ALL  EYES WILL BE ON FRANCE IN 2017. France is a highly significant barometer of world affairs, a definite nation to watch. Not only is France the “Eldest Daughter of the Church” and the home of an army of saints, she is also poised to disrupt global liberalism, restore the nation’s Catholic patrimony, reconfigure the European Union, and to form a political-economic-cultural link with Russia to bring about the end of liberalism and an era of world peace. If anyone thought the Trump campaign was a saga, just wait until spring 2017 when the global forces of liberalism will be at the throat of Le Pen.

Yesterday, the center right Republican Party of France held the first round of its primary election to choose its candidate for president. Surprising, Nicolas Sarkozy was bypassed by Alain Juppe (who came in second) and by a former prime minister, Francois Fillon (appointed as prime minister by President Sarkozy, 2007-2012) who came from behind to bypass both Juppe and Sarkozy. Since neither Fillon nor Juppe received a simple majority of the vote, according to French election law, there must be a second round run-off, which will occur this Sunday.

Thus, Fillon will now square off against Juppe, who was the favorite, going into the first round, for his party’s nomination as the Center-Right candidate.  The winner of the run-off will go head to head with Marine Le Pen for the presidency of France on April 23, 2017. Right now eyes are focused on Fillon versus Juppe for the Republican nomination. As conservative Republicans, both Fillon and Juppe want to (1) decrease taxes on corporations (offset somewhat by a VAT tax), (2) cut public spending and civil service jobs and are (3) unfavorable toward labor unions and the socially liberal left.

Fillon, however, (in a bid for Catholic votes) has indicated that although not against gay marriage per se, he will abrogate a French law that permits homosexual couples to adopt children; he has also voiced support for President Bashar al Assad of Syria, wishes to expel radical Jihadists and seeks to establish political ties with Russia and Iran.

Juppe, on the other hand, wants to retain political asylum for radical Islamists (engineering some type of in-house detention), favors homosexual adoption and is opposed to Russia, Syria and Iran and therefor to any rapprochement between France (and by extension, the EU) and Russia of the type envisioned by Fillon.

Although Sarkozy has admitted defeat and thrown his support behind Fillon, most apprehensive liberals and hopeful patriots are looking beyond the Fillon-Juppe contest to envision a possible Fillon versus Le Pen contest in the spring of 2017. Marine Le Pen, who just a few years ago was a political nobody, appears to be securely in the driver’s seat. Fillon represents the right, esp on economic issues and Le Pen the far-right, more-so on cultural issues.  She has made great progress revamping and brightening the public image of the National Front at a moment in history that is favorable to much of her party’s platform. Most political experts are expecting Le Pen to ease by the first round of the presidential elections in April as both the center and far right candidates squeeze out the socialists on the left and and then square off against each other in the decisive second round. At this point, things do not seem favorable for either Fillon or Juppe.

Both are opposed to labor at a time of labor unrest throughout Europe and France; both are advocates of deregulation at a time when popular sentiment is aroused against corporate business and international finance desiring to see it reigned in by policies and laws that protect the common good and not just the interests of a few. To make matters worse, both Fillon and Juppe advocate reducing public sector employment to fund tax breaks for the wealthy at a time when public sentiment is soured by austerity and emotional reservoirs are unleashing a pent up demand for justice and an end to what is perceived as greed and exploitation.

The white working class has had enough of both conservative economic policies and of the liberal social agenda. Will they rise in France as they have in Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and the US? While far-right candidates cannot normally expect support from the left; in this case it is the economic woes coming from the right that could trump their disdain for the culture agenda of Le Pen and throw them into her camp along with the white underrepresented worker. Although this is unlikely, it is increasingly possible as the left social agenda has become blatantly appalling to many at the same time that the economy is suffering a severe setback and in need of major structural readjustments.

Fillon, represents a unique challenge to Le Pen. Interestingly, both Fillon and Le Pen are pro-Russian. Fillon also supports immigration quotas and a coalition with Russia to counter terrorism. According to Bloomberg, Fillon, like Le Pen:

“…has consistently backed Russia in Syria since 2012, saying Moscow could be instrumental in resolving the conflict and refraining from calling for Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s removal until the Islamic State is defeated. In 2013, Fillon was a guest of the Valdai forum, which Putin and his foreign policy elite use to communicate Russia’s policy views to Western experts; apart from calling for cooperation in Syria, he expressed hope that Europe would soon abolish short-term visas for Russia.”

