David Duke and Margaret Huffstickler in 2008
…..Andrew Anglin article on federal shills
Know Your Shills: What Do the Feds Do?
October 19, 2016
So, weâ€™ve got ourselves a burgeoning little movement here then, donâ€™t we?
Sure we do. Things are going very well, overall. We are dozens of times bigger than we were two years ago. We appear to have held onto the Alt-Right label. The fags have backed-off.
Whatever the turnout of the election, weâ€™re going to grow by leaps and bounds â€“ rapidly.
Full speed ahead.
There is this issue though, which we need to talk about: federal informants. Itâ€™s not a nice issue to talk about. But it is an extremely important one to understand.
This is the deal: basically, there is zero chance that there are not already federal informants in our midst attempting to kike us up. We need to be aware of that.
At the same time, we canâ€™t go around calling people feds without definitive proof, because it is an extremely serious accusation. Once you start throwing it around, everyone starts calling each other feds and nothing makes any sense. Which is exactly why accusing people of being feds is a fed tactic.
What we need to do is be aware of what they do, and be able to identify this behavior. After the behavior is identified, those engaging in it must be simply ignored/shunned. Because ultimately, whether or not they actually are feds is irrelevant. If they are acting exactly as feds would act, it doesnâ€™t make any difference if they are being directed to act that way or not.
To shed further light on this issue of utmost importance, Iâ€™m going to pull some quotes from a handwritten prison essay entitled â€œHow Federal Informants Workâ€ by White activist Bill White, as diligently transcribed by Alex Linder of VNN.
Bill White was taken down by the feds, so has a pretty good idea what heâ€™s talking about.
There was once a time when a group of people could get together, shout â€œinformantâ€ in unison, and slander the reputation of a political activist. With the emergence of the internet, and the easy availability of government records, it has become easy for any person to quickly determine whether someone has rendered substantial assistance to the government. Here, I will explain how federal informants work and how one can access information on them. I also urge people to stop treating this subject so lightly â€“ rehabilitating actual dangerous informants, while using the term â€œinformantâ€ as a smear.
White first explains the paid informant position, which is probably less important to us than the prison snitch, which I think is mainly what we are dealing with now.
But the paid informant concept is real and important to understand, so letâ€™s look at that.
The US Department of Justice employs about 10,000 FBI field agents. FBI regulations require each agent to employ at least 4 confidential informants, and suggest 10 as an appropriate mean. This means that approximately 100,000 Americans work as informants for the FBI. When Americaâ€™s other 32 law enforcement agencies are considered, between 600,000 and 12 million Americans â€” perhaps one out of every 200 adults â€” works fulltime for the federal government reporting on other Americans.
Informants are paid approximately $400/week for their services. Thus, this profession tends to attract those for whom $1730 a month â€” $20,800 a year â€” is a substantial incentive. People who are not mentally ill or otherwise living on disability and welfare benefits, or people laboring at the lower echelons of drug organizations, tend to be particular recruitment targets, as are those who are otherwise unemployed. Informants also receive a bonus for convicting others â€” generally, they receive $100 for every year of sentence a victim receives â€” 20 years is a $2000 bonus, for instance.
The method of the informant is usually the instigation of inchoate crimes. The federal government may convict any two people who agree to commit a crime, one of whom has taken an act in furtherance, of conspiracy. There are few restrictions. The government must show a propensity towards the crime â€” being previously convicted of drug dealing is enough to allow an informant to target someone with a drug conspiracy; speaking out angrily is enough to justify trying to involve someone in an act of terrorism. The only rule is that the informant may not be one of the two required people.
In cases where the government cannot put two people together, they often try to invite a solicitation. This is how Matt Hale was framed. The government will infiltrate someone into an organization they believe is committing crimes, and try to involve them as â€œsecurityâ€ or as a â€œsoldier.â€ This person will let the group leader know he is available to commit a crime, and will wait to be solicited. In the case of the Blind Sheik â€” and Matt Hale â€” the informant may say he is going to commit a crime, and ask for the leaderâ€™s blessing.
The government targets these inchoate crimes because they are easier to prosecute than actual crimes. The FBI, for instance, has manuals â€” playbooks â€” of how crimes are to be put together.
