Dinesh D´Souza: Case Study in the Roman Domination of “Protestant” Christianity and “Christian” America

If you follow American politics, you’ve almost certainly heard of Dinesh D´Souza.

His books and documentaries are mandatory for the Republican Party faithful and his trial and conviction were beamed into every American home by all the major media making him a lightning rod for the Hegelian circus of “Conservative” verses “Liberal”.

What you don’t know about Dinesh D´Souza will explain to you why he’s a household name in politics and why the Jesuit-run Vatican dominates world affairs as surely as when kings asked permission of the Pope for every major decision, national or personal.

D´Souza was born and raised in Mumbai, India, in the region of Goa.

Vanity Fair tells the story (with its usual Leftist spin on D´Souza’s “Blue Pill”¹ “Conservatism”).

Through a Rotary exchange program he ended up, at age 17, in a small town in Arizona.  After “crushing the S.A.T.’s,” he landed at Dartmouth. … With support from a charismatic professor, Jeffrey Hart, who was a senior editor at William F. Buckley Jr.’s The National Review, the group founded The Dartmouth Review, with the aim of challenging in the most offensive ways possible what they saw as liberal campus claptrap.  Under D’Souza’s editorship, the paper published a “lighthearted interview” with a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, accompanied by a staged photo of a black man hanging from a tree; an article about affirmative action entitled “Dis Sho’ Ain’t No Jive, Bro,” written in Ebonics; and the names of members of the Gay Student Alliance.  In his memoir, Stress Test, former Treasury secretary Tim Geithner, who attended Dartmouth at the same time as D’Souza, recalls running into him at a coffee shop and asking him “how it felt to be such a dick.”

But William Francis² Buckley Jr. wasn’t just any old “Conservative”.  He was a devout Roman Catholic³, Yale Skull and Bones⁴ CIA operative⁵ whose specialty was being the Vatican’s pied piper to the Right.

Similarly, the “philanthropic” Rotary International has been a “secular” handmaid of the Vatican since its inception; first being outlawed as “Satanic” but then being welcomed into the fold by Popes John Paul II and Jesuit Francis I.⁶

Former Federal Reserve Bank of New York Chairman, Timothy Franz Geithner, is best known as the Barack Obama Leftist Treasury Secretary who neglected to pay his own taxes.  He’s in good company, though.  None of the Ruling Elite do.  This was particularly ironic during the 2016 election cycle where it was admitted that, between the two millionaires Americans were given as their “choice” for President of the United States, neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton “pay their fair share”.

Although Geithner’s father was a Jew, he is said to have been raised Episcopalian⁷ and sources like Wikipedia tout his Mayflower Puritan background as Protestant Christian bona fides.  A United Church of Christ minister officiated his marriage and they are just as far-Left as the Episcopal Church; promoting everything from homosexual marriage to abortion.⁸

Vanity Fair insists that the key to D´Souza’s success was simply being an acerbic Dartmouth “Conservative”.

D’Souza allows that some of his behavior may have been “sophomoric.”  But, as the leader of the young conservative counter-Establishment, he got national attention.  “Here I am.  I’m 20 years old, 21, and I find myself being written about in The New York Times and Newsweek,” D’Souza recalls.  Soon after graduation, he parlayed his young fame into a stint as managing editor of a right-wing quarterly, Policy Review, before landing a job in the Reagan White House as a domestic-policy analyst.  Seeing a career in government as a slog, in 1989 he accepted a job offer from the American Enterprise Institute, the pre-eminent conservative think tank.

He could easily have spent the next couple of years churning out dry policy pieces.  Indeed, his first few books went nowhere.  But in 1991, his Illiberal Education was a smash hit: an exhaustively researched takedown of the political correctness that was sweeping college campuses and that he believed was undermining academic standards and chilling freedom of thought.  His editor, Adam Bellow (son of novelist Saul Bellow), had urged D’Souza to aim to engage even liberals, and D’Souza did just that.  The book put on the map a conversation that was necessary at the time, and it became a best-seller, getting rave reviews and prominent cover placement in The Atlantic, The New York Review of Books, and The New Republic.  “Illiberal Education was terrific,” recalls Andrew Sullivan, then the editor of The New Republic.  “He had a sharp intellect and a gift for provocation, in a good way.”

D´Souza was getting promoted by powerful Romans and their Jewish minions.⁹

In Bellow’s highly-praised 1964 novel (published the year of his death) Herzog, the protagonist (Moses Herzog), “temporarily” converts to Catholicism.  In real life, Bellow’s second wife, Sacha (born “Sondra Tschacbasov”), did convert…permanently.¹⁰

Solomon “Saul” Bellow was a Lithuanian Jew who was raised in Roman Catholic-controlled Chicago, much like Saul Alinsky.

The University of Chicago was subsidized by “Baptist” John D. Rockefeller but Bellow biographer James Atlas admits that there was a preference for Communist Jews—and a quaint saying pointed to who was behind it all:

That fall, Bellow enrolled at the University of Chicago.  It was a shocking transition.  Founded in 1889 with a grant of $600,000 from John D. Rockefeller, the university had its origins in the strong Baptist community that established itself on the South Side during the middle of the nineteenth century; it was, however, an ecumenical institution and had received generous support from prosperous Chicago Jewish families such as the Rosenwalds and the Mandels (after whom the university’s Mandel Hall is named).  Even in its early days, when the Ivy League universities still maintained strict quotas, Jews in significant numbers entered the University of Chicago—and not just the children of wealthy Jews.  “Candidates for higher degrees, schoolteachers, casual listeners from the city, `irregulars’ of all kinds, immigrants and native born, Jew and gentile, rich and poor, orthodox believers and atheists, all walked the campus together,” wrote Hugh Dalziel Duncan in Culture and Democracy.  The chief architect of this intellectual efflorescence was Robert M. Hutchins, the university’s president, a determined proponent of general education.  “An Aristotelian and a Thomist,” as Bellow described him, “he saw to it that the huge fortunes amassed in slaughterhouses and steel mills were spent teaching generations of students the main achievements of Western culture.”  The centerpiece of Hutchins’s curriculum was the Great Books—Chicago shorthand for the idea that the classics of Western civilization should form the basis of a liberal-arts education.  (A joke around Hyde Park in those days: Chicago was a place where Jewish professors taught Roman Catholicism to Protestant students.)¹¹

Former New Republic Editor Andrew Sullivan is touted as, at least “former Conservative” but the New Republic has always slanted Left and Sullivan is “openly gay and a practicing Roman Catholic”.^{12, 13}  Sullivan is the type of flawed, schizophrenic, sexual deviant Larry Craig “Conservative” the Left love to gloat over:

Like many a preacher and politician before him, Andrew Sullivan, the neoconservative gay pundit, was caught with his pants down.  The story goes like this: Some time ago, Sullivan, who is HIV positive, took out an anonymous personal ad on a website called Barebackcity.com, which advertises itself as the “one stop source for bareback [i.e., unprotected anal] sex.”  He listed himself under the screen name “RawMuscleGlutes,” posted two headless photographs, and solicited bareback sex, preferably (although he did not say only) with other HIV-positive men.  He also indicated an interest in “bi-scenes, one-on-ones, three-ways, groups, parties, orgies and gang bangs,” but not in “fats and fems.”  Sullivan’s identity was discovered by other visitors to the site, possibly by someone with whom he had a sexual encounter.  The story simmered on gay Internet bulletin boards before breaking last week in the pages of LGNY in an article written by Michelangelo Signorile,¹⁴ the gay columnist who came to fame during the whole “outing” controversy a decade ago and who has recently called upon health officials to shut down gay bath houses to reduce unsafe sex.  Sullivan confirmed the substance of Signorile’s account in a response he posted last Thursday to his own website (AndrewSullivan.com) titled “Sexual McCarthyism: An Article No One Should Have to Write.” ~ The Nation

Whether bipolar “Conservative” Catholic or Chicago Communist Jew, all were getting behind Dinesh D´Souza.

“Suddenly, I just became a huge mainstream celebrity in the intellectual world,” says D’Souza, who was inundated with speaking invitations.  He also became a hot commodity among blonde conservatives.  After dating Laura Ingraham and then Ann Coulter, he found the ultimate prize in Dixie Brubaker, a beautiful blonde from a conservative California family, whom he had met while working in the White House; they married in 1992.  D’Souza admits, “It was my mission to marry the all-American girl.”

Popular pundit Laura Ingraham may also be considered a schizophrenic “Conservative”.  Although she, too, is a very devout Roman Catholic, she has eschewed marriage and proudly adopted three children.  She probably figures the astounding $45 million net worth makes up for missing a daddy, even in the eyes of the Church.  Sadly, it doesn’t.

