GOV/MIL Leftists Call For New "Secret Police" Force To Spy On Trump Supporters (AN ABSOLUTELY MUST-READ THREAD)

marsh

On TB every waking moment
[COMMENT: Looks like if we are going to "split the sheets," American businesses are making it easier by splitting into politically aligned business.]

Sephora Cuts Ties With Beauty Influencer for Being a Conservative, Says Republicans 'Aren't Aligned' With Their Values

Sephora Cuts Ties With Beauty Influencer for Being a Conservative, Says Republicans ‘Aren’t Aligned’ With Their Values
By Cassandra Fairbanks
0-105.jpg

The beauty store Sephora has cancelled all future partnerships and cut ties with beauty influencer Amanda Ensing for being a conservative.

The makeup shop responded to liberal activists who were outraged that they would dare to work with a Republican by saying that she “shared content on social media that is not aligned with Sephora’s values around inclusivity.”

Ensing posts pretty standard beauty content mixed with some posts about her pretty standard conservative views — such as her support for the Second Amendment.

“Thank you for reaching out and bringing this to our attention. We were made aware that Amanda Ensing, an influencer contracted through one of our external vendors’ campaigns, recently shared content on social media that is not aligned with Sephora’s values around inclusivity. As soon as we were informed, we made the decision to cease all programming with Amanda and will not be engaging her for future partnerships,” Sephora wrote in a response to a social media activist.

Now, conservative women are rallying to Ensing’s defense.

“To any conservative woman out there that shops at Sephora …Take your money elsewhere,” Republican political commentator and activist Courtney Holland wrote. She added that Ensing has “brought LOADS of business to them over the years with her millions of followers across her platforms and promotion of their products.”
To any conservative woman out there that shops at @Sephora…Take your money elsewhere@AmandaEnsing has brought them LOADS of business to them over the years with her millions of followers across her platforms and promotion of their products. https://t.co/1Wj4QISj23
— Courtney Holland (@hollandcourtney) January 30, 2021
cc: @Sephora cancel culture much? Did you also let go of all your conservative employees in your stores or warehouses because they associate with a political party in the FREE land? This is sick. https://t.co/nCdlRA6Kjx
— a (@allxdvs) January 30, 2021
Ensing tweeted on Friday night that her legal team has asked the company for more information as to why they are ceasing the relationship.

“I am disappointed that a brand that claims to be inclusive seems to be excluding conservative voices,” Ensing wrote.
Thank you My legal team has asked @Sephora for more information as to why they are ceasing the relationship. I am disappointed that a brand that claims to be inclusive seems to be excluding conservative voices. I will keep everyone updated https://t.co/rAQpDQTIaU
— Amanda Ensing (@AmandaEnsing) January 30, 2021
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Dems Introduce Radical Mail-In Ballot Plan That Could Give Them Permanent Majority Rule

by Jonathan Davisabout 7 hours ago

Shutterstock-mail-in-ballot-1-758x483.jpg


Honest people can disagree about whether or not substantial vote fraud occurred during the 2020 election cycle, and they have.

Left-wing Democrats and their sycophantic media allies refuse to discuss the subject, however, even in the face of hard evidence and convincing arguments, as if it never happened — despite the fact that these same people were certain in 2016 that the ‘Trump-Russia collusion’ hoax was real.

Nevertheless, rational Americans know that there were substantial voting irregularities this time around, and they want their leaders to investigate them, identify them, and either prevent them from happening in the future or eliminate them altogether.

Republicans, in fact, have rallied around legislation to do just that. According to a Jan. 15 statement from the GOP policy shop, the Republican Study Committee:
Today, Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Banks (IN-03) is introducing an important new piece of legislation called the Save Democracy Act. This legislation has received the formal backing of the Republican Study Committee and addresses one of the top issue areas Chairman Banks has prioritized for the 117th Congress: Restoring Trust in Elections.

“The Save Democracy Act would prohibit or reform current practices that weaken the security, oversight, and administration of elections for federal office. The Save Democracy Act would enhance federal election integrity by addressing three key areas: (1) Voter Registration; (2) Casting of Ballots; (3) Tabulation of Ballots,” says a summary of the legislation.

Here’s what it does:

Voter Registration:
· Prohibits automatic voter registration for federal elections.
· Requires voter citizenship verification to register to vote in federal elections.
· Requires full Social Security Numbers (SSN) to register to vote in federal elections.
· Requires federal courts to notify state election officials when an individual is excused from jury duty because they are not a citizen.

Casting of Ballots:
· Prohibit states from sending out unrequested absentee ballots for federal elections.
· Bars anyone other than the voter, an election official, or the post office from submitting a ballot to a polling location during federal elections.
· Prohibits use of public ballot collection boxes in federal elections.
· Requires that absentee ballots be received by the close of election day for federal elections.
· Requires a voter to provide proof of I.D. for absentee voting and in-person voting in federal elections, creating equal treatment for all ballots.
· Requires voters to produce a matching SSN printed on their ballot in federal elections. Additionally, requires election officials to cross-check the SSN on a ballot with the voter’s registration and submit such data to Congress.
· Maintains current protections for military and overseas voters.