Below the level of investigating crimes, federal informants also monitor political and media organizations and shape public discourse. Many newspaper reporters are on the federal payroll, or have a less formal relationship with federal law enforcement. This channel prevents negative coverage of federal cases and allows journalistic information to be funneled to US Attorneys. Within organizations, deeper-cover informants identify targets and help shape discourse â€” promoting other informants to leadership positions and doing federal dirty work.
[Individual A] became involved in an anti-immigrant organizing group. He has written he meets monthly at McDonalds with Indiana State Police and the FBI to discuss the white movement. He is not paid â€” though he would be if he was smart enough to ask. Heâ€™s an informant.In the future, if the government decides he is suitable for a â€œleadershipâ€ role, others will be told to go on white message boards and support him. He may be asked from time to time to speak well, or speak badly, of other white activists. MP may not even realize he is being manipulated â€” but he is being used.
Thatâ€™s key right there.
They use an army of anonymous message board posters to attack or promote figures. They have been doing this since the internet started.
â€“ HT ran a radio show on FM radio in New York, and on the internet. On his radio show, he would call for violence against blacks, Mexicans, and federal officials. When a listener would respond, HT would turn them over to the feds â€” often for further investigation. His show was a â€œhoneypot.â€
Always, always, always be aware of anyone who is encouraging acts of violence.
And I donâ€™t mean saying â€œthese people should be hanged for treason,â€ but telling you or others to go out and commit specific acts of violence.
They are either a fed or they are effectively a fed.
And if someone is doing this but is not an actual fed, the feds will generally just allow him to keep doing it, while monitoring his communications. Itâ€™s all the same to them. If the person encouraging violence isnâ€™t on the payroll, that means theyâ€™re saving the taxpayer $400 a week.
Violent skinhead groups were a concern to the feds. One day, a group called VSC was formed. This group declared â€œwarâ€ on all other skinheads. Then, they declared they were not â€œracist.â€ They would attack other white organizations, beat, stab, or set on fire white activists, and claimed nothing could happen in Indiana without their permission. Every once in a while, a few of their worst members would be arrested and sent to prison.
This group is a â€œfalse front.â€ It was organized by federal informants as a â€œhoneypotâ€ for violent thugs, but its violence was used by the feds to suppress and control non-violent white organizations. Thus, in addition to social control, physical violence is used to control and suppress political dissent.
This is something that isnâ€™t directly relevant to the present movement, but the principle is the same.
They will attempt to replace popular organic dissent with controlled dissent and then use the controlled group to attack the organic group.
Again, whenever you see a group attacking other groups, you should assume they are feds or effectively feds.
These examples show FBI priorities â€” monitoring groups for future targets, establishing media to shape political opinion, establishing groups to use violence to suppress political dissent, inciting â€œhate crimesâ€ (legal â€œterrorismâ€) for political purposes, and placing members in leadership positions to guide and monitor organizations.
Also note what the FBI did not do â€” and never does. They did not establish any legitimate businesses or organizations or attempt to involve anyone in legal activities. They did not foster charity or attempt to build anything to help other people. And, they never made an effort to legitimately influence the political process through elections.
That is also extremely key.
Whenever you see people who are entirely focused on either negativity or inane nonsense, they should be considered suspect. This especially applies to endless circular nonsense, such as aggressively pushing for or against religious ideas, or arguing about complex conspiracy theories which cannot be proved either way, rather than focusing on what is clearly happening in the here and now.
Conversely, people who are attempting to organize in a positive way are probably not feds, even if you donâ€™t necessarily agree with their methods.
Now, onto the more relevant part â€“ the kind of informant we are most likely to be dealing with.
So far, we have talked about informants in the civilian world. Now, we examine informants in the federal justice system.
The federal justice system is structured to reward informants and guilty pleas. A person pleading guilty in the federal system has their sentence reduced by about 8%. If they â€œaccept responsibility,â€ perhaps by cooperating, their sentence is reduced by one-third. If they receive what is called a SKI reduction for â€œsubstantial assistance,â€ their sentence is reduced 50%. They may also receive a â€œsafety valve,â€ voiding a mandatory minimum.
The easiest way to see if a federal inmate provided pre-trial cooperation is to look at their sentence. If their sentence is not within sentencing guidelines â€” all federal sentences are controlled by federal sentencing guidelines â€” find out why. If they received or asked for a SKI reduction, they cooperated.