Ann Coulter is identified as “non-denominational Christian” but her father was a very devout Roman Catholic and an FBI agent.¹⁵  The blonde bomb-thrower is known for being “ultra-Conservative” yet she has stumped for some shady characters from Senator Joseph McCarthy to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.¹⁶  What do the two of them have in common?  —They, too, were/are Roman Catholic.¹⁷  Perhaps there is a Jesuit or two in her closet.

Coulter is a also multi-millionaire and all of their help and influence was skyrocketing Dinesh D´Souza past the pedestrian pundits to promote him as a peer.

Emboldened by the success of Illiberal Education, he pushed his argument further, in 1995, with The End of Racism. … It was another best-seller, but this time the press denounced it as insensitive. …

But, D’Souza says, “I didn’t believe that sensitivity had a legitimate place in the debate.  Sensitivity was the reason why the debate had the artificiality it did.  Everyone has to walk on eggshells…  And I’m like, ‘I’m not going to do that…  I didn’t do any of this to you.  So I don’t owe you anything.’”  He ditched Washington for his wife’s hometown of San Diego and got a job at the Hoover Institution, Stanford’s conservative think tank. ~ Vanity Fair

In alternative media, it is a foregone conclusion that the Central Intelligence Agency bears the brunt of the responsibility for 9/11; as much as it does for the assassination of sitting President John F. Kennedy.

As I have stated previously: the CIA is an organization founded and run by Roman Catholics.

If Vatican treason was behind 9/11, Rome has a champion of distraction to blind the American Right in Dinesh D´Souza.  The title for his 2007 book explains why:

The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11

Even “Evangelicals”¹⁸ were giving him their “mega-church” podiums.

D’Souza’s other beat had been Christianity (with such books as What’s So Great About Christianity and Life After Death), and he eventually gained entrée to the mega-church speaking circuit.  In venues such as Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church, in Orange County, which claims to have more than 20,000 congregants, D’Souza says he was selling 800 books in a day.  He’d never encountered the American masses before, but they seemed to love him. ~ Vanity Fair

This was the kind of “Christianity” that made Manhattan’s Protestant King’s College offer D´Souza a seven-digit salary to be their President.  King’s was under new management and looked to make a comeback with D´Souza.

In 1994, beset by financial woes, King’s closed and declared bankruptcy but reopened in 1998 under Campus Crusade for Christ’s (CCC) ownership. ~ Rediff

Unfortunately, not everyone agreed.  Provost Marvin Olasky resigned after D´Souza’s selection and many bystanders linked the Conservative pundit as the reason.^{19, 20, 21, 22}

Olasky is, himself, an interesting figure, having transitioned from Hungarian Jew through Communist and Atheist to American “Evangelical”.

Once again, the word “Evangelical” is in no way threatening to the Vatican.  In fact, the Jesuit “flagship” periodical, America magazine²³ sought him out for his opinion on the 2016 Presidential election.  When Father Sean Salai, S.J. queried Olasky about being “evangelical Protestant”, he balked.

Salai: In your monthly Insiders Survey of 103 evangelical leaders and influencers, published by World Magazine, U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) consistently polled as the “top presidential pick of evangelical insiders” from last August through February.  How did Mr. Rubio’s withdrawal from the presidential race affect this opinion?

Olasky: In our survey toward the end of March, three-fourths named Ted Cruz as their top pick; 15 percent were for John Kasich, 5 percent for Donald Trump.  Almost half said they were disappointed by the way things were going, and a slight majority said they would write in a name or abstain from voting if Trump and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton became the only options.

Salai: Why did Marco Rubio, who is Catholic, appeal to evangelical Christian insiders more strongly than a Southern Baptist like Ted Cruz?

Olasky: Mr. Rubio is articulate, able to unite different parts of the G.O.P. and seems to have a biblical worldview.  Mr. Cruz was a strong second and also appeals to evangelical Christian leaders.

Salai: World Magazine, which you edit, bills itself as a leading news source for Christian right evangelical Protestantism.  How do you define this group and what kind of readers do you reach within it?

Olasky: Do we bill ourselves that way?

Olasky, too, has had help becoming a recognizable political pundit.

Today a curious realignment appears to be under way.  A generation of conservative scholarship has discredited and undermined faith in the efficacy of most government social programs.  Meanwhile, a varied group of public figures, writers, clergymen, academics, and denizens of think-tanks has developed its own version of conservative social policy, one that, ironically, calls for nothing less than a radical change in how Americans should think about and behave toward the poor.

Foremost among this group is Marvin Olasky, a professor of journalism at the University of Texas.  His 1992 book, The Tragedy of American Compassion, went largely unnoticed for two years until it appeared on reading lists handed out to freshmen Congressmen (and anyone else who asked) by the newly elected Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.  Since then, Olasky has become a much-sought-after speaker and conference-goer; his views are cited with regularity and respect in the press; and together with the writer Arianna Huffington, he has founded a center to promote his vision of “effective compassion.”  His new book, Renewing American Compassion, for which Gingrich has provided a foreword, partly recapitulates material presented in his earlier work and partly attempts to lay out a plan for setting his new policy in motion. ~ Commentary Magazine

Like many other Congressional House Speakers—from John McCormack, Tip O’Neil, Tom Foley and Nancy Pelosi on the hard Left through John Boehner and Paul Ryan on the anemic Right—Gingrich is Roman Catholic.^{24, 25}  Although Newt is a convert, his third wife Callista is a life-long and devout Roman Catholic.  Perhaps that is why “Protestant” President Donald Trump (who spent two years with the Jesuits at Fordham before transferring to the “public” University of Pennsylvania) made her the United States Ambassador to the sovereign city-state.

But, publicly, Olasky supported the selection of D´Souza.

Marvin Olasky, provost at The King’s College, said that D’Souza brings a particular set of gifts that impressed the board.

“I don’t think the board was making any general statement.  It was a particular hire, a specific hire,” said Olasky, a Presbyterian Church in America elder who is a member of Redeemer Presbyterian Church.  “A president of a college who can reach out and speak to new audiences for King’s and help to give us a financial footing is doing a very good job of what these days is the key role of the president.  I think that’s the logic of it.”

Olasky, who is also editor-in-chief of World Magazine, said that out of 21 full-time faculty, one professor is Roman Catholic.

“I know there’s some concern on the part of some evangelicals about the direction of King’s because of Dinesh’s background.  But he, in my view, is certainly heading in the right direction.  What I can do is work to make sure that the academic program remains firmly in the Protestant, evangelical tradition.”

From an institutional perspective, D’Souza said that he has not seen anything in the literature at King’s that says “Protestant.” ~ Christianity Today

What was the secret to D´Souza’s meteoric rise?

Dinesh D´Souza was born and raised Roman Catholic.

Not only was he born and raised Catholic, but he was educated at Jesuit St. Stanislaus High School in Mumbai.

To this very day he refuses to renounce his past while he continues to be presented as “Christian” and even “Evangelical”.

Another source that has been helpful to D´Souza has been Charles Wendell “Chuck” Colson’s Prison Fellowship.

Colson was Special Counsel to Richard Nixon and served seven months in prison for conspiring to cover up the Watergate burglaries.

When he emerged, he was presented to the public as a devout “Christian” determined to reform the prison system, but even more determined to bring Protestants back into the Roman fold.

Colson was a principal signer of the 1994 Evangelicals and Catholics Together ecumenical document signed by leading Evangelical Protestants and Roman Catholic leaders in the United States. ~ Wikipedia

Another notable signatory of “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” was former President of the Southern Baptist Convention, current President of Southern Evangelical Seminary in Charlotte, North Carolina, and Executive Editor of The Christian Post, Dr. Richard Land.

For a “Conservative Evangelical”, Land has taken some questionable stands.

For instance, in the wake of a supposed mass-shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut (an event that I have conclusively and repeatedly shown you was a false flag), Land joined nearly 50 other “faith leaders”—many of them also “Baptists”—in begging President Barak Obama for more “gun control”.

Prison Fellowship has been dominated by Catholic officers whether overtly or covertly such as former Chairman Mike Timmis, a dedicated Catholic and Knight of Malta, or current Chairman James Ackerman whose mother is Father Knows Best actress Elinor Donahue, a Roman Catholic convert.

In 2009, D´Souza was interviewed by Colson’s periodical BreakPoint,²⁶ and no distinction was made between the words “Christian” and “Catholic”.²⁷

Stan Guthrie: I served as an editor and consultant for D’Souza on Life After Death and interviewed D’Souza about his life as a Christian apologist.