Tabulation of Ballots:
· Requires that at least two representatives of each Presidential campaign in a general election be permitted to observe polls and vote counting operations.
· Requires that ballot counting, once begun, continue until completed—no delays or pauses.
· Requires the audit of ballot tabulation systems within the 30-day period following a federal election.

The Democrats, however, want to go another way: Universal mail-in balloting.
According to a press release for the legislation, here’s what their bill will do:
  • Promote the Ability of Voters to Vote by Mail – All registered voters would receive ballots in the mail weeks before Election Day, allowing them to carefully research candidates and issues well ahead of Election Day to inform their vote.
  • Expand Options for Casting Ballots – All registered voters would have the ability to cast their ballot through the mail or a drop-off site. Voters residing in states with in-person, same-day registration would still have the option to vote at a polling station in lieu of voting at home.
  • Fund the United States Postal Service – The legislation would provide the USPS funding to cover costs associated with mailing ballots both to and from voters in federal elections. This would allow states to save money by transitioning away from polling stations and reduce a major barrier for voters with the federal government absorbing the cost associated with USPS delivery.
  • Enact Automatic Voter Registration – States would be required to ensure that each citizen who provides identifying information to the state motor vehicle authority is automatically registered to vote.
Now look, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Democrats would never support legislation that made it harder for their party to win elections. So we have to assume a couple of things: 1) The voting ‘irregularities’ we saw in 2020 that benefited Joe Biden are real; and 2) Democrats now want to emulate that ‘success’ nationwide.

There’s also this, and it can’t be said enough. Back in the day when there was still a little bipartisanship left in Washington, a 2005 study led by former Democratic President Jimmy Carter and former GOP Secretary of State James Baker concluded, without doubt, that widespread mail-in balloting was a recipe for massive vote fraud.

The Daily Signal noted:

They called on states to increase voter ID requirements; to be leery of mail-in voting; to halt ballot harvesting; to maintain voter lists, in part to ensure dead people are promptly removed from them; to allow election observers to monitor ballot counting; and to make sure voting machines are working properly.

They also wanted the media to refrain from calling elections too early and from touting exit polls.

All of this may sound eerily similar to the issues in the prolonged presidential election battle of 2020. But these were among the 87 recommendations from the 2005 report of the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, known informally as the Carter-Baker Commission.


Democrats oppose all of those recommendations and instead only seem to support measures that make it easier to cheat.

Why is that?
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Donald Trump Left Biden with a Parting Gift He May Be Stuck with for Years to Come

By Garion Frankel
Published January 29, 2021 at 12:55pm

In March of 1801, during the last days of his administration, President John Adams filled over a dozen vacancies in the federal court system, confirmations that would go on to be known as the “Midnight Judges.”

While this was originally designed to protect his policies from the incoming administration of Thomas Jefferson, Adams’ appointment of John Marshall as Chief Justice, in particular, would come to define the Supreme Court and the rule of law as we know it.

As the Biden administration years get underway, it is becoming clear that former President Donald Trump was taking notes from history.

Politico reported Thursday that “before leaving office, Donald Trump appointed dozens of allies and former aides to a wide range of government boards and commissions — and there’s not much Joe Biden can do about it.”

This is because, as Politico further explained, “those who have reviewed the law governing the boards say removing appointees can be difficult, especially if they come with political or business connections that could help the organizations.”

“Most appointees do not need Senate confirmation and will remain until the end of their years long terms. Those who support Trump’s appointments say if Congress opposes the appointment process, lawmakers should change it,” the outlet said.

Governing institutions that received Trump appointees shortly before the transfer of power include the Kennedy Center, the Library of Congress Trust Fund Board and the Pentagon Defense Business Board.

While President Joe Biden will be able to remove some appointees (particularly those who do not have a set term), it is inevitable that many of these boards and commissions will remain bipartisan, if not Republican-leaning.

To put it simply, Trump was wise to follow Adams’ example.

Biden has made it abundantly clear that he wants to erase the last four years. From rescinding the Mexico City policy to rejoining the World Health Organization, Biden wants to permanently remove anything related to Trump — no matter how effective the policy, program or idea may have been.

However, the boards and commissions will now represent an obstacle.

Biden’s agenda goes far beyond politics. It seeks to fundamentally redefine American institutions, and having a few more left-leaning people in office would have been a useful tool in that endeavor.

The new appointments may not have formal legislative or executive power, but they do wield great influence over the cultural missions and institutions of the federal government.

Instead, Biden may face substantial opposition from some of these groups, which could derail his cultural efforts.

It is within this underbelly of the federal government where Trump’s legacy will truly be kept alive and have influence for years to come.

Democrats may have control over the presidency and both houses of Congress, but they do not rule the federal government with absolute authority.

