The attacks on Columbus statues in my hometown of Columbus really crystallized a kind of aggressive, unhinged hatred for these people. It is deep in my soul now, brooding like a dread swamp.

Andrew Jackson hits almost as hard for me, given that he is a figure I’ve so deeply admired as a populist, an anti-establishment, anti-banking figure and a diehard American patriot. Aside from Thomas Jefferson, who I admire as one of the greatest American thinkers and writers, Jackson is my favorite president.

Whereas Jefferson was a thinker, Jackson was a man of action. He was a physical man. Although I identify personally more with thinking than physicality, I recognize that thought without action is useless, and that all thinking men must rely on aggressive, action-oriented men to manifest their thoughts into reality.

He would order these degenerates attacking our monuments shot in the street. He would send in the feds, and tell them to make a spectacle of it. He would use a phrase like “paint the streets with their brains.”

These fiends would all scurry like cockroaches back to their drug holes as soon as a couple of them had their brains blown out. We know that. These are not brave men, these revolutionaries, they are damaged opportunists, taking the chance given to them by the state, by the Jews, to destroy as a way of acting out against their fathers.

ABC News:

Anti-racism protesters tried to pull down a monument of Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the United States, in a park near the White House on Monday night before police intervened.

Scores of protesters broke through a fence surrounding the 168-year-old bronze equestrian statue at the center of Lafayette Square in Washington, D.C. They climbed atop the sculpture and tied ropes around both Jackson and his horse before attempting to pull the statue from its base, which had been spray-painted with the word “killer.”

Baton-wielding police moved in and forcibly removed protesters from the park, at times firing chemical irritants to disperse the crowds. Some people were seen being taken away in handcuffs.

This may be the first time the cops did something, instead of standing by and watching our history be destroyed.

Donald Trump, who is ostensibly the president of America, has said that he’s going to start doing something about this.

…..This action is taken effective immediately, but may also be used retroactively for destruction or vandalism already caused. There will be no exceptions!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 23, 2020

It was of course already illegal to tear down statues, because vandalism is illegal, and apparently this special law against attacking symbols of war history allows for stricter punishments of people who do it.

But he’s authorized… these existing laws being enforced? What does that mean? The laws exist and cops all over the country are refusing to enforce them. What Trump would need to do is use the feds, the Justice Department, to press some sort of federal charges against these people. No city is going to press charges.

In Columbus, as in many places, the mob is not tearing down the statues – the city is. Because this is not a street war, it is a cultural war. The mob is simply the last manifestation of something that has been going on for decades, this Jewish project of turning a significant body of Americans – particularly women and effeminate men – against America, convincing them to align with the foreigners, with the Jews.

Most of these people pulling down the statues are not black. They are primarily white women, with a few estrogen boys mixed in. They are millennials.

This is the crowd in front of the attack on Andrew Jackson – in the front row, you can see 8 white women, two fat white estro-boys and a black male.

The protests tend to be upwards of 75% white women. If it wasn’t for white women, the protests would not be happening. The men who go there, like the fatboys you can see above, go there to try to impress women. Of course, the women are just going to take turns having sex with whatever blacks show up, but the fatboys will get a pat on the head.

This is all just extreme degeneracy. It is the lowest of the low, human waste product. It should not be difficult to oppose this.

What Trump needs to do is become a leader of the culture war. Because he already has that position, whether he likes it or not. He is the great villain for the left, for the Jews, for the foreign hordes, for Greta Thunberg and her minions – for all of these people aligned against white identity and white history. But he is refusing to lead his own team.

Maybe he’s going to start leading. Maybe the failure of his Oklahoma rally was a wakeup call.

I certainly hope that is the case. I hope he is planning some kind of serious turn.

We need a hero.

I tend to think of myself as the millennial Pat Buchanan. I have a better sense of humor. Probably not as smart. I am more honest. More idealistic… but I haven’t ever read anything Pat wrote when he was in his early thirties.