Dinesh D’Souza has been no stranger to controversy, whether editing the Dartmouth Review as a student or taking on the American left.  D’Souza has worked for the Reagan Administration, the Heritage Foundation, and the American Enterprise Institute.  A native of India and now a U.S. citizen living in California, he has written several notable volumes, including Illiberal Education.  D’Souza sparked outrage with his 2007 book, The Enemy at Home, in which he argued that the American cultural left bears responsibility for provoking militant Muslims into the September 11 terrorist attacks.  Facing a firestorm of criticism from the left and the right, D’Souza refused to back down.

Since then he has begun writing works on Christian apologetics and debating atheists such as Christopher Hitchens and Peter Singer.  In 2007 he authored What’s So Great about Christianity for Regnery.  And recently, Regnery released D’Souza’s latest, Life After Death: The Evidence, in which he attempts to make the case for an afterlife without resorting to religion, “because I am making a secular argument in a secular culture.”

I served as an editor and consultant for D’Souza on Life After Death and interviewed D’Souza about his life as a Christian apologist.

BreakPoint: You’ve worked for a president, Ronald Reagan.  You’ve debated some of the world’s greatest minds.  Now you’ve made the move into Christian apologetics.  First you write “What’s So Great about Christianity” and now “Life After Death”.  What has brought you from there to here?

Dinesh D’Souza: My faith has deepened over the past several years, since we moved to California in 2000.  But my work remained secular.  When I saw the new atheism, and saw how it was being lionized in the media, I suddenly recognized I had an opportunity to bring my Christian faith and my intellectual work closer together.  So I am delighted to be focusing now on Christian apologetics, although I still have one foot in secular culture.  I don’t see this as a problem because I’d like to take the apologetic argument mainstream, to have it aired out not merely in the Christian media but also on CNN, USA Today, and so on.

BreakPoint: What brought you to Christ?

Dinesh D’Souza: I was raised Catholic in Bombay, India.  The Portuguese missionaries came to India starting in the 16th century.  Somewhere along the line, they seem to have located one of my ancestors and brought him to Christianity, possibly by whopping him over the head.  It was the age of the Portuguese Inquisition.  Hey, I’m glad it happened, although I’m not sure my hapless ancestor would agree.  Even so I sometimes say I was raised with “crayon Christianity.”

This is a simplified Christianity, and too many of us learn this from our parents and never outgrow it.  We never develop a mature Christianity that can withstand the assaults of secular culture.  I married an evangelical Christian in 1992, and after our daughter was born in 1995, we started attending a nondenominational church in the Washington D.C. area.  But my faith remained lukewarm, wounded, you might say, by the influences of secular culture.  Only when we moved to California did we start attending a Calvary Chapel church, and I found people who took their Christianity very seriously and whose faith shaped their whole life.  This also began to happen with me.  Basically I went from being a crayon Christian and a lukewarm Christian to being a mature and passionate Christian. …

BreakPoint: Have you modeled your apologetics writing and debating on anyone in particular, and, if so, who?

Dinesh D’Souza: C.S. Lewis.  He was the most successful Christian apologist of the 20th century.  Lewis was trained in medieval literature.  He brought those secular scholarly credentials to bear on his Christian writings, and that gave him a credibility and authority that was unique in his time.  Also Lewis had magnificent range.  He could write for adults and he could write for children.  He wrote fiction and nonfiction.  He was an effective speaker and radio commentator as well as a good writer.

On the other hand, Lewis didn’t do debates.  The times were different, and of course the issues he confronted were sometimes different.  The big question after World War II was why a just God might allow something so terrible as a Holocaust.  Today, however, we are confronted with different questions: Does evolution discredit Christianity?  Does 9/11 and the behavior of the Islamic radicals show the evil social impact of religion?  Has new research in brain science invalidated the possibility of life after death?  We need a new apologetics for the 21st century, but Lewis remains our inspiration and guide.

BreakPoint: You seem to me to be much like Chesterton in that you’re willing to name names and be very direct in skewering an opponent’s position.

As an apologist for Darwinian “Evolution”, D´Souza further alienated himself from men like Olasky yet further ingratiated himself with his Roman backers.

I recently explained to you how Rome, along with selected human shield Jews, has altered our reality and called it “science”.

For instance, Albert Einstein’s “Special Theory of Relativity” does explain how “gravity” makes you feel “relative” to a stable, flat plain instead of a ball spinning faster than the speed of sound…it’s just too complex for you to understand.

Consequently, “conspiracy theorists” have begun to question whether the Jewish scientist was trying to deceitfully pull the collective wool over our eyes.  The fact that his close friend was a Jesuit-trained Belgian Catholic priest named Georges Lemaître has nothing to do with it, we’re sure!

However, I must mention that Lemaître is the astronomer who rose to the occasion and provided an answer on behalf of Darwinian evolutionists for the question, “If this all happened by random chance, how did it start without God?”  Lemaître’s response can basically be summarized as “First there was nothing, and then it exploded”.  The “scientific” phrase is “Big Bang Theory”.

One wouldn’t expect a Jesuit-trained Catholic priest to be so helpful to the Darwinians but in 2014 the Jesuit Pope, himself, reaffirmed that both “evolution” and the “Big Bang” are “real”.

Jesuits have run to the aid of floundering Darwinians more than you know.

But here, too, the Vatican controls both sides of the “debate”; giving you a good show but always insuring that you lose.

As far back as 1985, “agnostic”²⁸ biologists like Michael Denton were calling Evolution “A Theory in Crisis”.

Denton is Senior Fellow at what Wikipedia labels the “pseudo-scientific” Discovery Institute ²⁹ based in another strongly-Catholic city, Seattle, Washington.  It was founded and remains Directed by journalist and politician Bruce Chapman who is, of course, a Roman Catholic.

Discovery is a proponent of “Intelligent Design” which acknowledges all other fraudulent aspects of “science” but shows the flaws of macro evolution.³⁰  It promotes biologists such as Lehigh University’s Michael Behe.³¹  Behe is also a Roman Catholic who went to Bishop McDevitt High School in Harrisburg but then attended the “public” University of Pennsylvania, much as Donald Trump and a surprising number of other notables have.

Perhaps it’s no coincidence that D´Souza models himself after Clive Stapleton Lewis, dear friend of John Ronald Reuel Tolkien.  As we’ve already detailed for you, the one was a Chuck Colson “Ecumenist” and the other a devout Roman Catholic.

It’s certainly no coincidence that BreakPoint’s “Evangelical” journalist Stan Guthrie likened D´Souza to famed apologist Gilbert Keith Chesterton, a Knight Commander of the Papal Order of St. Gregory.

Chesterton was, at least, honest about the Church of England being “Catholic Lite”.

Chesterton married Frances Blogg in 1901; the marriage lasted the rest of his life.  Chesterton credited Frances with leading him back to Anglicanism, though he later considered Anglicanism to be a “pale imitation”.  He entered full communion with the Catholic Church in 1922.^[13] ~ Wikipedia ³²

Russell Ronald “R. R.” Reno III, Editor of First Things magazine,³³ noted this about King’s College appointing an unrepentant Catholic as President—

King’s College is an undergraduate institution in Manhattan.  Revitalized by Campus Crusade a decade or so ago, it was moved to the Empire State Building.  The college was meant to bring Christ to Babylon, and to bring Christian students into the hurley-burley of a global city.

Today King’s announced the appointment of Dinesh D’Souza as its new President.

A talented man who has spoken up for faith in the public square, D’Souza would seem a natural choice—except for the fact that he is Catholic.

Surely we’re at an interesting juncture in American religious history when a prominent Catholic is tapped to head up an Evangelical College.  A very interesting juncture.  It will be interesting to see how the Catholic thing works out.

In the meanwhile, I wish D’Souza every success.

Why would Russell Ronald Reno III wish Dinesh D´Souza “every success”?  —Because, like Chesterton, he left “Catholic Lite” (baptized Episcopal) to enter into “full communion” with Rome.  It was enough credibility to teach “theology and ethics” at Jesuit Creighton University.

Maybe King’s did make a mistake after all.

Maybe Campus Crusade for Christ, who resurrected King’s from bankruptcy, had skewed priorities…or maybe they really were on a “Crusade”.³⁴

Campus Crusade’s founder William “Bill” Bright endorsed Evangelicals and Catholics Together, along with 700 Club’s Pat Robertson.

Still, it did create a storm for some old dyed-in-the-wool Protestant curmudgeons.  Here’s more context from the Rediff piece mentioned earlier:

Dinesh D’Souza, the Mumbai-born controversial conservative scholar, has been appointed president of The King’s College in New York City — a move that has surprised many high education observers because D’Souza, a Roman Catholic, will now take over the helm of the historically evangelical Protestant institution.

King’s College, a liberal arts college, which operates out of rented space in the Empire State Building and has about 450 students who are essentially educated and trained to be evangelists or as The Christian Post says “to bring competitive Christian ideas to positions of leadership in the institutions of government, civil society, media, law, education, business, the arts, and the church,” describes itself as a nondenominational school whose “roots are in the Protestant evangelical tradition.”