Perhaps, historians may someday use these last-minute appointments to evaluate Trump’s legacy — which could have been impossible otherwise.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Democrats To Introduce Bill To Expel Marjorie Taylor Greene; GOP Leaders Plan To Talk With Her

By Daily Wire News
Jan 29, 2021 DailyWire.com

Representative-elect Marjorie Taylor Green, a Republican from Georgia, speaks during a protest outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2021. Republican lawmakers in Washington are fracturing over President Trump's futile effort to persuade Congress to overturn his re-election defeat, as his allies spar with conservatives who say the Constitution doesn't give them the power to override voters.
Stefani Reynolds/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-CA) is planning to introduce a resolution to expel newly elected representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) after a CNN report this week alleged that Greene had “indicated support for executing prominent Democratic politicians” before running for Congress.

Since she won the primary in August, Greene has been sharply criticized by multiple Republican Party elected officials, who have publicly denounced her and expressed “disgust” with her past support for the fringe QAnon conspiracy theory. “Q is a patriot, we know that for sure,” Greene said in a 2017 video. “There’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to take this global cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles out, and I think we have the president to do it,” Greene said, referring to Trump and the conspiracy theory.

This week, video has emerged of Greene berating a then-high schooler whose high school, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, had been shot up, leaving 17 people dead. Greene also appeared to express support for the baseless conspiracy theory that the shooting was a “false flag” event.

Gomez’s resolution follows the release of a report by CNN this week alleging that Greene expressed support for executing prominent Democratic politicians:
In one post, from January 2019, Greene liked a comment that said “a bullet to the head would be quicker” to remove House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In other posts, Greene liked comments about executing FBI agents who, in her eyes, were part of the “deep state” working against Trump.
In one Facebook post from April 2018, Greene wrote conspiratorially about the Iran Deal, one of former President Barack Obama’s signature foreign policy achievements. A commenter asked Greene, “Now do we get to hang them ?? Meaning H & O ???,” referring to Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Greene replied, “Stage is being set. Players are being put in place. We must be patient. This must be done perfectly or liberal judges would let them off.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

The case against cancel culture
January 28, 2021 I By BRITTANY HUNTER
Untitled-design6-1-780x500.png

Freedom of speech is a core value in American society. There is a reason our Founders included it as the First Amendment to our Constitution. Both our intellectual and economic lives depend on the free exchange of ideas and information.

Pacific Legal Foundation is committed to protecting an individual’s right to free speech. While our role is usually litigating on First Amendment issues, we believe the broader cultural point is that “bad” speech should be met with more speech, rather than calling for the silencing of views with which we might disagree.

But this exchange of ideas is being threatened by the social phenomenon “cancel culture.”

Where we used to be able to disagree with each other civilly, over the past several years respectful discourse has been harder to find. Now, individuals on both sides of the aisle are calling for the “cancelling” and “de-platforming”—the removal of individuals’ access to public platforms and from positions of power—of those who don’t agree with them.

Cancel culture has become so widespread, it has ruined lives, damaged reputations, and jeopardized the futures of young people whose lives have barely begun.

Yet, there is a national debate as to whether cancel culture actually exists, and if it does, if it is necessarily a bad thing.

To address these questions and help foster the free exchange of ideas, PLF recently had the privilege of hosting a virtual event, Coming Together or Breaking Apart: The Case Against Cancel Culture, featuring panelists:
  • Professor Jonathan Haidt, social psychologist at New York University’s Stern School of Business, author of The Righteous Mind and co-author of The Coddling of the American Mind
  • Professor Nadine Strossen, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law, Emerita at New York Law School, former president of the American Civil Liberties Union
  • Professor Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law, and founder of “The Volokh Conspiracy,” one of the most influential and widely read legal blogs in the country
Addressing what has become a virtual witch hunt to name and shame those who hold opinions that go against the culture of wokeness, the panel began by discussing whether cancel culture is as big a deal as many seem to think it is.

Strossen started the conversation by explaining that she did not find the fear over this social phenomenon to be overblown. She explained that the seriousness of the situation is what led her to sign the Harper’s Letter, which called for open debate and stated that “the way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away.”

Strossen explained that as a professor, she has witnessed the growing fear that has caused students to self-censor lest they be attacked for their opinions.

Haidt made a bold statement, calling cancel culture, “the social death penalty.”

He explained that in this current climate, those calling for cancellation make “no effort to see what the accused actually said or what the context may have been.”

He continued, “It’s about cutting them off, it’s about calling for their ostracism.”

Haidt also attributes a rise in teen suicide to social media. “Social death,” he explains, “actually leads people to want to commit suicide.”