After sentencing, an inmate may continue to cooperate. An inmate who provides substantial cooperation after sentencing receives a Rule 35. A Rule 35 is a post-conviction sentence reduction for cooperation.
An Israeli-trained informant recruiter for the FBI tried to make me a contact. I of course refused.
But the way he did it was very interesting. The approach was â€œI want you to feel like you can talk to me if you think thereâ€™s something I need to know, and this will keep you safe.â€
If I had agreed to communicate with them, I would have eventually been tricked into changing some detail of a story, which would put me in a position where I had committed a federal crime by having lied to a federal officer. They would then have threatened me with prison if I didnâ€™t cooperate.
I am certain that I am not the only one in this movement who has been approached by a FBI informant recruiter, but I am one of the only ones who has talked about it publicly.
So, has anyone else agreed to talk to them, thinking it was all cool, and then been roped into a threat of prison if they didnâ€™t cooperate and do as they were told?
I would be extremely surprised if that hadnâ€™t happened.
If it had happened to someone, the main thing they would do is try and break down the movement by attacking others in it. Because most of us are on the internet, and we arenâ€™t linked to prison culture in the way the White movement of the 70s, 80s and 90s was, it is hard to get us to commit acts of violence. So, the deal is, they try and make sure that the movement isnâ€™t cohesive. The main way to do this is to get people to fight with each other nonstop.
â€œInfightingâ€ is of course different from genuine criticism of the politics of others. There is nothing wrong with saying you donâ€™t like the way Jared Taylor claims that Jews are huwhite. There would be something wrong if you spent endless hours accusing Jared Taylor of being a criminal, or being a federal agent, etc.
There is also no excuse for making a huge deal out of these disagreements. I will occasionally voice certain disagreements like this when they come up, such as when Jared Taylor was recently in the media claiming that Jews should be involved in the Alt-Right. It was fair for me to point out that I disagree with this, and it wasnâ€™t a situation where I was â€œinfightingâ€ or breaking down the cohesion of the movement by purposefully drawing peopleâ€™s motives into question.
White goes on to explain that this isnâ€™t a game and you shouldnâ€™t just go around accusing people of being feds.
Because this is a serious issue, treating it like a funny gossiping game is inappropriate. Real federal informants are never rehabilitated â€” the feds will continue to approach them 20 or 30 years after the fact. Fake allegations of informing trivialize a serious issue. The federal government is the party who most wants informants rehabilitated and honest activists smeared. Game-players play into federal goals.
Because this is a serious issue, serious evidence should be required. Because our societal institutions are dishonest, all evidence must be treated skeptically. However not all government documents are false, nor are all media reports.
Evidence begins with an individualâ€™s own statements. Individuals cooperating with the FBI usually know to keep their cooperation secret â€” but some donâ€™t.
When others discuss meetings with the FBI, it should cause some concern. Not everyone visited by the FBI is guilty of cooperating â€” but the best way to approach an FBI visit is to say â€œIâ€™m represented by counsel,â€ to give the name of an attorney you know, and refuse to speak without that counsel present. Any other response is unwise.
It is more than unwise.
It is absolutely insane.
There is no justifiable reason to ever talk to federal agents under any circumstances unless your lawyer is present. As far as Iâ€™m concerned, anyone who does talk to them should be assumed to be cooperating.
I would even go a step further and say that if anyone knows someone else is talking to the cops, and doesnâ€™t make it public, they are a traitor of the same tier as the potential snitch.
He then explains the obsession Feds have with baseless accusations and personal attacks â€“ again, this is what matters to us, as it is the main thing going down.
The real danger, though, comes from paid informants pushing the FBI agenda. It is hard to tell these types apart from honest weirdos sometimes. Certain behaviors, though, are suspicious. One is making allegations about others without specifics or evidence. When evidence is presented, truth can be discerned â€” when an individual will not make a specific, disprovable allegation, and is not open to reason, they are suspicious.
Iâ€™ve learned over the years not to say something unless I have reason to believe itâ€™s true â€” and to withdraw it and apologize if Iâ€™m wrong. For instance, I have been reasonably told Jared Taylorâ€™s wife Evelyn Rich is not Jewish, and received a good explanation of how the ADL misused a paper she wrote. I have apologized for this allegation. I still dislike Taylorâ€™s politics â€” but I withdraw my ad hominem as incorrect.