In 1994, beset by financial woes, King’s closed and declared bankruptcy but reopened in 1998 under Campus Crusade for Christ’s (CCC) ownership.

Forty-nine-year-old D’Souza’s arrival to King’s College coincides with the school’s transition into becoming an independent entity once again after 12 years of support from CCC. …

D’Souza, who will become the school’s fifth president, will succeed J Stanley Oakes who announced last December that he was retiring, and take over the reins from interim president Andy Mills who said, “We are thrilled to welcome D’Souza as the new president.”

Can we consider this a Campus Crusade condition?

But the fact that D’Souza is an avowed Christian apologist has prompted questions as to how Catholic he is and how Protestant the Campus Crusade for Christ-affiliated school is.

Obviously in an effort to defuse the swirling questions and rumours that the appointment of D’Souza, considered one of the most influential conservative authors and speakers with access to loads of funding from foundation grants and fellowships, could boost the school’s standing, the new president himself addressed the dichotomy of a Catholic heading a Protestant evangelical institution in an interview with Christianity Today.

Billy Graham’s Christianity Today is touted as “evangelicalism’s flagship magazine”.

One wouldn’t expect such a venue to come running to the aid of a decision to make a Jesuit-trained Catholic the President of a Protestant College…or would one?

He said, “I’m quite happy to acknowledge my Catholic background; at the same time, I’m very comfortable with Reformation theology.  I’m comfortable with the evangelical world.  In a sense, I’m part of it.”

D’Souza said, “I do not describe myself as Catholic today.  But I don’t want to renounce it either because it’s an important part of my background.  I’m an American citizen, but I wouldn’t reject the Indian label because it’s part of my heritage.  I say I have a Catholic origin or background.  I say I’m a nondenominational Christian, and I’m comfortable with born-again.” …

Here, D´Souza evinces completely incorrect usages of the terms “Catholic” and “Christian”.

It’s tough to be “comfortable with born again” when you’re being burned alive, slowly having your arms rotated out of their sockets or having urns of water forced through a rag into your throat, and then having the rag ripped back out—all punishments inflicted on Christians by Catholics.³⁵

What’s more, this is exactly why Rome is so pleased to use many who are not active Catholics but who have a strong Catholic influence in their lives, past or present.

In the absence of any other powerful influence, Rome easily fills the vacuum.^{36, 37}

D’Souza argued that “a lot of times, Christians spend a lot of time in intramural type debates and squabbles: Are you Catholic or Protestant; if you are Protestant, what type are you; are you pre-millennial; what position do you take on Genesis 1?”

“I would comfortably describe myself as a born-again Christian, but I don’t feel it is necessary to renounce anything,” he said, and added: “I am not doing Catholic apologetics, that’s for sure.”

I wouldn’t call John Foxe’s Book of Martyrs—a massive chronicle of Roman persecution of Christians—an “intramural squabble” but perhaps someone trained by the Jesuits would.

From an institutional perspective, D’Souza said that he has not seen anything in the literature at King’s that says “Protestant.”

“Being a Protestant is a term defined in opposition to Catholicism and refers to a set of historical battles over denominational issues,” he said.  “As far as I can tell, those denominational issues are not the center of what’s being argued today.  I do think evangelicals and Christians generally need to be more competitive in the secular marketplace of ideas.” ~ Christianity Today

Certainly, “it wasn’t in the fine print” might work in court (where D´Souza would soon find himself) but that does seem a little disingenuous for a “Christian”.

Technically, he’s right.  King’s (the one in Manhattan, not the Catholic school in neighboring Pennsylvania that is given top billing by Google)³⁸ doesn’t have a “Mission Statement” so much as an “About” page and, it’s true, the word “Protestant” is nowhere to be seen.  Maybe it was Marvin Olasky who was out of place there.

It is absolutely fascinating—one might even say, “Divinely Ordained”—to find out that Olasky was the instrument through which Dinesh D´Souza was pulled from grace.

About 2,000 people gathered on Sept. 28 at First Baptist North in Spartanburg, S.C., to hear high-profile Christians speak on defending the faith and applying a Christian worldview to their lives.  Among the speakers: Eric Metaxas, Josh McDowell, and—keynote speaker for the evening—best-selling author, filmmaker, and Christian college president Dinesh D’Souza.

D’Souza’s speech earned him a standing ovation and a long line at the book-signing table immediately afterward.  Although D’Souza has been married for 20 years to his wife, Dixie, in South Carolina he was with a young woman, Denise Odie Joseph II, and introduced her to at least three people as his fiancée.

Finally, near 11 p.m., event organizer Tony Beam escorted D’Souza and Joseph to the nearby Comfort Suites.  Beam noted that they checked in together and were apparently sharing a room for the night in the sold-out hotel.  The next morning, around 6 a.m., Beam arrived back at the hotel and called up to D’Souza’s room.  “We’ll be down in 10 minutes,” D’Souza told Beam.  D’Souza and Joseph came down together, and Beam took them to the airport.

The next day another conference organizer, Alex McFarland, distressed by D’Souza’s behavior, confronted him in a telephone conversation.  D’Souza admitted he shared a room with his fiancée but said “nothing happened.”  When I called D’Souza, he confirmed that he was indeed engaged to Joseph, but did not explain how he could be engaged to one woman while still married to another.  When asked when he had filed for divorce from his wife, Dixie, D’Souza answered, “Recently.”

According to San Diego County (Calif.) Superior Court records, D’Souza filed for divorce only on Oct. 4, the day I spoke with him.  Under California law, that starts the clock on a six-month waiting period for divorce.  D’Souza on Oct. 4 told me his marriage was “over,” said he “is sure Denise is the one for me,” and said he had “done nothing wrong.”

The episode is a strange twist in D’Souza’s otherwise meteoric rise in the evangelical world.  He developed a reputation among evangelicals with a string of best-sellers, including The Roots of Obama’s Rage, which spawned a movie, Obama: 2016, which has now grossed more than $30 million.  He broke into the Christian conference and megachurch market in 2007 with the release of a book that year, What’s So Great About Christianity.

D’Souza now receives speaking fees sometimes in excess of $10,000 from Christian groups, putting him in the top tier of Christian speakers.  In 2010 he became president of The King’s College, New York City, which is supported by Campus Crusade for Christ, now called Cru.  At that time he moved from California to New York, with his wife staying in California.

D’Souza said King’s board chairman Andy Mills has known about his marital trouble for at least two years.  Mills confirmed that through a spokesman, Mark DeMoss, who added that Mills was “hopeful about restoration and both he [D’Souza] and Andy were praying to that end.”  DeMoss said The King’s College board met by conference call to begin “looking into the situation.”  D’Souza participated in a portion of that call, DeMoss said.  Following that meeting, on Oct. 15, D’Souza wrote in a text message to me: “I have decided to suspend the engagement.”

The King’s board plans further discussion at a regularly scheduled meeting on Oct. 17 and 18, DeMoss said. ~ WORLD News Group

World News is edited by Marvin Olasky.

The reporter who broke the story, Warren Cole Smith, used to work at King’s College until D´Souza let him go.

Not everyone at the school had been pleased with Mr. D’Souza’s appointment.  Marvin Olasky, the school’s provost, left.  “It will come as no surprise to you that Dinesh D’Souza and I have different ideas about some things,” he was quoted as saying in Christianity Today.

Another figure whose affiliation with the school came to an end was Warren Cole Smith, a consultant whose contract Mr. D’Souza chose not to renew.

Both men played a role in Mr. D’Souza’s departure: Mr. Olasky is the editor in chief of World Magazine, the publication that broke the news of Mr. D’Souza’s marital circumstances.  Mr. Smith reported and wrote the article.

“I did not seek out the story,” Mr. Smith said Thursday.  “I happened to be a speaker at the same conference as Dinesh, and because the organizers of the conference knew that I knew Dinesh, when they were presented with this information they came to me.”

He added, “We made the determination that it was newsworthy because Dinesh is a prominent Christian leader and was engaged in behavior that would generally be considered unacceptable for Christian leaders.  So I felt like I needed to verify with on-the-record sources that it was true, and when I did that, to write the article.” ~ The New York Times

Particularly ironic was how D´Souza used his now ex-wife Dixie as his Evangelical cred.

It gets worse.  D´Souza’s mistress, Denise Odie Joseph II,³⁹ was also married at the time.