Volokh later added his concerns over social media, expressing that it has changed so much over the years that it makes the impact of cancel culture greater than it otherwise would be.
“Now, you can get 10,000 signatures, and that’s not the tip of the iceberg, it turns out, it’s actually bigger than the iceberg. The actual number of people who are outraged is probably a lot less than that.
But the result is that I think a lot of times universities, for example, their reaction is ‘Oh my God, we need to do something, we need to take stern action to convey to students that we are taking them seriously.’”
He added, “The problem is, the outrage mobs look so large—it looks like this giant mob, but that is just because the technology has made it so easy for people to cheaply just say ‘Okay, fine. I’ll sign up.’”

Volokh offered a slightly different view of cancel culture, expressing that social ridicule is not akin to being sent to the gulags or even being sent to jail. “It’s not death, it’s not even really social death. So, we need to keep things in perspective.” But he does admit that this is a huge problem, agreeing with Haidt’s sentiment and explaining that the threat of being fired or the threat of being kicked out of college “powerfully deters people from expressing themselves.”

He continued:
“As a result, all of us are losers because the people who are deterred from expressing themselves aren’t just the idiots who don’t have anything useful to say…it’s people who have any views that they think are dissenting in some measure or might be viewed as dissenting five or ten years from now.”
He went on to say:
“That is poison for the academy where we can’t know what’s true. You can’t know that something is true unless people are free to say the opposite. And then their arguments are substantively disproven.”
Strossen made a distinction between healthy self-censorship and unhealthy callout culture. Productive self-censorship, she said, “is part of a healthy discourse on campus and elsewhere…in a healthy, vibrant discourse you are seeking to pursue the dialogue, to exchange and refine and refute and debate ideas and perhaps, change minds.”

She continued, “Whereas the goal of cancel culture seems to be, as the word implies, to end the discussion to take not only certain ideas and certain subjects off the table entirely, but to take certain people out of the discussion entirely. It is effectively the death penalty.”

When asked why so many are quick to participate in cancel culture, Haidt explained, “When we see professors piling on, I think it’s more driven by fear than the desire for prestige. It’s driven by the fear that you’ll be next.”

Haidt later continued, “We need a sociological perspective to understand why these things happen, what is the goal of them. It’s not necessarily focused on shutting down speech; I think it’s focused on strengthening the group that is pursing political ends.”

Haidt also spoke of the rise of “campus safetyism,” a concept mentioned in his book The Coddling of the American Mind.
“While safety for most people means primarily physical safety, we began to see this concept-creep, the idea of safety extended to emotional safety, and then just to ‘things that offend me.’ So this big change that happened around college campuses in 2015 and 2016 reflected the rise of the idea of safety in the classroom.”
Volokh built on Haidt’s comment:
“A lot of the rhetoric used these days is the rhetoric of the emotional fragility of minority groups, and also sometimes of women. One thing someone pointed out is that feminism in the past was ‘I am woman hear me roar’…feminism today is ‘I am woman, I am super vulnerable.’”
Strossen added:
“As a pro-liberty feminist, this reminds me of a famous line in a Supreme Court decision by the great liberal Justice William Brennan, but he took it from an ACLU brief written by the great then-ACLU lawyer Ruth Bader Ginsberg, striking down a supposedly protective law for women. He said, ‘This reflects romantic paternalism, which far from putting women on a pedestal actually puts them in a cage.’”
Grim as the situation may seem, the panel ended with an air of optimism.

When asked what makes each panelist optimistic about the future of cancel culture, Haidt chimed in first, saying, “A lot of survey work shows that most people hate cancel culture, political correctness, and wokeness—even most people on the left.”

Strossen paid PLF a great compliment saying she stays optimistic in part because of “programs like these. There is such a growing interest in an opportunity to learn about and empower people to raise their voices. I also just read a survey that shows that people in this country are not politically active at all, and unfortunately, they are not raising their voices at all to counter the excesses of cancel culture.”

She continued, “I think we should take every opportunity we have, including through forums like this, to tell people what a big difference they can make by raising their voices. As my favorite ACLU T-shirt says, ‘You have the right not to remain silent.’”

Volokh gave his opinion from a legal scholar’s point of view:
“The law is pretty good on a lot of these things. The judges in recent years have been pretty good—by and large, mostly judges from the left and from the right and from the center…court decisions make a difference.”
Watch the full video below.
View: https://youtu.be/TYVUz4HtqTQ
1:00:49 min
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdA-4eiCIe8
14:31 min

Tucker: The American government is at war with its own people
•Jan 29, 2021


Fox News

Tucker Carlson warns Democrats' suppression of dissent, divisive rhetoric will lead to 'scary' repercussions.

[COMMENT: He makes an interesting comment near the end about AOC and the dialogue about Republican "white supremacists" brings the focus to racial issues and identity politics and away from economic disparities, which is what her wealthy donors want to happen.]
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment
God Bless Texas


Texas Governor Orders Agencies to Sue Biden Administration for Climate Actions That ‘Kill Jobs’

January 29, 2021 9:23, Last Updated: January 29, 2021 12:01
By Tom Ozimek

Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott on Thursday vowed to oppose what he called the Biden aAbbott signed an executive order during a press conference in Odessa on Thursday, which directed all state agencies to sue the Biden administration for any federal actions that threaten the Lone Star state’s energy sector.