Evidence continues with first-person accounts. First person accounts may be wrong. They are often not objective. They should be investigated and substantiated.
The FBI opened a â€œTerrorism Enterprise Investigationâ€ into me in 2007 because a police detective in 1996 said I had been involved in an arson. An FBI investigation into the arson concluded there was â€œno evidence.â€ The agent who used the report took the allegation without the investigation report to justify â€œgetting meâ€ within FBI rules. White activists often do the same thing â€” take one allegation without investigation, and assert it as true.
In most cases, there are documents and records to justify or deny an allegation. I have made myself a promise never to again accuse someone of anything without reasonable proof. This is why I seek documents and witnesses.
There is also the question of â€” if an allegation is true, so what?
Informants are dangerous because they often lie to manufacture crimes, and the FBIâ€™s internal files are like an internet message board where the accused can not only not respond, but can be jailed and tortured based on rumor.
True National Socialists are attracted to NS because they seek goodness in a corrupt world. Many become too enthused and become too obsessed with moral purity. Iâ€™ve been in this category. When one strives for virtue, it is easy to reject flawed mankind. However, our excessive surface â€œpurityâ€ and our movementâ€™s inner corruption has paralyzed white activism.
Thus, in addition to demanding evidence, the white movement needs to start asking â€œso what?â€
These are difficult questions â€” but they belong in a broader discussion of baseless allegations. In addition to demanding evidence â€” we have to also ask, if true, do these allegations matter? Are they within an acceptable range of human error and fallibility, given what needs to be done.
White closes with a much-needed call for reasonableness.
I am no longer involved in white political activity. If the white movement wants to destroy itself â€” insofar as further destruction is possible â€” that is its business. But, I believe in the vision of Adolf Hitler â€” in a beautiful, orderly world that promotes life and human happiness â€” and I am saddened to see the same-old same-old predominate as the world dies.
What should be a beautiful celebration of love has been polluted and turned into a celebration of degeneracy and hate. The FBI directs white activism into criminal activity and Jewish groups direct white power parodies into white ranks. Many of the most cynical have abandoned NS ideals to support the â€œnew right wingâ€ â€” Zionism â€” and many others seem to be talking just to earn their government check.
I urge people to set fantasy aside and to focus on evidence, on reality, and on what can be demonstrated. There are many resources available to us to sustain the gossip and rumor-backed communities of 20 years ago. These efforts, often sponsored by people trying to harm white people, ultimately lead nowhere.
So, hopefully this will help people to identify the kind of behavior that federal informants exhibit, and avoid individuals who engage in these behaviors.
Again, the goal of the feds is and will continue to be to break down the cohesiveness of our movement. The most important thing is to focus on the agenda, and forget about personalities. Judge people based on their contributions. And donâ€™t run around making baseless accusations or getting caught up with people who do that.
This has all gotten heavy and itâ€™s going to get heavier. We all need to have our heads in the right place.
I see Bill White bizarrely defending Jared Taylor, who is de facto married to a leftist jewess, Evelyn Rich, and has kids with her. I know personally that Taylor was antisemitic UNTIL he got involved with her. We both interpreted at the 1989 IHR conference, he from Japanese and I from German. He was just as anti-Jew as the rest of us THEN.
I have had my own experiences with Bill White, who:
1) ran in 2008 on the front cover of his magazine a graphic of rifle crosshairs over the head of (then presidential candidate and US Senator) Barack Obama and then asked the rhetorical question: “Kill this Nigger?”
Just look it up on google.
2) He then spent part of the month of August 2008, without provocation or the slightest evidence, calling me a homosexual (despite my two marriages, two dozen girlfriends, and two daughters).
It took a mutual friend, Roy Armstrong-Godenau, to tell him to knock it off
…. having met (on multiple occasions in both Alexandria, Virginia and Brandenberg, Austria) my first wife and my first daughter, Ingrid, and decades later, also meeting my current ladyfriend (2005-), Margaret Huffstickler.
Margi and I in 2007 in East Lansing, Michigan, where I spoke to a WN gathering and Margi sang an art song.
I also published the actual Commonwealth of Virginia birth certificates of my two daughters, Ingrid and Erika, clearly listing me as their father, and also I ran on my website pictures of them showing their clear facial resemblance to me.