 

“Fillon has also been fervently against economic sanctions against Russia following Putin’s Crimean escapade. In April, Fillon welcomed a French parliament resolution that called for lifting the sanctions. He called them “inept and strategically devastating for our farmers” as well as counterproductive. Russia, along with France, is involved in fighting the Islamic State, he reasoned.”

As such, the pro-liberal French media does not support Fillon as it does Juppe and continued liberalism. According to political analyst Eric Verhaeghe, the media in France

“….mainly supports Paris’ alliance with the US and French-German relations. “Yet in reality there is a large part of public opinion in France that (does) not often speak out openly, but know that there can be no balance in Europe without a renewed and consistent alliance with Russia.“

 

“The French elite previously didn’t feel the necessity to express its position on Francois Fillon as they didn’t think he would have had any chances to be elected. But now they see that he poses a real ‘threat’ [to their established relations with Washington and Berlin] and become interested in his program.”

According to Politico, Fillon has referred to Russia as a “crucial partner” for both France and Europe, has advocated lifting EU sanctions against her, and has blamed Western powers for having “provoked” Russia by expanding NATO too close to its borders.

Due to the these similarities between Fillon and Le Pen, “Le Pen boasted that the Republicans’ primary had been fought on her themes: French identity, reconsideration of France’s role in Europe, and a crackdown on immigration and jihadists.” These themes are likely to carry over to center stage during the spring presidential election.

Because of this likely eventuality, Sébastien Chênu, Head of Public Relations for Le Pen, has stated that Juppe would be a preferable opponent for Le Pen; he would be easier to defeat than Fillon:

“Juppe would have made a very good opponent for Le Pen… “He represented privilege, elitism, Europe — everything the French are tired of seeing. And he would not be a very energetic campaigner.”

With the surprise first round primary victory by Fillon, Le Pen must rethink her strategy due to the likelihood of vying with a political opponent less at odds with her Euro-skeptic agenda. Her most probable move will be depicting Fillon as an EU globalist friend of crony-capitalism.

Le Pen recently stated her election as president  would result in the formation of a trio of world leaders (Le Pen – Trump – Putin) that “would be good for world peace”. She also stated that

“There is a worldwide movement. A worldwide movement which rejects unchecked globalisation, destructive ultra-liberalism … the elimination of nation states, the disappearance of borders….The forces at work in these various elections are ideas, forces which could bring about my election as the president of France next May.”

If Fillon defeats Juppe, and chances are he will, France will be running two pro-Putin anti-liberal Middle East military campaign candidates for president. Either way, no matter who wins this election (Fillon or Le Pen), there will be a likely rapprochement with Russia as New Era has been indicating since its inception.

 

 

 

ALL OVER THE WORLD CHRISTIAN affiliated political parties committed to traditional moral values, to economic fairness, and the securing of indigenous cultural patrimonies (being challenged by rampant global liberalism), are making their voices heard and their political clout felt.  Such new parties are to be found in France, Greece, Poland, Hungary, the Philippines, Nigeria, Uganda, Malaysia, Russia and Slovakia to name the most prevalent (Scroll Down to “Fast Track to Truth” at newera.news). A similar occurrence is taking place in the United States. Although the Republican Party is by no means a new party, it has activated a previously uninvolved group of white rural  married (presumably Christian men or men rooted in traditional moral values) who, like people worldwide, have had enough of the global liberal agenda and are therefore rising in, what the New York Times refers to as a “stunning repudiation of the establishment”. These previously latent men have made their voice heard; that voice was the unexpected and decisive factor in the election of Donald Trump to the presidency with the expectation that the president-elect will take the country back from those few among the rich and powerful who are misusing their blessings to advance a rebellious clash with Western culture.

“The Reuters/Ipsos early exit poll found that 75 percent of respondents agreed “America needs a strong leader to take the country back from the rich and powerful.”