Some people don’t really understand just how based Pat is. He wrote a book about how Hitler did nothing wrong and we never should have entered WWII. It was basically “how can I sell IHR arguments to normies?” the book.

Here he is on C-SPAN talking about it.

He’s also done some lightweight wink-wink Holo-denial. Everyone who gets it gets what he’s getting at. But he never had the nerve to just say it all. You know. Boomer.

Anyway, this latest bit is the funniest thing I’ve seen all week. Including that shit I wrote when I was drunk yesterday, which was ultra-lulz (the thing about that is… the work needs done, and I have to do it, it has to be done, sometimes I have a drink, sometimes I have a few drinks – the fact that the work needs done remains; I work two 5-6 hour shifts, 7 days a week, it is pretty much impossible that some portion of the work will not be done while drunk, even given that I’m a semi-teetotaler at this point).

Pat doesn’t have to write while drunk. But his stuff has inspired me a lot. He says things plainly, breaking down media gibberish with simple common sense.

Pat writes on his blog:

If ex-CIA Director John Brennan did to Andrew Jackson what he did to Donald Trump, he would have lost a lot more than his security clearance.

He would have been challenged to a duel and shot.

That.

Is so.

Funny.

And it’s funny because it’s true.

Brennan is such a little pervert bitch. Whining because he thinks his (presumed) pizzagate secrets are all about to get dropped.

I was surprised he didn’t setup a GoFundMe after his security clearance was revoked.

“Trump’s … performance in Helsinki,” Brennan had said, “exceeds the threshold of ‘high crimes & misdemeanors.’ It was … treasonous.”

Why should the president not strip from a CIA director who calls him a traitor the honor and privilege of a security clearance? Or is a top-secret clearance an entitlement like Social Security?

CIA directors retain clearances because they are seen as national assets, individuals whose unique experience, knowledge and judgment may be called upon to assist a president in a national crisis.

…

Who trashed this tradition?

Was it not the former heads of the security agencies — CIA, FBI, director of national intelligence — who have been leveling the kind of savage attacks on the chief of state one might expect from antifa?

Are ex-security officials entitled to retain the high privileges of the offices they held, if they descend into cable-TV hatred and hostility?

Former CIA chief Mike Hayden, in attacking Trump for separating families of detained illegal immigrants at the border, tweeted a photo of the train tracks leading into Auschwitz.

“Other governments have separated mothers and children” was Hayden’s caption.

Is that fair criticism from an ex-CIA director?

….

And does Trump not have a point when he says the Boston Globe-organized national attack on him, joined in by the Times and 300 other newspapers, was journalistic “collusion” against him?

If Trump believes that CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times and The Washington Post are mortal enemies who want to see him ousted or impeached, is he wrong?

Yeah, that is the question you’re not allowed to ask.

The media is the new priest class of the Jewish religion of Feelingsiatiy.

We are an irreconcilable us-against-them nation today, and given the rancor across the ideological, social and cultural chasm that divides us, it is hard to see how, even post-Trump, we can ever come together again.

Speaking at a New York LGBT gala in 2016, Hillary Clinton said: “You could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables … racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic … Some of those folks … are irredeemable, but … they are not America.”

When Clinton’s reflections on Middle America made it into print, she amended her remarks. Just as Gov. Andrew Cuomo rushed to amend his comments yesterday when he blurted at a bill-signing ceremony:

“We’re not going to make America great again. It was never that great.” America was “never that great”?

…

Clinton and Cuomo committed gaffes of the kind Michael Kinsley described as the blurting out of truths the speaker believes but desperately does not want a wider audience to know.

In San Francisco in 2008, Barack Obama committed such a gaffe.

Asked why blue-collar workers in industrial towns decimated by job losses were not responding to his message, Obama trashed these folks as the unhappy losers of our emerging brave new world:

“They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

These clingers to their Bibles, bigotries and guns are the people the mainstream media, 10 years later, deride and dismiss as “Trump’s base.”