I am upper left, Margaret lower right and Ingrid to the left of Margi.
Ingrid and Erika in 1989
Erika in 2007
For White to write the above libels and then never apologize to ME raises questions worth pondering.
Now, onto the topic White raises of WNs who get suspiciously low sentences:
On Daily Stormer, a supportive comrade named Wayne wrote:
JdN supports the work of Andrew Anglin.
He has some personal or ego issues with David Duke, which is a common thing among nationalists and right-wingers.
Don Black banned JdN when the latter become popular on Stormfront. And some people, former SF users, say that Don Black is a shabbos goy, not to mention Don Black’s son became a good goy promoting diversity and other libtard crap.
Wayne, thanks, and I do support Andrew Anglin completely (except for the Duke connection, which seems to be on the wane), and love Anglin’s innovations and sense of fun, so needed now in this depressing world, but I have just one correction:
I have no personal issues with David Duke. We have always gotten along fine on a person-to-person basis, he stopped over to our apartment in Virginia several times, Margi and I stayed at his ski apartment in Austria for a week, he bought us dinner, he wanted us to move there and be neighbors, I dated his ex-girlfriend Donna 1989-90, who did not trash him, btw, Margi and I drove 900 miles one-way in a little Honda car with a bad transmission to speak at a beleaguered conference he was holding in Memphis, Tennessee, when many other speakers had bailed out due to terroristic threats to hotels by minions of the loathsome, fat black faggot Darryl Lamont Jenkins of the “OnePeoplesProject”…..
……and more importantly, David Duke has put out some great info over the decades.
I even know two of the men who have ghostwritten his books.
Duke’s Wolf Blitzer interview on CNN in 2006 was fantastic, and an example of why, despite everything, I supported the man 1989-2009, a twenty-year period.
I in fact wrote to Duke and to Don Black of Stormfront (married to his ex-wife Chloe) yet again a full, sincere peace offer on the 19th of this month, which included me taking down all my counter-attacks on him and even helping him with fundraising and other things where I have proven skills, but it was contemptuously ignored. It is up on my website now, just slightly edited to take one name out.
Since, as before, this new peace offer has been rejected, I have published it, plus other information.
David Duke could have gotten 23 years for tax evasion and mail fraud, and supposedly he is someone the jews fear and loathe due to the anti-Jew info he puts out.
David Duke, James Edwards of “The Political Cesspool,”and Margi in November 2008 in Memphis, Tennessee
Instead, David Duke got only 15 months:
[Wikipedia] On December 12, 2002, David Duke pleaded guilty to the felony charge of filing a false tax return under 26 U.S.C. Â§ 7206 and mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. Â§ 1341 According to The New York Times: “Mr. Duke was accused of telling supporters that he was in financial straits, then misusing the money they sent him from 1993 to 1999. He was also accused of filing a false 1998 tax return…. Mr. Duke used the money for personal investments and gambling trips…. [T]he [supporter] contributions were as small as $5 and [according to the United States attorney, Jim Letten] there were so many that returning the money would be
At the law.cornell.edu website, tax evasion is three years and mail fraud is 20 years.
False tax return: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7206
Mail fraud: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7206
I wonder why the feds went so easy on Duke?
As we saw with Matt Hale (40 years in a super-max), and the Order prisoners (20-190 years), true WNs get the max.
And yes, I actually know White from many an email back and forth, and from mutual friends.
(Btw, Bill White graduated from Silver Spring High School in Maryland, a highly jewish suburb of Washington DC and the hometown of Goldie Hawn. This does not mean he is Jewish. In fact, it could make him very anti-Jewish. I just don’t know.)
And I actually know David Duke, and very well.
Margi and I even spent a week in February 2007 with David Duke and his Russian girlfriend Maria in Zell am See, Austria, where he had an apartment for skiing and pursuing his nature photography hobby and business. (Margi and I basically had a nice time with them. My problem with Duke is not personal.)
I sent a peace offer to Duke — on the chance that he is not controlled opposition — on October 19 of this year, with the subject line “My renewed offer of peace to you: David Duke and Don Black,” copying it to Andrew Anglin and 16 other prominent WNs, a very generous offer to end all hostilities and even help him, and David Duke has not deigned to respond.
……Barely edited version of my October 19 peace offer
[I decided to run this peace offer now. Duke has never responded to any of my peace overtures with any thing but silence.Let the public know that I at least did the right thing.]