It was only inevitable:

After a marathon meeting to decide his fate, the board of trustees of The King’s College, a small evangelical school based in Manhattan, announced Thursday that conservative author Dinesh D’Souza had resigned as president.  Former president and current chairman Andy Mills, who made the announcement to faculty and staff, will return as interim president for a third time.”God has a mighty future for Dinesh, but there are some things he has to go through first,” Mills said after breaking the news to King’s students Thursday afternoon.  “I have to admit, I got a bit over-enamored with him.”  Mills assured students that most of the college’s funding and scholarships come from board members, not from D’Souza’s connections. …

It was not immediately clear whether the board’s decision was driven by the allegations of the affair, or by dissatisfaction with D’Souza’s leadership that had been building at the college for months.  At the meeting Thursday, Mills did not give details of the board’s conversation about D’Souza or give reasons for his departure.  Representatives for the college did not respond to requests for comment.

According to several sources at the college, members of the King’s faculty and board alike had grown unhappy with D’Souza’s presidency over what they saw as a failure to earn his salary.  D’Souza has spent much of the past few months promoting his documentary, 2016: Obama’s America, and his high profile in the media was seen as rarely benefitting the college.  It may even have been seen as a detriment: According to a former staffer familiar with the college’s public relations, King’s employees have been explicitly tasked with disentangling D’Souza’s extracurricular activities from the college’s reputation.  D’Souza became a non-presence on the college’s official Facebook page throughout 2012, which staffers say was no coincidence.

In two articles published after the board meeting Tuesday by Christianity Today and Fox News, D’Souza lashed out against World’s report on his relationship, denying that he had ever shared a hotel room with Joseph and accusing the magazine of libel.  ~ The Daily Beast

In D´Souza’s defense, Obama’s America was all the rage at the time.  It had been produced by Jewish Steven Spielberg’s Mormon Director, Gerald Molen, renowned for such films as Schindler’s List and Jurassic Park.⁴⁰

Molen would again lend his talents to D´Souza for Hillary’s America in 2016 and they would get a send-off by Conservative Catholic Hollywood star Jon Voight.

But in 2012, D´Souza was humiliated and discredited.  He needed something terrible to garner sympathy from a stuffy Fox News-watching American Right.

—And the Federal Bureau of Investigation (run by secret Roman Catholic James Comey) delivered!

In fact, D´Souza claims that Comey allocated $100,000 for investigation.

WHY I’M SMILING TODAY: This capo James Comey allocated $100,000 to investigate my $20 K case–all to please his mob bosses Holder & Obama pic.twitter.com/XHdnvspNYz

— Dinesh D’Souza (@DineshDSouza) May 9, 2017

Again, in D´Souza’s defense, this is the same James Comey who said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong by ducking government security failsafes and sending thousands of unencrypted e-mails through a private server.

Normally, only an extremely seedy character would do such a thing to avoid the most heinous of crimes—trafficking in women, children and/or drugs, high treason, etc.—but we absolutely trust Director Comey’s judgement.

For the FBI, there are times to show up in camouflage, body armor, toting military assault rifles and arriving at 3 AM in armored trucks used in the “Global War on Terror” and then there are times to politely knock and immediately accept “NO!” as an answer.

FBI Director James Comey acknowledged Tuesday that his agency failed to get access to Democratic National Committee servers and the smartphone of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman allegedly hacked by Russia in the 2016 presidential race.

Thousands of emails from the servers and Chairman John Podesta’s device were stolen, then made public during the race, which Clinton lost to Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

But the FBI’s repeated requests for access to the devices were denied.  So the agency instead had to rely on the findings of a “highly respected private company,” Comey said.

“Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server involved,” he said in a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing about Russia’s intelligence activities during the election.

Comey said he didn’t know why the FBI was denied access.

He testified along with CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.  They spoke publicly for the first time since their agencies last week briefed Capitol Hill leaders, President Obama and Trump about the alleged Russian hacking and released an unclassified report on their findings.

Normally, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation is investigating a matter of national security, they aren’t so shy.

In fact, I wouldn’t recommend you attempt this, yourself.  I don’t know of too many other instances where the FBI can be so easily dissuaded or that the Director was clueless as to why his massive, powerful organization didn’t do its job.

Perhaps it had something to do with John Podesta’s night life.

Actually, the only other instance I can think of where the FBI forgot it owned the authority of the world’s only Superpower government was during the investigation of the Alfred Kinsey “Sex Institute” at Indiana University.  It was widely alleged that Kinsey and his “sex researchers” had encouraged and enabled a broad range of pedophiles, traffickers and rapists under the rubric of “science”.  Kinsey and his associates kept meticulous notes, data and correspondance locked away on the Indiana University campus.

In 1957, it came to light that the Nazi governor of the World War II-occupied Polish towns of Jędrzejów and Tomaszów Mazowiecki, Fritz von Ballusek, had been raping, sodomizing and abusing a shocking number of the children under his authority, to include his own.  He continued his activities even after the war and was guided and encouraged by none other than “Doctor” Alfred Kinsey.⁴¹

Dr. von Balluseck⁹³ was an incest offender who raped and sodomized not only his own offspring, but Jewish, Polish, and German children as well, from roughly 1927 to 1957.  The German press reported Kinsey’s visit to Frankfort during his world tour in 1956.  Little else is available regarding the German stopover, or if Kinsey met with Balluseck, and there was no mention of Kinsey’s visit to Frankfort in the approved writings about Kinsey’s European travels.¹⁸⁷

German judges, police and national government officials were (are) just as corrupt as their American counterparts.  The frauds at the Federal Bureau of “Investigation” politely asked Kinsey and Indiana University for the evidence that showed he had collaborated with and encouraged a serial child rapist and sadistic psychopath.  Both Kinsey and Indiana U. courageously stood their ground and refused the timid G-men. …

In Germany, after decades of raping and torturing children “Doctor” von Ballusek walked free from the death of the one little girl he finally went to trial for slaughtering. ~ Eaters of Children ⁴²

Given the other fibs D´Souza was caught in, we can also throw a flag on whether or not he was actually engaged to the already-married Denise Odie (no hyphen) Joseph II.  But if they were, the “engagement” was, indeed, “broken off”.

It also seems that Denise Odie (no hyphen) Joseph II’s marriage to Dr. Louis Joseph survived the scandal because two years later the two were seen…sort of…at the “Save Venice Enchanted Ball”.

The “Save Venice Enchanted Ball” competes with other critical philanthropic enterprises such as world hunger, human trafficking and saving endangered species from extinction by gathering New York’s Elite, having them put Dionysian masks on and generating millions of dollars to preserve the art and culture of Venice.

Professional photographer Ken Arcara caught them for “Guest of a Guest”.

But in the case of what the FBI “uncovered” regarding D´Souza’s misdeeds, they weren’t taking a John Podesta, Alfred Kinsey / Indiana University “Thanks but no thanks,” for an answer.

On January 23, 2014, D’Souza was charged with making $20,000 in illegal campaign contributions to the New York Senate campaign of Wendy Long and causing false statements to be made to the Federal Election Commission.^{[132][133][134]}  His attorney responded to the charges by saying his client “did not act with any corrupt or criminal intent whatsoever” and described the incident as “at most…an act of misguided friendship”.^[135][136]  Gerald Molen, who co-produced the 2012 film 2016: Obama’s America with D’Souza, stated that the indictment was politically motivated retribution for the success of that film.^[72]  Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz felt that the charges were unfair: “The idea of charging him with a felony for this doesn’t sound like a proper exercise of prosecutorial discretion…. I can’t help but think that [D’Souza’s] politics have something to do with it…. It smacks of selective prosecution.” He went on to say such alleged campaign violations are common in politics.^[137]

On May 15, 2014, United States District Judge Richard M. Berman rejected the contention that D’Souza was singled out for prosecution, stating, “The court concludes the defendant has respectfully submitted no evidence he was selectively prosecuted.”^[138]

On May 20, 2014 D’Souza pleaded guilty to one felony count of making illegal contributions in the names of others.^[139]  On September 23, 2014, the court sentenced D’Souza to five years probation, eight months in a halfway house (referred to as a “community confinement center”) and a $30,000 fine.^[15][16] ~ Wikipedia

Wendy was an old friend from Dartmouth who didn’t have a chance.  She was massacred in an attempt to unseat Leftist Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand (also an alumnus of Dartmouth).  The Wikipedia entry is inaccurate.⁴³  Long was running for United States Senate from the State of New York.

From a “Machine” point of view, Long was still relatively safe.  As a lawyer who clerked for devout Roman Catholic Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas she would fit right in.

If you only read “user-edited” Wikipedia, you would see that Wendy would’ve been a risk to the complete domination of Congress by Roman Catholics—

Wendy Elizabeth Stone was born on June 21, 1960, in Worcester, Massachusetts,^[1][2] but grew up in a small town in New Hampshire.  She was “raised as a Congregationalist in a New England Yankee family.”^[2]

It is noteworthy that Long is not a native of New York (and neither are the vast majority of the other “elected” politicians in Washington, or throughout history and around the world for that matter.⁴⁴)

But what’s more, the source for her “Congregationalist” upbringing in Massachusetts was a National Catholic Register piece bragging that Wendy is a convert to Roman Catholicism!