What Clinton, Cuomo and Obama spilled out reveals what is really behind the cultural and ideological wars of America today.

Most media elites accept the historic indictment — that before the Progressives came, this country was mired in racism, sexism, homophobia and xenophobia, and that its history had been a long catalog of crimes against indigenous peoples, Africans brought here in bondage, Mexicans whose lands we stole, migrants, and women and gays who were denied equality.

The people who cheer Trump believe the country they inherited from their fathers was a great, good and glorious country, and that the media who detest Trump also despise them.

For such as these, Trump cannot scourge the media often enough.

See, it’s basically a Stormer article written for someone other than a bunch of teenage psychopaths.

Of course, Buchanan doesn’t have nearly the reach we have.

Because the younger generations… they are too angry to be moved by dry reason. The kids need the inspiration. And the lulz.

But I really liked the Andrew Jackson bit.

Andrew Jackson killed a man in a duel. He took a shot to the chest, and carried the bullet for the rest of his life.

He had some other near-duels too.

That guy didn’t give a fuck, which is why everyone was like “HELL YES” when Trump hung up his portrait in the Oval Office as one of his first acts as President.

Yesterday, the President of the United States Donald J. Trump invited a small group of Navajo World War II veterans who served as code talkers to the White House. Their story is actually interesting from a historical perspective but that’s not want the Jew run fake news media wanted to cover.

They zeroed in on two things.

The first of which was how Trump held the event in front of an Andrew Jackson portrait. Jackson was responsible for implementing a policy that forcibly removed Indians from the Southeastern party of the United States during the 1830s. Due to this history, the media viewed this as a show of disrespect by Trump to the Indians.

The second of which was a joke that Trump made about Pocahontas in reference to Senator Elizabeth Warren. Warren previously claimed that her ancestors were Cherokee Indians in a move to get preferential treatment as an affirmative action hire at Harvard University. That’s why Trump continually refers to her as Pocahontas.

CNN and others in the Jew run media have gone crazy over this. Take for example this CNN clip.

And here’s Pocahontas herself hysterically responding to Trump’s joke on MSNBC.

It’s a good bet that Trump did this intentionally to troll his political enemies. He knew that they would go crazy about the Jackson portrait and the Pocahontas joke. They’ve already spent hours of television time covering this. In the grand scheme of things, this issue has no tangible significance. The fact that they would go so crazy over a joke further illustrates how unhinged they’ve become.

This does prove one thing. There sure is a great deal of competition for that fake news trophy!

We should have a contest as to which of the Networks, plus CNN and not including Fox, is the most dishonest, corrupt and/or distorted in its political coverage of your favorite President (me). They are all bad. Winner to receive the FAKE NEWS TROPHY!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2017

“On one side, an Indian Chief, hanging to a gibbet, his tomahawk, scalping-knife and horn, on the ground. On the other side, a Jew, suspended in like manner, and a banknote of five dollars lying in the same manner, as the murderous but less destructive instrument of the savage.”

Andrew Jackson was the first and only other candidate in our nation’s history to take on a corrupt establishment and win, in the name of the people.

He was also a hardcore shitlord and white supremacist extremist who took down the bank.

It is fitting he should be honored thusly.

The Hill:

President Trump hung a portrait of Andrew Jackson in the Oval Office on Tuesday, The New York Times reports, an apparent nod to the populist sentiments of the new administration.

Trump’s rise has often been compared to the populist election of Jackson, including by some of the new president’s own team.

Chief White House strategist Steve Bannon called Trump’s inauguration speech on Friday “Jacksonian,” saying it struck the populist and patriotic tones Jackson was known for.

Trump has also expressed admiration for the seventh president, as well, calling Jackson “an amazing figure in American history — very unique so many ways,” through a spokesperson last week.

…

Jackson’s legacy is also rife with controversy. He signed the Indian Removal Act of 1930, paving the way for what is now known as the “Trail of Tears” shortly after his presidency ended, in which the Cherokee Nation was removed from its lands east of the Mississippi in the massive forced migration.