“Texas is going to protect the oil and gas industry from any type of hostile attack launched from Washington D.C.,” Abbott said. “President Biden’s embrace of the green new deal is a job killer in Texas. It also takes a wrecking ball to the energy independence that Texas has been able to provide to the United States of America and Texas is not going to stand idly by and watch the Biden administration kill jobs in Midland, in Odessa or any other place across the entire region,” he added.

Abbott’s order (pdf) came on the heels of a series of executive actions taken by President Joe Biden in the name of fighting “climate change.” These include the decision to revoke authorization for the Keystone pipeline, the decision to rejoin the Paris Climate Accord, and a moratorium on issuing new oil and gas leases on federal land and waters.

While Biden’s actions have drawn fire from Republicans, industry groups, and even some Democrats, Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry said at a Wednesday press briefing at the White House that Biden wants to make sure workers in the energy industry “have better choices” in jobs that “pay better” and are “cleaner,” giving the example of being a solar power technician instead of being a miner. Kerry also claimed that it’s a false notion that “dealing with climate” comes at the expense of energy workers, adding that there is “a lot of money to be made” in the creation of new “healthier” jobs in sectors such as green hydrogen, geothermal heat, and other renewables.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Thursday criticized the Biden administration’s actions on energy policy that he collectively dubbed a “piecemeal green new deal.”

“There’s nothing green about a tsunami of pink slips for American workers, or carting Canadian crude around in trucks and trains instead of a pipeline,” McConnell said on the Senate floor. “This piecemeal green new deal is the wrong prescription: wrong for the environment, wrong for national security, and most of all for the working Americans who will soon be formerly working Americans if this keeps up.”

“Wilfully throwing our own people out of work, reducing our domestic energy security, raising costs and prices for working families—all for no meaningful impact on global temperatures,” McConnell added.

McConnell also cited a study (pdf) by energy consulting firm OnLocation, which concluded that Biden’s oil and gas lease ban would mean the loss of nearly 1 million jobs by 2022.

“The decision on federal lands will leave us down nearly one million American jobs by next year alone,” McConnell said on the Senate floor. “It’s a heck of a way to kick off a presidency.”

Congress Electoral College In this image from video, then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) speaks as the Senate reconvenes on Jan. 6, 2021. (Senate Television via AP)

But Texas is “prepared to fight back,” Abbott said, with his executive order directing every state agency to, “use all lawful powers and tools to challenge any federal action that threatens the continued strength and vitality of the energy industry. Each state agency should work to identify potential litigation, notice and comment opportunities, and any other means of preventing federal overreach within the law.”

Abbott also said he would support legislation that would prohibit cities from banning natural gas appliances, an action he said was recently taken in San Francisco.

“In Texas, we will not let cities use political correctness to dictate what energy source you use,” he said.dministration’s bid to destroy jobs with its volley of actions targeting the oil and gas industry.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Pelosi ramps up panic porn in Militarized DC…
Posted by Kane on January 29, 2021 10:57 pm
Pelosi ramping up panic porn at Capitol. pic.twitter.com/a4VOHDXyvo
— Alexander Muse (@amuse) January 29, 2021
These first two videos are the same footage and were published today…

Video on website 2:02 min

View: https://youtu.be/L9UUqMhNslg
6:17 min

Bonus Clip — Thomas Massie says Dems Have Militarized D.C. to Push Domestic ‘War on Terror”‘
 

Jaybird

Veteran Member
That second amendment is looking pretty good right about now..........................................................................
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Expect Democrats To Move At Breakneck Speed Following The Blueprints Of The Soviet Union, Venezuela And Other Tyrannical Regimes Of The Past To Complete Their Crackdown Upon America



By US Navy Veteran John C. Velisek for All News Pipeline
The country is under a once distant threat that is bullying its way through our culture. Big Government, Big Tech, academia, and entertainment are the four pillars that are destroying our countries foundations. Hell-bent on the destruction of our basic liberties, the progressive socialists, are following the blueprints of the one-time Soviet Union, Venezuela, and other regimes of the past.

Part of this blueprint is the canceling of our fundamental liberties. The Chinese virus is but the start of this tyranny. Following the rigged election of China Joe Biden, we are now hearing for the leftists a call for revenge. In academia, professors of public policy at Duke Bill Adair, also the founder of the far-leftist Politifact, and Philip Napoli have argued that there is a need for the government to decide what speech will be permitted. In their ivory tower, the poor snowflakes can not accept that there may be someone with ideas different from what they believe. They can' handle disagreement but opt for the censorship of those they feel are below the.

In their world, the citizens cannot decide because they have believed all the lies fed to them by the opposition. They do not understand that facts matter and millions of people have decided to stop drinking the progressive socialist Kool-Aid and have started to think for themselves. Lied to by the leftist political officials within our midst and talking heads of television, the American people have seen the truth and will resist the temptation to allow our government officials to continue their run to the control of every aspect of our lives.