Wendy Long, the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, will square off tomorrow against her Democratic opponent, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, in their first and only debate before the November election.

The two well-credentialed candidates are polar opposites on abortion, religious freedom and marriage. Long, a Catholic convert and veteran activist on social and judicial issues, will do everything possible to make her platform the more compelling choice for New York voters.

“There could not be a more clear contrast between longtime pro-life leader Wendy Long and Emily’s List poster child Senator [Kirsten] Gillibrand,” stated Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, a nondenominational organization that raises funds for pro-life politicians, in an enthusiastic endorsement.

Yet Long and Gillibrand have several important things in common: The Democratic senator was raised Catholic, and both women received undergraduate degrees from Dartmouth College — and top ratings from the National Rifle Association

Even the anemic “Conservative” running without a prayer against an entrenched Leftist is still completely controlled by Rome.

The National Rifle Association can give Gillibrand all the kudos she likes, she’s only one vote in 50 at the Federal level while the State of New York suffers draconian and confiscatory gun laws rail-roaded into place by far-Left Roman Catholic Governor Andrew Cuomo, son of far-Left Roman Catholic Governor of New York, Mario Cuomo.⁴⁵  Perhaps the NRA doesn’t know it’s being played, giving a far-Left United States Senator 2^nd Amendment credibility when she is the antithesis of everything NRA members value.

But then again, maybe the NRA does know what it’s doing.  It, too, is dominated by Roman Catholics like Wayne LaPierre, who was trained in lobbying by the Jesuits at Boston College.

Or maybe Wayne spoke to Clarence Thomas at Mass and they decided it was okay to help Senator Gillibrand maintain her seat.

When propaganda plays are put on, they are populated by Papists from beginning to end.  For a sickening 20 years, FBI Agent Robert Philip Hanssen helped prop up the Soviet Union to keep the Cold War alive with a constant stream of stolen intelligence.  After two decades it finally became clear that he couldn’t keep it up any longer so a Jesuit-trained Agent named Eric O’Neill ³⁵ was given the privilege of finally making the collar.  By “coincidence”, Hanssen (a devout Roman Catholic) attended the same Opus Dei parish as the Director of the FBI, Louis Freeh.  In fact, St. Catherine of Siena boasts several other well-known parishioners from “Republican” Senator Rick Santorum to Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Robert Alito.^{36 37}

When reporting on St. Catherine’s many attendant power players, the Leftist New Republic suddenly became unusually respectful of the supposed arch-nemesis of the far-Left and simply stated “the head of the National Rifle Association” went to Mass there as well.  Perhaps that’s because so few Americans know that, like clownish “gun-advocate” Ted Nugent,³⁸ former NRA President Wayne LaPierre is a devout Roman Catholic.

Perhaps now we can see how, despite earning a salary in excess of five million dollars, LaPierre and the NRA frequently betrayed / betrays gun owners.

LaPierre was replaced as NRA President but maintains his insurgency for Rome as Chief Executive Officer.  His successor, Oliver North was raised Roman Catholic.  North is supposedly a Protestant now, yet he still gives generously to Catholic causes. ~ The D.C. Snipers Were Vatican Assassins ⁴⁶

Again, according to “user-edited” Wikipedia, Kirsten Gillibrand’s religious affiliation is a mystery and the National Catholic Register isn’t overt about it either.

Early life and education

Kirsten Elizabeth Rutnik was born in Albany, New York, on December 9, 1966, the daughter of Douglas Paul Rutnik and Polly Edwina Noonan. Both her parents are attorneys, and her father has also worked as a lobbyist.^[1]  Her parents divorced in the late 1980s.^[2]  Gillibrand has an older brother, Douglas Rutnik, and a younger sister, Erin Rutnik Tschantret.^[3][4]  Her maternal grandmother is Dorothea “Polly” Noonan, a founder of the Albany Democratic Women’s Club, as well as a leader in Albany Mayor Erastus Corning’s powerful political machine, which lasted for more than 40 years.^{[1][3][Note 1]}  She has English, Austrian, Scottish, German, and Irish ancestry.^[5]

During her childhood and college years, Gillibrand used the nickname “Tina.” She began using her birth name of Kirsten a few years after law school.^[3]  In 1984, she graduated from Emma Willard School, an all women’s private school located in Troy, New York,^[6] and then enrolled at Dartmouth College.^[3]  Gillibrand majored in Asian Studies, studying in both Beijing and Taiwan.  While in Beijing, she studied and lived with Connie Britton.^[7][8]  Gillibrand graduated magna cum laude in 1988.^[9]  While at Dartmouth, she was a member of the Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority.^[9]  During college, Gillibrand interned at Republican U.S. Senator Alfonse D’Amato’s Albany office.^[10]  Gillibrand received her J.D. from UCLA School of Law and passed the bar exam in 1991.^[11]

It seems Wikipedia not only missed the fact that Gillibrand is Roman Catholic, but that she attended, not one, but two wealthy private all-girls schools.  The second one was Academy of the Holy Names in Albany—an affluent Catholic prep school.

Great news- Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who attended Holy Names K-Grade 8, is returning to campus! She’ll be here… http://t.co/aybZoI228d
— Holy Names – Albany (@AHNalbany) October 1, 2014

Oddly, there are a great many far-Left Catholics in government like Gillibrand, pushing a host of agendas that give Catholic constituents fits, yet Senator Kirsten and her kin remain in good standing with the Church.

Oh, Alfonse D´Amato?  —He’s Catholic, too.

In fact, the New York Times was pleased to print D´Amato’s letter explaining that what I found to be the Catholic Church’s foundation of child abuse that spans her entire existence back through to when she was the Roman Empire was actually just a brief “unfortunate time in [C]hurch history”.^{47, 48}

It was clear to Jesuit-educated Catholic Dinesh D´Souza that his Catholic convert friend Wendy didn’t have a prayer against her entrenched far-Left Catholic opponent so he didn’t give her the help she kept asking for in personal appearances.  Instead, he took the easy way out and donated the maximum $10,000 to her losing campaign…and then he donated again…and again.

Why not?  Dinesh was doing very well for himself financially.  He seemed to be getting all the right breaks.

D´Souza made one of those “straw donations” through his assistant, Tyler Vawser, and Vawser’s wife.  Vanity Fair noted:

Vawser was concerned; according to court documents, D’Souza assured him it was fine.  If anyone should ask about it, D’Souza said, Vawser should say that he knew Long and that he supported her candidacy.  When Long later asked D’Souza about these unusually large contributions, D’Souza assured her that the individuals had the means.  Despite the trail of untruths, D’Souza casts the act as one of generosity of spirit and misguided friendship.  “All of my friends supported Wendy Long, but none of them supported her like this.  Why?  They were too smart to do it… I felt inwardly that I should do more.  I felt an obligation to do more.”  Not so obligated, it should be said, that it was worth fund-raising the legal way—like traveling to Westchester to meet with a group of Indian doctors.

The other donation he made through his married mistress, Denise Odie (no hyphen) Joseph, II and her husband.⁴⁹

Even more interesting, Catholic convert Wendy long “reattributed” half of the donation Denise Odie (no hyphen) Joseph, II’s husband, Louis, made.

The Vawsers, unfortunately, got stiffed.

As far as Vanity Fair and reporter Evgenia Peretz could see, one tragedy fed another—compounded greatly by the lies of Dinesh D´Souza.⁵⁰

D’Souza felt indestructible, and he was on a roll.  Weeks after orchestrating the illegal contributions, he brought Joseph along to a conference in South Carolina.  The subject was how to apply a Christian worldview to one’s life, and D’Souza was the keynote speaker.  He introduced Joseph as his fiancée to several people, even though both of them were still married to others.  Alas, a reporter named Warren Cole Smith from the Christian publication World Magazine discovered that he and Joseph were sharing a room.  Six days later, Smith called D’Souza to ask how he could be engaged when he was still married.  D’Souza replied that he had filed for divorce “recently.”  When Smith checked, it turned out that D’Souza had filed for divorce that very day.

But was there something more at play?

Both Warren Cole Smith and Marvin Olasky were in the perfect place and time to strike back at their nemesis.

Andrew Sullivan’s New Republic certainly covered it as a “schadenfreude” vendetta.

By odd coincidence, Smith also works at Chuck Colson’s BreakPoint.  In fact, he’s the Chuck Colson Center Vice-President of Mission Advancement.⁵¹

When D´Souza went to court, it certainly seemed like United States District Court Judge Richard M. Berman was of the hangin’ sort.