We are in serious need of some more trails of tears just about now, friends.

And it’s look like Trump may well deliver them in spades.

What’s more: I’ve got a feeling Jackson is staying on the $20 bill.

(Here’s a nifty pdf copy of the above image, which you can easily print off and post at your favorite high school, university or coffee shop).

Why would anybody want to have a coin with an ape on it?

The U.S. Mint has decided to depict Lady Liberty as an ape on a new $100 gold coin. For whatever reason, there are people in the Treasury Department who have a weird obsession with putting non humans on coins and currency.

Daily Mail:

The US government on Thursday issued a new commemorative collector coin featuring Lady Liberty depicted as a black woman – the first time in history that the famed symbol of Americana is portrayed as an African American.

The 24-karat gold $100 coin was unveiled to mark the US Mint and Treasury’s 225th anniversary.

The 2017 American Liberty 225th Anniversary Gold Coin shows the woman’s head in profile with a crown of stars.

It features the year of the mint’s founding, 1792, as well as 2017.

The mint says the other side of the coin will depict an eagle in flight.

It was designed by Justin Kunz, an accomplished artist and illustrator whom the mint has commissioned for past works on coins, according to its website.

The Treasury Department headed by the Jew Jacob Lew announced last year that they had plans to eventually replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill with a female monkey named Harriet Tubman.

These are not good decisions. The United States of America was founded by men of White European descent. It is highly disrespectful and offensive to the nation’s founders for depictions of subhuman animals to be placed on American coins and currency.

Donald Trump needs to immediately revoke the decision to have Andrew Jackson removed from the $20 bill. He should also launch an investigation into how the Treasury Department is making these decisions. There is obviously something very wrong if they think this type of thing is OK.

We’re not sorry.

We won then, we’ll win now, we’ll win until there’s no one left to beat.

This Thanksgiving weekend, gather your agency and prepare for some festive jimmy-rustling. After the insanity of Black Friday and a weekend of pissing off their parents with buzzwords from Gender Studies and virtue-signaling about poor Injuns, what better face to greet returning students than that of proto-shitlord Andrew Jackson?

This holiday presents us with an opportunity to keep pushing our enemies closer to the edge and close out the best Current Year yet with one last low-key poster drive:

1. Print out copies of the poster below
2. Wait for the weekend and the chaos that surrounds it (praise kek)
3. Put them up in and around universities and other places leftists/Jews congregate
4. Use wheatpaste if legally able (check local bylaws), otherwise use strong tape (you can put them on bulletin boards, though there they are likely to be ripped down quickly)
5. Those not participating IRL amplify online impressions with stories/tweets

Here is the original:

pdf version here.

Here is the Anglin mod – for the bold among ye:

pdf version here.

You can use whichever one you wish. Either is going to trigger someone.

You would think Treasury Secretary Jack Lew’s decision to replace Andrew Jackson with Harriet Tubman on the twenty-dollar bill would have provoked a massive conservative backlash. But you would be underestimating the extent and speed of Conservatism Inc.’s transformation into Cuckservatism Inc.—submitting to, and even slobbering over, the very forces it is nominally pledged to resist.

Some individuals, notably Donald Trump, along with some of his high profile supporters and sympathizers like Pat Buchanan, Ben Carson, Greta Van Susteren, and Ann Coulter did indeed oppose Lew’s move.

However, when Donald Trump called the move “pure political correctness,” Red State’s  Leon Wolf [Email him] said that it was “evident that he is once again signaling to his white supremacist basis of support” [Trump’s Hypocrisy on Harriet Tubman “Political Correctness” Proves that he is Actively Courting Racists, April 21, 2016]

And Republican consultant Liz Mair (the woman responsible for ads featuring semi-nude photos of Melania Trump) similarly tweeted that Trump’s opposition to Tubman was designed to court “white nationalists.”