Big Tech and media's crushing censorship will not change the facts and will not distort the truth. The American people will see through the lies and misinformation. The next step, which is just beginning, is the cancel culture of destroying the livelihoods and families of those who disagree. Big government is taking a more active role in the misinformation campaign and the politics of personal destruction. Moving at breakneck speed to further totalitarianism, the leftists call for a government-run by leftists and anarchists to further dictate what is or is not allowable speech.

Coupled with the liberal programs to revise our culture and history is persecution directed at the American liberty loving patriots. They are attempting to coerce the American patriots into bowing down and declaring our great country's history is evil. Tearing down our monuments and revising our history have taken hold because we have let our educational system flounder on the shoals of progressive socialism that had its start under FDR and Woodrow Wilson.



We are being told that if you believe in individual rights as enshrined in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, you must be a racist. The anarchists in the streets' sole purpose are the creative chaos and attempt to cause the patriots within our country, the majority. The progressive socialists hope that the disorder will cause behavioral changes in the psyche of the American patriots causing patriots to bend in their beliefs to the point where they give up and submit to the globalists' demands.

And make no mistake, the globalists, along with the factions within such as teachers unions and community activist groups that work to cause racial disharmony. Those in our government will never understand that the individual citizen is who built this country. Personal responsibility and rugged individualism are what this country was built on. Without personal responsibility, the anarchists and the enablers behind them cannot be held accountable. And without rugged individualism, how can the people stand up to the sorts of things we see today in the circus of politics that threatens to bring this country down.

It may take some time, but the American people will stand up to the intimidation and force used by Marxist forces such as BLM and the Democrat Party. Andrew Cuomo, New York Governor and nursing home murdered, even stated on air that nowhere does it say that protests should be peaceful. But Cuomo can't explain how riots, looting, and burning a citizen's business taking away their livelihood can lead to a fearful police department that runs over someone in a mob surrounding the police car. Even our fake vice-president Kamala Harris has said that riots should continue; she even helped the few arrested to make bail. But she can’t explain that the riots will find everyone, including those in the Capitol who rules the supposed little people from on high. Where the progressive socialists have gained a foothold, threats, violence, censorship, and chaos follow. What will these socialists say when the populace has had enough and start fighting back. They have nothing they can do but declare it an "insurrection.” It will be civil disobedience and the American people's triumph over the authoritarianism they, the progressive socialists, are trying to force upon us.

Leading with the devices at their command in social engineering, political repression, and destroying the best economy before the pandemic will lead to the ultimate collapse that is part of the plan the progressive socialism. By the end of the Biden/Harris regime, our constitutional separation of power and fealty to freedom and fundamental equality will begone. The replacement of the necessary foundation of our country will be tribalism and identity politics. The truth will be supplanted by the ideology of socialism, including mass censorship.

Socialism will maintain the status quo of corporate oligarchies. It has been shown that even during the past socialist takeovers of democratic countries, the movement has been nothing more than a funded operation for the benefits of the elites in positions of power.

The mainstream media and the leftists are doing their best to make the "insurrection" a pivot point in the nation's psyche because of a national election that will not admit it was stolen. The mountains of evidence were not investigated or ruled on by ANY court. The challenges that did make it to the courts were dismissed on technicalities and procedural issues. The evidence has never been examined, and in the few cases that made it courts, was dismissed out of hand without any investigation. The MSM and leftists won't tell you this and refuse to allow anyone to question the election results. Why would they not let the citizens of a supposedly free country see the evidence and will enable us to decide for ourselves?

Is it because in the world of journalism of today, there can be actions to question or investigate any information that is not committed to "the Cause." The globalist elites who have decided that the peasants need to be led without their consent and forced to agree to limits on their liberty. They claim this suppression is a constitutional norm and that the lower class must comply. The globalists see themselves as figureheads meant to make declarations that the peasants will bow down to and follow unquestioningly. They have badly misinterpreted the American people's pulse and are ill-prepared to tamp down the citizen interaction.



The Biden administration is a coup, an open attack on our country to usurp our republic and culture.

In the word of George Washington:

“The time is now near at hand which must properly determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves: whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their houses and farms are to pillaged and destroyed; and themselves consigned to a state of wretchedness.”

What more can be done to the middle class? Caught between the globalists and the progressive socialists in our Congress and the radicalized mobs such as Antifa and BLM below them, what is left open to the middle class? And it appears that the mobs destroying our cities and attempting to intimidate our citizens do not understand that what they are doing is becoming an ally to the socialist left.

It doesn’t matter that socialism has never worked; these thugs don't understand socialism. They have been brainwashed since earl yon through the leftists that indoctrinate them in our schools. Being told that in socialism, "the people" run everything and share equally, it will be a rude awakening when these mobs discover that the Insider elites in total control of consolidating and controlling the wealth.