Mr. Trump has not yet taken the Oval office and he is already being warned by the aberrant rich and powerful that liberals worldwide are going to raise their guns in opposition. First, he was warned by Hilary Clinton in her concession speech in which she promised a peaceful transition in the best American tradition.  Apparently, her showing up to make a concession speech, rather than resisting a Trump victory and refusing to show at all, is all that can be expected from the Clinton camp — her showing up and being cordial represents her idea of a peaceful transition. Although she did not complain and acted civilly, she wasted no time rallying the troops against Trump.  Hilary gracefully accepted defeat, as is expected in America. However, those who are expecting peace are in for quite a surprise. Clinton’s idea of a peaceful transition has already been witnessed; it took place on stage this morning – that is, the transition is over. After accepting Trump as president in the morning, it was all out war a few hours later, as she had indicated in her speech.

Her first words were a veiled threat:

‘”Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans.”

Yes, Hilary offered to work with Donald, but on the condition that he will be successful for “all” Americans. She gracefully conceded and offered him an open mind and a “chance” to lead.

“Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and a chance to lead,”

He will be given a chance, a slim chance. If President Elect Trump does not bring “success” to “all” (LGBT language)  or should he trespass on any liberal agenda item that Clinton believes is necessary for “progress” she will not work with Mr. Trump but against him. She used her speech to rally the troops urging them not to join forces with the new president but to fight on.

“I know we have still not shattered that highest and hardest glass ceiling, but someday, someone will, and hopefully sooner than we might think, right now (double intendre-perhaps).”

Ms. Clinton put Trump on warning: Although she honors the peaceful American transfer of power, she will not remain peaceful should her agenda be challenged.  In other words, she is not behind the president at all, nor will she give him any chance to advance new ideas or initiatives if she thinks they oppose her agenda.

“Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power and we don’t just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things: the rule of law, the principle that we are equal in rights and dignity, freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values too and we must defend them.”

Hilary is banking on the law and the “rule of law” protecting her and the liberal legion against Mr. Trump; that is why she refers to the “enshrined” rule of law.  In other words, Mr. Trump we (the liberal camp) have spent over a hundred years perverting the laws of this country and too bad, you must follow them – so fat chance of success; the LGBT community now has the protection of law. Unfortunately, for Ms. Clinton, with both Houses of Congress and the Presidency in the hands of Republicans backed by a new cohort of Christian men, laws are about to change.

Clinton might be right on the topic of equality of human rights and dignity and on freedom of worship, but she is wrong about “expression”, which she erroneously tries to sneak in on the coattails of the former correct three. Error does not have any rights. Thus, Pope Pius XI wrote in his encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge:

“Charity, intelligent and sympathetic towards those even who offend you, does by no means imply a renunciation of the right of proclaiming, vindicating and defending the truth and its implications. The priest’s first loving gift to his neighbors is to serve truth and refute error in any of its (expressed) forms. Failure on this score would be not only a betrayal of God and your vocation, but also an offense against the real welfare of your people and country.

Hilary seems to lack cognizance of the fact that God too is a person and as a Divine Person, he too has rights, Divine Rights:

“It is part of their (the clergy) sacred obligations to do whatever is in their power to enforce respect for, and obedience to, the commandments of God, as these are the necessary foundation of all private life and public morality; to see that the rights of His Divine Majesty, His name and His word be not profaned; to put a stop to the blasphemies, which, in words and pictures, are multiplying like the sands of the desert; to encounter the obstinacy and provocations of those who deny, despise and hate God, by the never-failing reparatory prayers of the Faithful, hourly rising like incense to the All-Highest and staying His vengeance.”

Although error does not have rights, those in error do.  However, one of those rights is not the arrogant expression of their error. Arrogant expression of ones ideas and aberrant thoughts cannot be a right because human ideas can obviously be erroneous or sinful, in which case, they conflict with Divine Ideas. When that happens, there is a violation of God’s rights. Natural Law and Divine Law are superior to any human law; unless of course, the United States Constitution is accepted as the supreme law of the land, even higher than the Law of God.  Hilary, is banking on this long-standing American verity; supreme court justices acting under the penumbra of the US Constitution have given error rights. Nonetheless, although error may be tolerated, it does not have an absolute right to exist especially no right to arrogantly exist:

“In the social life of nations, error may be tolerated as a reality, but never allowed as a right. Error “has no right to exist objectively nor to propaganda, nor action” (Pius XII Speech Ci Riesce 1953)

All rights are contingent upon human necessities, on those basic things necessary for life and the pursuit of happiness (food, clothing, shelter, education etc.), on those things that are necessary for human advancement, that is the actualization of human potential for wisdom, understanding, and knowledge as well as growth in love and the moral and theological virtues that help men and women to bear fruit and to live the beatitudes. Unlike items in the liberal; agenda, none of these items conflicts with the mind and will of God as He has made them known in the life and teachings of His Divine Son, Jesus Christ.