So Trump's upset about Harriet Tubman going on the $20 bill? Wow. I didn't see that pander to white nationalists coming…

— Liz Mair (@LizMair) April 21, 2016

Reality check: If opposing Tubman on Political Correctness grounds makes you a “white supremacist,” then even the most tepid neoconservatives of 20 years ago were far more racist than Trump.

Trump, after all, still stipulated that Tubman was “fantastic” and suggested she might deserve a place on U.S. currency—just not at the expense of Jackson. But back in 1992, when the National Endowment for Humanities created the National Standards for United States History, Lynne Cheney (Dick’s wife and former chair of the National Endowment for Humanities) objected that Tubman simply did not merit the attention she was getting:

Harriet Tubman, an African-American who helped rescue slaves by way of the Underground Railroad, is mentioned six times. Two white males who were contemporaries of Tubman, Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee, get one and zero mentions, respectively. Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein, Jonas Salk and the Wright brothers make no appearance at all.

[The End of History, Wall Street Journal October 20, 1994]

Stanley Rothman, Althea K. Nagai, and Robert Lerner wrote a critique of high school textbooks, Molding the Good Citizen, which leading neoconservatives like Nathan Glazer and Cheney endorsed enthusiastically. The authors criticized texts that they said were responsible for “more students knowing about Harriet Tubman than George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Joseph Stalin, or Winston Churchill.” The pre-purge National Review summarized their critique by writing that textbooks were “bowing to feminism and left-wing black politics by overstating the importance of such historical figures as Harriet Tubman.” [Battle of the Books, by Mark Gerson, August 14, 1995].

William J. Bennett similarly complained that “something approaching 85 percent of the 17 year olds in America know who Harriet Tubman is, while only about one-third of our high school seniors can place the Civil War in the right half century” [The War Over Culture in Education, Heritage Foundation, September 5, 1991].

As Catherine Clinton observed in her 2004 biography, Harriet Tubman: The Road to Freedom, “Tubman’s name became a hot button for conservative critics, and she became a symbolic ‘whipping girl’ for political correctness.” Similarly, in his 2007 book, Harriet Tubman: Myth, Memory, and History, Milton C. Sernett similarly noted that “Tubman had become the iconic embodiment of African American history –‘politically correct’ on two counts: race and gender.”

If anything, Establishment conservatives should now be more skeptical of elevating Tubman than they were in the 1990s. Although she had by then become a major figure in high school textbooks and in dozens of children’s biographies based largely on the Communist Earl Conrad’s propagandistic exhumation of her in the 1930s, no historian had written a serious biography of her until the early 2000s [The Moses Of Her People, by James M. McPherson, New York Review of Books, March 11, 2004, subscriber link. See also James Fulford’s Harriet Tubman—Gun-Toting Republican, Delusional Narcoleptic, And/Or Creation Of Communist Propaganda? May 15, 2015]. These biographies, including Clinton’s and Sennett’s cited above, found that many of Tubman’s already meager accomplishments had been exaggerated or even invented.

Instead, however, the vast majority of Conservatism Inc. commentators have chosen to celebrate this latest effort to make Tubman equal, if not superior, to the Founding Fathers and other white male heroes. Whereas Respectable Right commentators of just a couple decades ago complained about Tubman’s overemphasis in textbooks, Eli Lehrer [Email him] claims at National Review that the radical Tubman was more important than “the description of her as an ‘Underground Railroad conductor’ that appears in my son’s elementary-school materials and many popular accounts of her life.” Lehrer concludes:

Harriet Tubman was a black, Republican, gun-toting, veterans’ activist, with ninja-like spy skills and strong Christian beliefs. She probably wouldn’t have an ounce of patience for the obtuse posturing of some of the tenured radicals hanging around Ivy League faculty lounges.