District Court judges aren’t elected by you, they’re selected by your President.  Being a good Fordham grad and Leftist Roman Catholic, Jesuit-trained President Bill Clinton⁵² selected Berman for New York’s Southern District—the Jesuits had trained Berman in “social work” just as they did Barack Obama in “community organizing”.⁵³

Berman took over from Judge Kevin Thomas Duffy—also a Roman Catholic, and fellow alum of Fordham where the Jesuits trained him to be a lawyer.

Judge Duffy was also a Left-leaning Catholic “hangin’ judge”…at least when it came to those dastardly Muslims.

From his seat on the bench, Judge Kevin Thomas Duffy listened patiently to the man he would soon put in prison for the rest of his life.

The man, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, was the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and he was not going away quietly.  He said he was proud to be a terrorist, and lashed out at the United States and Israel.

When it was time for Judge Duffy to respond, he did so not by citing the law, but another authority: the Quran.  It was a somewhat startling moment that reflected how the judge, who retired on Sept. 30, drew upon a broad range of knowledge during his nearly 44 years on the federal bench.

Judge Duffy cited several verses from the Quran, including one that offered tolerance for nonbelievers.  “Your God is not Allah,” he told Mr. Yousef. “You worship death and destruction.”

Judge Duffy, 83, is best known for presiding in three of the country’s biggest federal terrorism trials, all in Manhattan in the 1990s.  Two trials stemmed from the trade center attack in 1993, which killed six people and injured more than 1,000; a third involved a plot, hatched in Manila and not carried out, to blow up a dozen passenger airplanes as they crossed the Pacific. ~ The New York Times

The Prosecutor, Andrew McCarthy, is also Roman Catholic.  He does, however, break from the strangle-hold of Jesuit-trained United States Judicial officials in the Southern District.  McCarthy didn’t go to Fordham, he went to Columbia.  He only teaches at Fordham.

If this seems like a Roman run-around designed to make fall-guys out of hapless Muslims and perpetuate a fraudulent “Global War on Terror”, it gets better.

The FBI had a man on the inside of the 1993 “terror cell”: the group’s bomb-maker, Emad Salem (an Egyptian Intelligence operative).  When Salem told his FBI contact that he was being pressured to build a bomb, the FBI told him, “Build it!”

Salem was shocked.  He thought he was being set up and began recording his conversations with the FBI.

The bomb did get built, eventually killing 6 and wounding over one thousand.  The FBI excuses ranged from “we lost track” to “we were going to substitute fake powder”.  The Agent entrusted with not “losing track” was John P. O’Neill…also a Roman Catholic.

Oddly, Salem was not called as one of Andrew McCarthy’s witnesses against the “terror cell”.

Judge Richard Berman ascended to “Senior Status” in the Southern District on an interesting date: September 11^th, 2011.

Judge Berman seems to hold a special interest in both illegal immigration and children, having written such interesting papers for the New York Law Journal as “Special Immigrant Juvenile Status”, “A Team Model to Identify Child Abuse,” “Seven Steps to Protect Children,” and “Community Service for Juvenile Offenders”.

Very often, criminals will mask their private behavior by going to the opposite extreme in their public life but that’s just conjecture here.  I’m sure Judge Berman has nothing to do with helping the Vatican traffic children (something even easier to do when they aren’t natural-born citizens).

But it hasn’t been all terrorists and child traffickers for Judge Berman.

On September 3, 2015, Berman ruled in favor of Tom Brady, the New England Patriots’ quarterback, overturning a four-game suspension imposed by National Football League (NFL) Commissioner Roger Goodell pursuant to an investigation that found footballs used by the Patriots in the 2015 NFL Playoffs were under-inflated.  The judge found that the investigatory materials used by the NFL as evidence in support of the suspension were not shared either with the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) or with Brady.  Berman ruled the withholding of these materials hindered Brady’s ability to appeal.  The suspension was lifted, allowing Tom Brady to begin playing immediately. ~ BallotPedia

Tom Brady?  —He’s Catholic, too.

Tom Brady met Saint John Paul the Great. Then won 5 Superbowls. pic.twitter.com/H1LRwzhAXW

— Fr. Zach Kautzky (@frzachk) February 6, 2017

But Dinesh D´Souza was a broken and penitent man.  He was terrified of real prison and came up with some interesting ways to avoid it.

D’Souza also wrote his own letter to Berman, beginning with: “When I think about what I did, I am filled with a sense of sheer frustration, exasperation and regret.  I cannot believe how stupid I was.  … I have already paid a price for this behavior in having the FBI investigate me, having handcuffs behind my back and being exposed to public disgrace and embarrassment.”

In his letter to the judge, D’Souza suggested that he might teach English to immigrants or work with the Boys and Girls Club in lieu of going to prison.  It was a notion supported in several letters to Berman, including one penned by Molen.  “It is my prayer that in your consideration and determinations you will see him as he is, a most remorseful and penitent man, determined to make amends and give service to his community.  I therefore ask for leniency on his behalf,” Molen wrote.

D’Souza’s sentence, in fact, did include one day of community service for each week of his probation, including while he is in the confinement center, which is a facility near D’Souza’s home in San Diego.  Insiders say he will be free to leave the center by day, but he must spend his nights there.

Also weighing in on D’Souza’s behalf via a letter to the judge was radio and TV personality Laura Ingraham, who wrote of her time working with D’Souza on the Dartmouth Review, a conservative, alternative newspaper founded in 1980 to counter the university’s more liberal official newspaper.

“When other students partied at frats, Dinesh worked as a stringer for a Catholic newspaper to make a few dollars,” wrote Ingraham.  “Having come to the U.S. as a 17-year-old exchange student from India, Dinesh didn’t have ‘spending money.’  He made it all himself.  Classmates teased him because he possessed exactly one pair of shoes (with huge holes in the soles!).  I didn’t care — Dinesh was teaching me how to write a news story, edit copy, track down sources and most importantly, to stay firm in my principles.” ~ The Hollywood Reporter

It certainly helps to have a powerful millionaire Catholic ex-girlfriend at your side when you need one.

There’s been an interesting side-effect to D´Souza’s “community service”.

His community service, teaching English to Mexican immigrants, some of whom are undocumented, has softened his stance on immigration.  He once had a credo that “the quality of the immigrant is directly proportional to the distance traveled to get here…  But I now see that the adults in my class are incredibly industrious, determined, and hardworking, and no less strenuous in their pursuit of the American Dream than any other immigrant group.” ~ Vanity Fair

Perhaps this “softening” helped him meet his current wife, Debbie Fancher.

Fancher, 50, immigrated from Venezuela at age 10.  She was working for a Republican group in Texas when she discovered some Spanish-language videos of Bill Ayers promoting socialism in South America.  She reached out to D’Souza to see if he’d be interested in them, given he had recently debated the controversial leftist, and the two began dating shortly thereafter. ~ The Hollywood Reporter

While the United States government has smeared, fabricated or framed a sickeningly large number of “domestic terrorists” over the years, William “Bill” Ayers legitimately deserves the title.

In 1970, Ayers’ terrorist group, the “Weather Underground” went on a bombing spree.

The Weather Underground claimed responsibility for roughly a dozen bombings.  Targets included the Pentagon, the Capitol, police stations, banks and courthouses. ~ The Washington Post

Supposedly, the only deaths involved were three hapless bombers in Greenwich Village.

On March 6, 1970, a bomb exploded prematurely inside a town house at 18 W. 11th St. in Greenwich Village.  Three Weathermen were killed — the two building the bomb, Terry Robbins and Diana Oughton, and another, Ted Gold, who was entering the building. ~ The New York Post

But across the country at that time, another very Catholic city suffered: the San Francisco Police Department’s Park Station was bombed.  It could’ve been a bloodbath but only one officer was killed: Sergeant Brian McDonnell.  McDonnell was a good Roman Catholic who has been laid to rest in Holy Cross Cemetery, Colma, California.

Ayers’ terror group has been blamed, but only unofficially.

Ten years later, members of the Weather Underground joined with the Black Liberation Army and shot several police officers.  Sergeant Ed O’Grady died⁵⁴ in 1981.  He was a good Catholic, too.

He had been a sergeant for four years and was close to completing credits at St. Thomas Aquinas College in Sparkill for his Bachelor of Science degree in criminal justice. ~ The New York Times

He was laid to rest at Saint Anthony’s in Nanuet, New York.

Ayers and his terrorist co-conspirator / “life partner” Bernardine Dohrn raised the child of two friends arrested, tried and jailed for the crime; David Gilbert and Kathy Boudin.

In New York City at that same time, two more Catholic officers were shot: Richard Rainey and John Scarangella.  Rainey survived, Scarangella did not.  A street and park have been named after him.  His funeral and burial took place at Blessed Sacrament Catholic Church in Bayside.  In 2015, Rainey died at the age of 67.  He was laid to rest near his friend at Blessed Sacrament.