Hilary pushes the bar to the extreme. She stated in her concession speech that “our constitutional democracy…demands our participation…so let’s do all we can to keep advancing the values and causes we all hold dear.”

In other words, it is the sworn obligation of democratic government, as understood by Hilary Clinton, to demand the participation of aberrant thoughts, words and ideas in the public forum, in the courts, schools, and halls of congress while those professing Christian ideas must be demanded to remain silent and keep their thoughts, words, and ideas out of the courts, schools, and halls of Congress, (and to themselves) because the constitution, she sites, has erected a wall of separation between church and state – so “three cheers for the Constitution”.

With this type of logic, it is clear – the fight will go on as the liberal cohort continues to defy the laws of God because they believe they have not only a right to voice their errors but  also a sacred constitutional right to demand abortion, homosexuality, legalization of drugs, disrespect for authority etc., while any idea rooted in Christianity must be removed from the public forum. Why, because the constitution demands it.

As she tried to sneak in a false right of expression upon the coattails of actual rights, she also tried to sneak in protection of the “American Dream” for aberrant LGBT activists on the legitimate coattails of equal protection for of all races and religions, men and women, immigrants and those with disabilities. Following this deviant move, she urged her followers to do everything in their power to advance the LGBT and broader liberal vision.

“We need you to keep up these fights NOW and for the rest of your lives.”

This was the second time Hilary called for a fight “Now”. except, this time, it is not an entendere  The result: hours later in liberal bastions across the country, liberal minions took to the streets shouting slogans such as “Racist, sexist, anti-gay Donald Trump Go Away” and “Not our President”:

SEE NY TIMES VIDEO: Clinton Minions Take to Streets Fighting “Right Now” – Moments after Hillary Called for it in Her Veiled Concession Speech.

But it is not Hilary alone who will challenge the new president, Hilary was joined in the refrain by fellow champion of the liberal cause, German Chancellor Angela Merkle who has already set liberal conditions on her relationship to the new president and by extension to America itself. In her congratulatory communication Merkel stated:

“Germany and America are connected by values of democracy, freedom and respect for the law and the dignity of man, independent of origin, skin color, religion, gender, sexual orientation or political views…. I offer the next President of the United States close cooperation on the basis of these values.”

Because Trump received no similar cold shoulder from the Prime Minister of England, the Liberal New York Times is looking for a new champion and thinks they have found one in Germany:

“He (Trump) received no pushback on Wednesday from Theresa May, the British prime minister, who simply congratulated Mr. Trump on his win. The two leaders’ (May and Merkel) reactions were further proof that, after Britain’s decision to leave the European Union, we will have to look to Mrs. Merkel not just to lead Europe but to replace America in leading NATO as well.”

The liberal ideologues are too filled with hate to reconcile with Christian men and women of good will.

Look anywhere on the social media and you can find liberal hatred being fomented. Quite unlike the Obama win eight years ago when Republicans reluctantly put aside their differences and closed rank around President Obama as expected in the best American tradition, no such thing is happening in 2016. Instead off a hand shake, Trump is receiving a loud FU (see video below).

https://youtu.be/Z1Np4dbqplk

To bad for the liberals, but they are going to be outplayed by the emerging global forces arrayed against them (see the “Fast Track to Truth” at newera.news). Trump will find support among the international community to battle the Leviathan of liberalism.  All over the world people are rising against the sea of liberal pollution — it is coming to an end and very soon.

The Mother of God promised at Fatima that Russia would be converted and corollary to that conversion she added “in the end my Immaculate Heart” will triumph.”  The Triumph of the Immaculate Heart is underway world wide and misguided souls being led by blind guides, such as Ms. Hilary Clinton, Barack O’bama, and Nancy Pelosi et al who are clueless, are, like their guides, totally unaware of what is going on. They are no longer fighting against a mere set of disorganized and muzzled human beings; they are fighting against Divine Providence, which has decreed that the Immaculate Woman and her Divine Son shall triumph over the feculent Prince of Darkness and his enslaved followers (Gensis 3:15 and Revelation 12:1-6).

 

 

 

 

S