[What They Didn’t Teach You in School about Harriet Tubman, April 21, 2016]

Where once for conservatives Tubman was “a symbolic ‘whipping girl’ for political correctness,” National Review just ran a blog post Harriet Tubman Is a Great Choice, Not a Politically Correct One [by Jim Geraghty, April 21, 2016]. And National Review’s Charles Cooke tweeted “What is ‘politically correct’ about a gun-toting Christian revolutionary who helped John Brown and willfully defied federal law?”

Needless to say, National Review Editor Rich Lowry [Email him] is especially effusive about Tubman—sample quotes:

• “Literally a freedom fighter.”
• “A biopic-worthy life of bravery and idealism”
• “Tubman is inarguably an exemplary figure”
• “The “Moses” of the Underground Railroad”
• “A biopic-worthy life of bravery and idealism”
• “A symbol of all the nameless persons held in bondage in early America”

What’s In Your Wallet, NRO, April 22, 2016

While the neoconservatives once complained that Tubman was elevated to be equal to the founders and great Americans of the Civil war, Cooke [Email him] now asserts on Twitter that Tubman was indeed as important: “Harriet Tubman was a freedom fighter in just the way that the Founders were. Same North Star. Same ‘promissory note.’ Even higher stakes.”

Red State’s Leon Wolf even suggests that Tubman was as, or even more consequential, than Lincoln and Grant, in the fight to save the Union and abolish slavery.

There are so many figures who were central to our great Civil War, both in the military sense (like Grant) and the political sense (like Lincoln). But the Civil War was, at bottom, a spiritual fight. It was won on the battlefields of Shiloh and Gettysburg, but these battles would never have been fought if not for the inspirational figures like Frederick Douglass, John Brown, and Harriet Tubman.

[Harriet Tubman is an Excellent Choice for the $20 Bill, Red State, April 20, 2016]

It would take volumes to debunk all the myths about Tubman, but it’s worth noting that her new Conservatism Inc. fans particularly tout her fervent Christianity. But as James M. McPherson noted, she suffered from a head injury which caused “what her biographers variously term ‘temporal lobe epilepsy’ or ‘narcolepsy’ or possibly ‘cataplexy.’” And as Kate Clifford Larson explains it in her biography of Tubman, Bound for the Promised Land: Harriet Tubman, Portrait of an American Hero, Tubman’s head injury “coincided with an explosion of religious enthusiasm,” driven by a “lifetime of potent dreams and visions that, she claimed, foretold the future.” In any other historical figure, this apparent heterodoxy would generate as much unease as Mitt Romney’s Mormonism. But Conservatism Inc. needs it to sway the rubes.

When Big Brother finally breaks Winston Smith in George Orwell’s 1984, Smith does not acknowledge defeat. Instead, he describes his prior hatred of Big Brother as a “cruel, needless misunderstanding”. The novel ends: “It was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.”

This pathetic Conservatism Inc. embrace of Tubman is no different. Rather than fight for principles they professed to believe just a few years ago, they have “won a victory” over themselves. In defeat, they have elected to believe they are victorious.

If we had  men  like Rich Lowry instead of Andrew Jackson during the Seminole Wars or the War of 1812, they’d be pretending that the Scott Massacre or burning down the White House was their idea.

Donald Trump, Glorious Leader of the White Race, has come out and defended our heritage against the vicious Jews who are plotting to replace Glorious Leader (1828) with a talking monkey on the $20 bill.

New York Post:

Donald Trump on Thursday called Andrew Jackson’s ouster from the $20 bill an act of “pure political correctness” and said Old Hickory should stay put — even if it means printing a new currency denomination.

“Andrew Jackson had a great history. I think it’s very rough when you take somebody off the bill,” Trump told NBC’s “Today” show. “Andrew Jackson had a history of tremendous success for the country.”

…

“Yes, I think it’s pure political correctness (to replace Jackson). (He’s) been on the bill for many, many years and really represented somebody that was really very important to this country.”

The face of Jackson, a slave-holder who was America’s seventh president and who has been roundly criticized in modern times for forcing Native Americans off their land, will be bumped to the back of the $20s when new bills are designed and unveiled in 2020, officials announced Wednesday.

