor does it prevent the Department of Justice from prosecuting Joe Biden over his documents case. Remember, Ron Hur only declined to prosecute Biden for his “poor memory.” If Biden had continued to serve as President, I think that is an admission that he is competent to stand trial. I also think that the statute of limitations would be waived while Trump is in office. (The proceedings in New York with Justice Merchan will speak to this issue.)

The post Comparing Trump’s Pardon of Arpaio and Biden’s Pardon of Biden appeared first on Reason.com.

How can America survive if people like this leave?

/18 Comments/in /by
I’m not leaving my America. I’m leaving Trump’s.
We’re teetering on the edge of a free fall into rock bottom, pulling anyone with a shred of decency down with us.
Atlanta Journal-Constitution – By Todd Copilevitz
Editor’s note: This is the first in an occasional series exploring the author’s decision to move abroad.
America, we need a time out.
Growing up in the Midwest, I couldn’t fathom how a nation could embrace someone like Hitler or how America justified locking up 120,000 Japanese Americans in detention camps. I was raised to believe most people had a breaking point — a moral red line that, once crossed, would stop them.
Now I know better. Fear weaponized, simple scapegoats offered — this toxic cocktail blinds people. It happened in Germany. Bosnia. Myanmar. Cambodia. Stalin’s Russia.
Less than a month ago, my heart dropped like a lead weight. The nightmare came home.
Fury and fear have been spinning in my head ever since. Donald Trump will soon be president again — this time with a MAGA-led Republican Congress and a rubber-stamp Supreme Court ready to green light whatever hateful agenda he couldn’t finish the first time.
He’s armed and ready to bulldoze decency. For a horrifying number of Americans, the misogyny, racism and antisemitism [!!] didn’t matter — or, worse, they liked it. That’s not just alarming; it’s sickening.
Back in the “good old days,” we were taught that the early stages of fascist regimes often began with the subtle normalization of hatred and the systematic erosion of rights — all disguised as efforts to protect security or preserve tradition. We learned that shameful episodes like Operation Wetback in the 1950s served as clear warnings of what not to do, just as the Nazi ghettoization of Jews was a stark reminder of the depths to which humanity could sink when fear and prejudice take the wheel.
Now? We’re banning books. Arresting librarians. Threatening teachers. Demonizing education itself.
It’s hard to even fathom what they’re teaching today — if teaching is still a priority at all [indeed, it’s mostly LGBTQ+ ideology now]. It feels as if the ugliest chapters of history are being exhumed and replayed, no matter the price society pays.
Look, we’re not in Kansas anymore. This is Nazi Germany territory [just a tad overreacting].
The past few months have left me shaken. My family — the people I live for — represents every group MAGA has decided to target. So I’m leaving. I’m packing my family and moving abroad.
But I’m not leaving my America; I’m leaving Trump’s.
This isn’t a decision made lightly. In our house, we’ve seen too much of the inhumanity humans are capable of. My wife spent years in combat zones as a TV photojournalist and video editor.
In 2020, as journalists in the United States were beaten on live TV during the George Floyd protests, it was like a portal opening to her past. The chaotic scenes on screen mirrored the brutality she had endured in Panama, Argentina and Iraq — where right-wing regimes didn’t just suppress dissent but actively targeted journalists like her [that would include Israel most of all, but of course being a right-thinking person he would never say that]. Until then it was easy to wrap ourselves in the belief this could never happen here.
Now, however, every night the news feels like a barrage of emotional land mines. The parallels between other hellscapes and what’s happening here are coming too fast and too frequently for comfort. I’ve stopped lobbing in the occasional “It won’t happen here” because I no longer know that for sure.
My own history might not be as harrowing, but I’ve spent more than a decade as a crime reporter, followed by another decade helping the Marine Corps recruit young men and women. Those experiences taught me how vast populations look to their leaders for stability — and what happens when that trust is betrayed.
I’ve seen too many terrified faces — people losing their homes, their loved ones. I’ve witnessed the cruelty strangers inflict on those they deem “lesser.”
Ironically, the military, which many fear Trump will turn against fellow Americans [when the left riots over mass deportations?], gives me hope. I know it includes decent men and women who take very seriously the Constitution they vow to defend and who will stand up for what’s right.
But I can’t sit idly by, praying authorities don’t come for my immigrant neighbors. I won’t watch them try to erase my son, strip away my daughter’s rights or escalate antisemitic rhetoric into action [somehow I missed the anti-Semitic rhetoric; Israel couldn’t hope for a better president. With a name like Copilevitz he could probably immigrate to Israel without any problem and bask in the warm glow of Israeli democracy]. I can’t gamble on this ending well.
This isn’t about losing an election. I’ve lived under more Republican presidents than Democratic ones — loyal opposition is practically a reflex. But this? This time it is different.
We’re watching the fabric of our society, our culture, get shredded in front of us. In Texas, they offer bounties for turning in women seeking abortions. Across red states, cruelty is being legislated with zeal — banning water breaks for road crews, criminalizing compassion, targeting LGBTQ+ people as public enemies. Decency is a crime; hate is a virtue.
This is not my America.
It’s not just the policies. I fear the swarms of emboldened bigots letting their hatred rage even more than I fear our government. Nazis marching in Ohio? Anonymous text messages telling LGBTQ+ citizens to report to reeducation camps. You see the angry entitlement, and the vicious disparaging rhetoric daily now.
Neighbors turning on neighbors. Cultural differences being criminalized. Children weaponized as pawns in deportation schemes. We’re teetering on the edge of a free fall into rock bottom, pulling anyone with a shred of decency down with us.
I know the trolls will come for me now that I’ve spoken up. But I’ll take the marketplace of ideas over fear any day. And hey, if any of you can explain — rationally — why I should stay, I’m all ears. Go ahead, convince me. I’d love to hear it. [PLEASE GO AND TAKE SIMILAR-MINDED OTHERS WITH YOU!]
Yes, I could shut my eyes and wait it out for four years. As a 62-year-old white man, I have the privilege of insulation. But turning a blind eye has never been the answer, and it won’t start being one now.
I believe I have an obligation to make the world better for those around me. Until now, that meant leaning into the fight: donations, phone banks, petitions, protests. But now, the risk is too close for comfort.
After too many sleepless nights and endless spirals of “what if,” we’ve chosen a future in Northern Ireland. It’s a place with its own scars, but those scars tell a story of hard-fought peace and dialogue — two things we’re starving for here. And, bonus, over there, removing guns from society was an obvious part of the solution, not part of the chaos.
In Northern Ireland, my family will be able to finally breathe, thrive and focus on building something meaningful — instead of just surviving. Plus, they supposedly speak the same language as us. Well, sort of.
Yes, family and friends have asked if we’re sure — and if it must be now.
The answer to both is a resounding yes. History has shown us that the window for making a secure environment can close all too rapidly. I want my family and friends to know they can always hop a flight to safety and sanity. We plan to help anyone who follows. Humanity is a collective effort.
Leaving is hard. Uprooting our lives adds an entirely new layer of complexity. Selling our home isn’t just about finding a buyer — it’s about walking away from the first house my wife and I bought, the one where we designed our dream yard and filled every room with memories.
For my mother, who’s in her 80s, the challenge is even greater. She’s leaving her grandchildren and the life she’s built. Yet, her resilience warms my heart — she’s already picturing herself living in a real village.
The pets, blissfully unaware, bring their own challenges: paperwork, travel restrictions, ensuring their safety.
We have just spent a week in Northern Ireland, sorting out logistics, meeting with immigration solicitor (gotta admit, that sounds better than lawyer), looking for a car, learning to drive on the “wrong” side of the road and sorting out the new currency.
The house we’re moving to in Portballintrae has views of the North Atlantic, but it also comes with adjustments: smaller spaces, new systems, a different way of living.
[Looks like a very homogeneous (even religiously), small White town. From Wiki:On Census day (29 April 2001) there were 734 people living in Portballintrae. Of these:

  • 12.0% were aged under 16 years and 33.4% were aged 60 and over
  • 48.9% of the population were male and 51.1% were female
  • 1.0% were from a Catholic background and 96.5% were from a Protestant background.
  • 2.1% of people aged 16–74 were unemployed]
It’s overwhelming at times, but every sleepless night reminds me why we’re doing this. This isn’t just relocation; it’s preservation. We’re packing hope, resilience and determination.
We’re not giving up our citizenship. We’ll keep paying our U.S. taxes. I’ll still keep an eye on what’s happening. America is still home. But when I turn off the news, I hope to breathe a little easier.
I know I’ll be homesick. My memories, identity and roots are American. Trading a wooded lot in Atlanta for a semidetached house in a village of 754 will be a culture shock.
I hope we can return someday, that all of this turns out to be a false alarm. But I can’t take that chance.
This isn’t retreat; it’s strategy. When the rules are rigged, the boldest move is to stop playing. It’s not fear; it’s purpose. I’m building a life where compassion, justice and democracy aren’t theoretical. They’re real, lived values.
To those staying: I’m rooting for you. Keep fighting for the better America we know is possible. I’ll cheer and donate from across the Atlantic, my heart always carrying a piece of this country.
For me, the most radical act of hope is pivoting. Reclaiming agency. Living aligned with my principles. Sometimes, the smartest move isn’t fighting in a broken system from within — but working on building a new world and thriving outside it.
This isn’t goodbye. This is a hello to a new unknown. But it’s also a declaration: I refuse to accept the terms set by others. I’m choosing a life where dignity, compassion and justice can win. Though my heart might have dropped like a lead weight last month, it feels lighter knowing we’re moving toward a place where hope still flickers.
As Tom Bodett said in so many Motel 6 commercials, “We’ll leave the light on for you.”

Todd Copilevitz, a marketing consultant, is a former reporter and columnist for The Dallas Morning News.

Interview (unshaved) with Emil Cosmin

/4 Comments/in /by