Add to this the censorship, and cancel culture taken from the likes of the Soviet Union and understand that the anti-America cabal has plans to separate and chase the middle class hard working patriots from the forum of American politics.

HRR Situation Update video on website (This is a new source for me and I cannot vouch for the video) 1:20:57 min
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment

How do we save America if the system is rigged?
Let's Talk Right Now
by Let's Talk Right Now

January 29, 2021 Podcast on website 1611995712138.png


Many Conservatives are trying to figure out whether we try to reform the GOP or start a third party like the Patriot Party. In reality, it’s all a moot point unless we fix the rigged election systems in place.

The mainstream media is colluding with the Democrat Party and Big Tech to cover up the widespread voter fraud that was required in order to ensure that Joe Biden “defeated” Donald Trump in the 2020 Presidential Election. Because of this Censorship, it is making our mission more difficult to accomplish… but not completely impossible. However, we must understand the threat before moving forward.

Conservatives across the country are trying to figure out what we are supposed to do next. Many feel betrayed by the ruling class of the GOP after they’ve turned their backs on us and threw us under the bus by not dealing with Big Tech Censorship and refused to confront the obviously serious issue of Election Fraud. Given that the Republican leaders refused to have Trump’s back, Conservatives now want to primary all of them… myself included!

The question becomes… do we go third party or reform the Republican Party? In my opinion, it’s an important question to answer. However, there’s no point in even entertaining the conversation if we don’t first fix the Rigged Election systems. If we have zero chance of winning any election, what difference does it make whether we are GOP or Patriot Party? None. That’s the reality of the situation we face.

So what we can do? During this episode of Let’s Talk Right Now, I break down what I believe our game plan must be in order to save our nation in spite of seemingly insurmountable odds with the whole system stacked against us.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

January 29, 2021

The Internet’s War On Wall Street Did What Government Could Not—It United America

wallst-united-1050x525-1-1024x512.jpg

by Matt Agorist
TheFreeThoughtProject.com

In the last three weeks, after the Trumpists were duped into thinking they could stop the election of Joe Biden by walking into the capitol and taking selfies with cops, the American technocratic police state has shifted into hyperdrive. In the name of stopping the “insurrection” that wasn’t, President Joe Biden and his team of neoliberal cronies have moved to criminalize speech, up to and including arresting people for trolling with memes as far back as 2016!

Facebook, Twitter, Google, Amazon, Apple, and the like have been unceremoniously creating tens of thousands of online unpersons since January 6.

Establishment hacks, hungry for more power, have seized this moment to increase the surveillance state apparatus and push for the criminalization of everything and anything that is anti-establishment. A nightmarish police state is unfolding in front of us and because the Trumpists were the first to be sacrificed, the left has still been on their honeymoon ignoring the fact that “pro-democracy” Biden is quickly becoming a dictator, bypassing Congress and ramming through a record number of executive actions.

To put it mildly, since the onset of lockdowns last March, those of us who have been paying attention, have seen that the outlook is bleak, so long as the masses keep allowing their elected officials to take away their rights in the name of perceived “safety.”

All promise is not lost, however. There have been multiple glimmers of hope, proving and reasserting the power of the individual versus the establishment.

Gavin Newsom, who has been compared to Hitler for his draconian and entirely arbitrary lockdown orders, likely reacting to a massive recall effort against him, suddenly reversed course on the lockdowns this week, allowing struggling businesses to hang on to their life’s work. But this was just the beginning.

On Tuesday, a paradigm shift took place unlike anything we’ve seen in history. A populist movement started on Reddit that threw aside their political differences and moved to take back some of this power and wealth that has been extracted from them particularly over the last year, but going back decades before.
Gamestop, stopped the game.

The rigged game that has paid for yachts with helopads belonging to the myriad of slime balls on Wall Street, whose job description entails betting (in a casino they own) that businesses will fail, and then ensuring their failure, was exposed.

In the last few days, millions have witnessed — many for the first time ever — that the system is a rigged club, and they are not in it.

The coordinated effort by millions on the internet has shown the establishment that the people have power. It knocked them on their heels as kids with $500 in their bank accounts helped take down multi-billion dollar hedge funds.

Predictably, however, like the establishment does every time it is threatened, it used its power and influence to attempt to stop it.

On Thursday, the Robinhood app ironically began acting like the Sheriff of Nottingham as it froze trading to protect hedge funds from rising stock prices of GME, AMC, and NOK. This was de facto market manipulation to protect Wall Street while screwing over the individual investor.

But this move did not go unnoticed. In fact, it was an act so egregious that it garnered the attention of political enemies who actually found a moment of solidarity to stand against it.

MAGA Congressman from Arizona’s 4th District, Paul Gosar, along with Ted Cruz, and Lauren Boebert, united with their perceived political foes across the aisle like Rashida Tlaib and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to call out this coordinated effort by Big Tech to collude against private investors.

