That Black Guy Suggests Trey Gowdy for SCOTUS

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
July 1, 2018

Senator Tim Scott, commonly know as “that black guy, no not Dr. Ben, the other one – no not the sheriff, he’s a Senator” has a suggestion which is worth considering.

I guess.


Sen. Tim Scott wants to recommend his friend and fellow South Carolinian Rep. Trey Gowdy to be one of the candidates President Donald Trump considers for the Supreme Court.

“I’m going to recommend Trey Gowdy be one of the folks that I would have a strong recommendation for him serving on the Supreme Court,” Scott said in an interview on CNN’s “The Van Jones Show” airing Sunday at 7 p.m. ET. “I hope that the President will be open to that recommendation.”

Scott called Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor, “incredibly fair” and said he was an equal opportunity critic of both the Trump and Obama administrations.

“A guy who will call balls and strikes and not choose a side, even when he’s an elected member, at this time in our nation’s history that’s hard to find,” Scott said.

The two Republicans have grown close over their time in Congress and recently co-authored a book, “Unified: How Our Unlikely Friendship Gives Us Hope for a Divided Country.”

Okay, so.

Everyone likes Trey Gowdy. They like him because he does this aggressive Al Pacino bit.

This is clearly an act, designed to invoke the idea that he is really passionate. I’m sure that some part of his personality is genuinely aggressive, but the bit he does, the thing that makes people like him – it is an act.

He talks a good game, and has given hell to Dems and Jews at a lot of Congressional hearings, but clearly does not care that much about truth and justice, or he wouldn’t keep saying “Russia meddled in our democracy” without any evidence.

In 2018, anyone who mentions that is either genuinely stupid, brainwashed or lying on purpose, and I don’t think he is either of those first two things.

And then he did that completely bizarre TV tour a couple weeks ago where he said there was nothing at all improper about the FBI spying on and sending informants into the Trump campaign. That was, in my view, treasonous.

Not to mention he wrote a book with some nigger.

But, even considering all of that, there could be worse picks.

What I’m hoping for though is some hardcore federal judge who most people haven’t heard of, who is an originalist who is ON THE RECORD saying anchor babies are not in the Constitution.

Because Lyin Ted and several other originalists have said that anchor babies are in the Constitution.

Anyone Trump picks is going to be an originalist, who is going to be fine on guns, speech, immigration, free association, state’s rights (including Roe v Wade), Affirmative Action, voter ID laws, etc. The issue that matters that they disagree on is anchor babies, and we have to fix that issue.

These people have to have their citizenship stripped from them, with a SCOTUS ruling that the citizenship was awarded through fraud. That has to be the goal if we are going to restore manageable demographics in this country. If we can get back to a 70-75% white voter base, then we will be able to do anything we want (it’s not really that far away, btw – the country might only be 55% white, but a large portion of the nonwhites are either not citizens or too young to vote).

We’ve got a ticking time bomb though with the underage anchor babies, who have grown up in this country, and will vote at 18.

These numbers are I’m sure low, but it gives an idea:

Ted Cruz, btw, has since reversed his position on this.

But there was a point at which he was very adamant that the Constitution protects anchor babies.

So I don’t know the details of the debate among originalists, but apparently it is enough of a debate that you can just switch positions based on political pressure. At least if you are Ted Cruz.

Trump was always strong against anchor babies.

The thing is… it doesn’t just have to be ended, it has to be reversed in that all of these existing ones are stripped of their citizenship.

We don’t have to be super nasty about it. We can give them all 2 year visas – or even longer in some cases – if they don’t have a criminal record, where they can get their stuff in order as they prepare to return to a country they may have never even been to, but they won’t be able to vote or collect benefits.

This isn’t a crazy thing. Mexico can be made to accept these people, and it might even be good for them to have people educated in America return to their country.

Understand: Mexico can be made to do whatever we want them to do if we decide to make them.

It is only about the political will.