The only reason GL (1828) forced those savages off “their” land is to protect the White people they kept attacking and slaughtering. They were killing kids, raping and killing women – it was a horrorshow with these tree-monkeys.

So when anyone says Jackson was wrong for removing corn stew, what they are actually saying is that more White children and women should have been murdered by these red barbarians.

And these idiot Blacks whining about it know absolutely nothing. Jackson defended Negroes as well as Whites from the red menace. During the War of 1812, at the Battle at Fort Mims, this terrorist Tecumseh sent his half-breed generals, Peter McQueen and William Weatherford, in to slaughter all the unarmed Black slaves along with the Whites.

The Red Sticks – Tecumseh’s Creek Indian terrorist group led by the higher-IQ half-breeds – were ISIS-tier. Jackson put them down, but didn’t slaughter all of them like he obviously should have, and a bunch of them – including Weatherford – escaped and joined Seminole terrorists in Florida.

And Jackson himself was half-SJW. When Weatherford eventually surrendered, he didn’t have him executed, instead letting him move to Alabama and return to his initial profession as a plantation owner. Negro slave plantation owner, by the way.

Jackson also adopted a red Indian child, apparently due to White guilt. The boy was an orphan from the war he won against the Creek terrorists. He raised the boy beside his own biological son, and even tried to get him into West Point before he died.

So honestly, there is nothing anyone can complain about with this man – whether you’re a racist or an SJW, there are things to admire in him.

But he was a strong White male, so much be destroyed – burned on the alter of Black Justice.

Instead of “In God We Trust,” the new $20 bill will feature the inscription “U aint no me, muffugguh, Sheeeeeeiiiit.”

Andrew Jackson, one of the most badass White men to ever step foot in the New World, is being removed from the $20 bill to be replaced by a female talking monkey.

New York Times:

The Treasury Department will announce on Wednesday afternoon that Harriet Tubman, an African-American who ferried hundreds of slaves to freedom, will replace the slaveholding Andrew Jackson on the center of a new $20 note, according to a Treasury official, while newly popular Alexander Hamilton will remain on the face of the $10 bill.

Other depictions of women and civil rights leaders will also be part of new currency designs.

The new designs, from the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, would be made public in 2020 in time for the centennial of woman’s suffrage and the 19th Amendment to the Constitution. None of the bills, including a new $5 note, would reach circulation until the next decade.

It was unclear whether details of the unexpectedly sweeping changes would win over some women’s groups, who had sharply criticized Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew for reneging on his 10-month-old commitment to put a woman on the face of the $10 bill, which is the one currently in line for an anti-counterfeiting makeover.

Allegedly, they won’t introduce it until 2030.

So we need to fix these problems by then. That is the revolutionary deadline. If they seriously put this monkey on our money, it’s officially over.

Andrew Jackson was the best guy. He crushed the Jew bank.

Actually, the deadline is a lot sooner than that. We need to get it together. You all need to be devoting significant parts of your week to spreading the message. I need to talk more about this. Do it on social media, do it in comments sections, maximize it. We are gaining huge traction, but we could be gaining a lot more if people developed stringent schedules for spreading propaganda.

Who is Harriet Tubman?

Harriet Tubman is an actual monkey who was taught to talk by Benjamin Franklin when he was high on cocaine and thought it would be funny.

Turns out, it wasn’t funny.

It wasn’t funny at all.

Once possessing the ability for human speech, Tubman fomented a terroristic revolution which came to be known as “The Banana Bonanza.”

If it were not for the heroic actions of Davy Crockett and Pat Boone, who led a group of skinheads to put down the The Banana Bonanza using outrageous, genocidal tactics, Tubman would have established a Planet of the Apes style dictatorship in America.

The talking monkey Tubman was considered the worst terrorist ever until 2007, when communist Jews began telling college students she was a hero of social justice.