Another twenty years after that (thirty years since the bombings occurred), the New York Times printed a story on real domestic terrorists Ayers and his co-conspirator / life partner Dohrn; it was published on September 11^th, 2001. ^{55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62}

Despite being unrepentant terrorists—

“I don’t regret setting bombs,” Bill Ayers said.  “I feel we didn’t do enough.”

—Ayers and Dohrn fared far better with the FBI and Justice system than did poor Dinesh D´Souza.

Mr. Ayers, who in 1970 was said to have summed up the Weatherman philosophy as: “Kill all the rich people.  Break up their cars and apartments.  Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at,” is today distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago.  And he says he doesn’t actually remember suggesting that rich people be killed or that people kill their parents, but “it’s been quoted so many times I’m beginning to think I did,” he said.  “It was a joke about the distribution of wealth.”

He went underground in 1970, after his girlfriend, Diana Oughton, and two other people were killed when bombs they were making exploded in a Greenwich Village town house.  With him in the Weather Underground was Bernardine Dohrn, who was put on the F.B.I.’s 10 Most Wanted List.  J. Edgar Hoover called her “the most dangerous woman in America” and “la Pasionara of the Lunatic Left.”  Mr. Ayers and Ms. Dohrn later married. …

Between 1970 and 1974 the Weathermen took responsibility for 12 bombings, Mr. Ayers writes, and also helped spring Timothy Leary (sentenced on marijuana charges) from jail. …

Ms. Dohrn, Mr. Ayers and others eventually broke with S.D.S. to form the more radical Weathermen, and in 1969 Ms. Dohrn was arrested and charged with resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer during the Days of Rage protests against the trial of the Chicago Eight — antiwar militants accused of conspiracy to incite riots at the 1968 Democratic National Convention.

In 1970 came the town house explosion in Greenwich Village.  Ms. Dohrn failed to appear in court in the Days of Rage case, and she and Mr. Ayers went underground, though there were no charges against Mr. Ayers.  Later that spring the couple were indicted along with others in Federal Court for crossing state lines to incite a riot during the Days of Rage, and following that for “conspiracy to bomb police stations and government buildings.”  Those charges were dropped in 1974 because of prosecutorial misconduct, including illegal surveillance. …

Mr. Ayers is … safe from prosecution …  A spokeswoman for the Justice Department said there was a five-year statute of limitations on Federal crimes except in cases of murder or when a person has been indicted.

It only makes sense that after Ayers and Dohrn received their Get Out Of Jail Free card that they both ended up becoming tenured, highly-respected University Professors, teaching their radical far-Left ideology to your children to help create many future generations like them.

Ayers is an education professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and Dohrn is a law professor at Northwestern University. ~ The Washington Post

It was from their Catholic-dominated city of Chicago⁶³ that Ayers and Dohrn launched the political career of Jesuit-trained “community organizer” Barack Obama.

It is interesting, indeed, that a powerful puppet of Rome on the so-called “Conservative Right” should be paired with a powerful puppet of Rome on the radical far-Left, both for their mutual advantage.⁶⁴

It was such a hit they did it again two years later!

The wedding of Dinesh D´Souza and Debbie Fancher was high-powered but low profile.

At a secret location in San Diego on Saturday, Dinesh D’Souza will take a break from putting the final touches on his anti-Hillary Clinton movie to marry Debbie Fancher.  Officiating is Pastor Rafael Cruz, whose son, Ted, is running for president.

The guest list is being kept under wraps, though it contains some prominent players in conservative politics.  The Hollywood Reporter has learned that pianist Stephen Limbaugh will provide the music, but it’s not known if cousin Rush will attend.

“It’s the second marriage for both of us, so there won’t be a lot of glitter,” D’Souza tells The Hollywood Reporter.  “We’ll have people whose names you’ll recognize, but it’s mostly a family affair and we’d rather not emphasize the guest list.” …

Also invited is Gerald Molen, the Oscar-winning producer of Schindler’s List who is also producing Hillary’s America, which is D’Souza’s upcoming documentary not only about the Democratic frontrunner for president, but also the alleged past sins of her party. ~ The Hollywood Reporter

Picking the father of United States Senator Ted Cruz to officiate at the service was an interesting choice.  Apparently, Debbie Fancher wasn’t just any Venezuelan immigrant, she came well-connected.

The elder Cruz was born in Cuba and joined the Communist Revolution as a teenager.  He regretted fighting for Fidel Castro and escaped Cuba in 1957.  He became an evangelical Christian in 1975 and has been preaching ever since.  D’Souza said he chose him to officiate in part because his fiancee is friends with Pastor Cruz.

Rafael Cruz is also an interesting guy, he is supposedly ex-Cuban, ex-Communist and ex-Catholic.  At this writing, he is alive and single, having divorced both his wives.  He’s a great story for William F. Buckley’s National Review, perhaps not as great as an Evangelical preacher.

Pardon Me?

After the ascendency of “partially” Jesuit-trained Donald Trump to the Presidency, a cry has gone out to pardon Dinesh D´Souza.

According to Vanity Fair, when D´Souza went to trial, he seemed determined to self-destruct.

After the charges came down in January 2014, he cried “selective prosecution,” a serious offense in which the government unfairly targets an individual—in this case, for political retribution.  Alas, D’Souza didn’t have evidence that the president, or Attorney General Eric Holder, or anyone else in the Justice Department, was out to get him.  When he couldn’t get the case thrown out on that basis, he pleaded guilty and claimed to take responsibility for his actions.  The act might have earned him points with the judge, who had the discretion to ignore the sentencing guidelines (from 10 to 16 months of incarceration), but D’Souza seemed to squander the judge’s goodwill by publicly and repeatedly announcing that he was a victim of political persecution.  The judge seemed perplexed.  Why was D’Souza engaging in self-sabotage?  Did he have some kind of psychological affliction?  Why, in the first place, did a man who had achieved so much success so carelessly flout the law when there was so little to gain?  In short, how could such a smart man be so stupid?

In fact, the Jesuit-trained Leftist Catholic Democrat Judge was so “perplexed” as to D´Souza’s behavior, he also ordered him to receive regular psychological counseling.

But now the tide has turned in favor of Dinesh.  He’s back on top of his game and full speed ahead for distractions powerfully used to keep “Conservative” Americans on the Hegelian reservation.⁶⁵

His latest book is now also his latest movie: Death of a Nation.

In it, the unrepentant “former” Catholic claims that the Democrats assassinated Abraham Lincoln, and that they’re looking to do the same to our current Savior, Donald John Trump.

Actually, the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, and even the American Civil War, were Roman plots from beginning to end.  Perhaps Dinesh is as bad at history as Donald Trump is at being taken seriously.

In fact, Donald Trump might even be a candidate for martyrdom; becoming far more useful to his masters after being given the Kennedy treatment.

But if Dinesh D´Souza’s mythologizing of America’s Apprentice President is an ominous presaging of his being done away with, Donald Trump didn’t take it that way.

In fact, he has already pardoned the documentary film-maker.

Will be giving a Full Pardon to Dinesh D’Souza today. He was treated very unfairly by our government!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 31, 2018

—And around, and around we go…

Approximately 36 hours ago, maybe more, I e-mailed Dinesh at his website.  I warned him (whomever runs his site and/or handles his e-mail) that I was about to go to press with an exhaustive column that was sure to look negative but, in the best “Evangelical” tradition, I was obeying Matthew 18 and offering him (them) first look and a chance to respond.  I have not heard back so…bombs away!

UPDATE: My friend Eric gave me a citation from Avro Manhattan which may make the case that the Catholic roots of Dinesh D´Souza have actually been under-stated.  It may be that D´Souza wasn’t just an Indian raised Catholic and educated by Jesuits but comes from a hyper-devout Catholic family that produced Jesuits who helped control the destiny of India.

Delegates of Catholic countries were mostly Catholics, often zealous ones.  These were supplemented by individual Catholics who, although not representing any member nation, yet could powerfully influence important problems e.g. the Chief of the United Nations’ Status of Women Commission;⁶ by members of the Catholic hierarchy sent as official advisers to a national delegation at U.N.O. e.g. Bishop O’Brien, Auxiliary to Cardinal Gilroy, Archbishop of Sydney, as official adviser to the Australian delegation to the U.N. General Assembly (September, 1950); and by individuals representing non-Christian countries e.g. Moslem Pakistan sent Mr. Charles Lobo, former Chief Justice of Sind (1950); Buddhist South Korea sent its Foreign Minister, a most fervent Catholic; Hindu India sent the Rev. Jerome D´Souza, a Jesuit, who, besides being an Indian delegate to U.N.O., was a member of the Parliament of India.⁶⁶