…..More on David Duke and Don Black
……On the stateless defamer Carlos Porter, who can live in EU countries with “hate-speech” laws, and yet write “nigger”to his heart’s content
…..Contact and support
John de Nugent
306 S. Steel Street
Ontanagon MI 49953
+1 (906)Â 884-6689 😉
Skype: John de Nugent (Ontonagon)
Need secrecy? Then start a Hushmail.com
or safe_mail.net account andÂ then send me @yahoo.com
your new secret email address.
Â Â Facebook: John D. Nugent (2,438 friends)
(deleted after Zuckerberg-Merkel agreement)
Twitter at John de Nugent @johndenugentESA
â€“5 October 2016 via PayPal to email@example.com from G to pay my overdue Internet bill
â€“2 October 2016 via PayPal from J in Finland and via Stripe from G in England
â€“1 October 2016 cash from P in Florida
â€“24 September 2016 donations via Stripe from J in Southern California and from M in Australia
â€“23 September 2016 euros in cash, wrapped in aluminum foil, from S in Germany
â€“9 September 2016 via PayPal to my friend Margi Huffstickler, email address firstname.lastname@example.org, from S in Germany
â€“8 September 2016 via a PayPal to my friend Margi Huffstickler, email address email@example.com, from F in Canada
â€“1 September 2016 book Hillbilly Elegy from a comrade in Idaho
â€“29 August 2016 $40 cash from Santa Claus, North Pole 😉
â€“24 August 2016 via PayPal to firstname.lastname@example.org from P in Australia
â€“22 August 2016 via PayPal to email@example.com from K in Croatia
â€“15 August 2016Â cash from both CC in Mississippi and a Miguel Serrano ( LOL 😉 ) in Massachusetts; even the dead are sending me money from Valhalla!
â€“13 August 2016 cash from a fellow fmr Marine in Florida, a Patton booklet (very interesting and Ã proposÂ https://www.johndenugent.com/english/i-endorse-donald-trump-for-president-the-literal-reincarnation-of-george-patton/) and info on the Michigan Statehouse
â€“11 August 2016 via Paypal to Margi Huffstickler at firstname.lastname@example.org from J in England
Royal Naval College
â€“July 28, 2016 cash from P. in Minnesota
â€“July 18, 2016 cash from P. in Massachusetts
â€“July 17, 2016 cash from M. in Oregon
â€“July 15, 2016 donation from Germany via PayPal
Yea, it seems like controlled opposition up, down, and sideways sometimes. I still don’t know what to make out of many people, but they all seem to run everyone around in circles guessing what’s what.
Well I buy better protective software as donations come in. Hacking is a fact of life for WNs whose potential the Jews fear.
A lot of people cop a plea rather than go broke fighting the US government in court. The late Jim Trafficant being the exception!
To get off of the subject, are you on dial up? Man, has it been slow getting on your site recently.
I assume you are referring to Duke.
But a lot of people are not major white nationalists.
My concern is a deal, or that he is mind-controlled.
The Jews have been hacking my site for a week now.
Speaking of deals, Hal Turner comes to mind.. I am not sure that I have that deal figured out or not. It sure was bizarre!
Keep your guard up! Take care John!
Weeeelll, in my view some WNs start out as merely nuts, and then do something illegal. The feds then grab them, and force them into a deal.
But they were not traitors in the beginning, just kwazy, man. 😉
John, what are your thoughts about white men marrying Asian women? I am not for racial mixing between yellows and whites. What do you think is the main reason that so many men fell for Thais, Chinese, Filipinos etc. etc. Your ex-assistant seems to be among those white men who gladly mixes with an Asian. He is now an anti-racist. Why didn’t he marry a white anti-racist woman, why Asian? You know him the best so figured maybe you can also answer.
Well, the problem is white women who are battle-ax feminists, or overweight, and man-hating bitches ready to clean a guy out in divorce court.
Holappa was in a situation where the woman became seriously overweight, but that was not the only issue. I think he became an “antifa” because something happened to him when he as in federal custody in March-June of 2009, mind control, and marrying the Chinese woman was an outward symbol of his rejection of white nationalism.
As for Asian women themselves, well, Asians are an intelligent and hard-working race with many good qualities.
Not my cup of tea, though 😉