These tweets below represent something absolutely amazing — the left and the right throwing their differences aside and taking a moment to reflect on the corrupt establishment that no longer functions for the people.
Fully agree. https://t.co/rW38zfLYGh
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 28, 2021
This is beyond absurd. @FSCDems need to have a hearing on Robinhood's market manipulation. They're blocking the ability to trade to protect Wall St. hedge funds, stealing millions of dollars from their users to protect people who've used the stock market as a casino for decades. https://t.co/CGkJxVfzkv
— Rashida Tlaib (@RashidaTlaib) January 28, 2021
Senator @tedcruz, Rep. @DrPaulGosar, Rep. @AOC, and Rep. @RashidaTlaib are going to bat for Redditors against hedge funds and Robin Hood.
This is a bigger crossover event than Avengers.https://t.co/XwYZhC0zGg
— Ford Fischer (@FordFischer) January 28, 2021
First Big Tech censored conservatives.
Now it appears Big Tech is colluding with Wall Street to bailout hedge funds after private investors beat them at their own game.
Congress should subpoena Robinhood & anyone involved with the GameStop halt & make them explain themselves.
— Lauren Boebert (@laurenboebert) January 28, 2021
A moment large enough to bring these two sides together like this hasn’t likely happened since 9/11. We are truly navigating into uncharted waters.

In a time where divide is the norm and vitriol between political ideologies is constant, people were able to come together in a common fight against the corrupt ruling elite.

As there is such significant bipartisan support calling out the establishment, rest assured that this will likely be the subject of a congressional hearing soon.

Hopefully, the action taken to correct what big tech did to stifle private investors is not more “regulation” that got us to this point in the first place. The very “regulation” that has granted a monopoly on the stock market was written by K street and given directly to their puppets in the capitol. This cannot happen again, and as Justin Amash points out, the safeguards against cronyism are put in place through the opposite of centralized planning.
The people in centers of power are rigging the system in full view and calling it a “chance to recalibrate.” The rest of us call it corruption. We defeat it through decentralization.
— Justin Amash (@justinamash) January 28, 2021
As doom and gloom appear to be the “new normal,” it is refreshing and indeed sanity-replenishing to see the two political parties who are tearing America apart, come together to stand against corruption, cronyism, and an overt attack on main street Americans.

Those of us who have been at this for more than a decade have been waiting for a moment like this for a long time. The empire will inevitably strike back, but as this incident highlights, rebellion in the form of peaceful counter economics will prevail.

To those who profit off of destruction and control rather than creation and free markets — your days of hiding behind the mainstream media and your shills in marble buildings are numbered. No amount of “regulation” or censorship will stop an idea whose time has come.

View: https://youtu.be/d-jXrvszvzo
6:03 min
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Would You Be Considered A Domestic Terrorist Under This New Bill?

FRIDAY, JAN 29, 2021 - 22:40
Authored by Robert Wheeler via The Organic Prepper blog,

After 9/11, the entire country collectively lost its mind in the throes of fear. During that time, all civil and Constitutional rights were shredded and replaced with the pages of The USA PATRIOT Act.

Almost 20 years later, the U.S. has again lost its collective mind, this time in fear of a “virus” and it’s “super mutations” and a “riot” at the capitol. A lot of people called this and to the surprise of very few, much like after 9/11, Americans are watching what remains of their civil liberties be replaced with a new bill.

The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021
The DTPA is essentially the criminalization of speech, expression, and thought. It takes cancel culture a step further and all but outlaws unpopular opinions. This act will empower intelligence, law enforcement, and even military wings of the American ruling class to crack down on individuals adhering to certain belief systems and ideologies.

According to MI Congressman Fred Upton:
“The attack on the U.S. Capitol earlier this month was the latest example of domestic terrorism, but the threat of domestic terrorism remains very real. We cannot turn a blind eye to it,” Upton said. “The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act will equip our law enforcement leaders with the tools needed to help keep our homes, families, and communities across the country safe.
Congressman Upton’s website gives the following information on DTPA:
The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021 would strengthen the federal government’s efforts to prevent, report on, respond to, and investigate acts of domestic terrorism by authorizing offices dedicated to combating this threat; requiring these offices to regularly assess this threat; and providing training and resources to assist state, local, and tribal law enforcement in addressing it.
DTPA would authorize three offices, one each within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), to monitor, investigate, and prosecute cases of domestic terrorism. The bill also requires these offices to provide Congress with joint, biannual reports assessing the state of domestic terrorism threats, with a specific focus on white supremacists. Based on the data collected, DTPA requires these offices to focus their resources on the most significant threats.
DTPA also codifies the Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee, which would coordinate with United States Attorneys and other public safety officials to promote information sharing and ensure an effective, responsive, and organized joint effort to combat domestic terrorism.
The legislation requires DOJ, FBI, and DHS to provide training and resources to assist state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies in understanding, detecting, deterring, and investigating acts of domestic terrorism and white supremacy. Finally, DTPA directs DHS, DOJ, FBI, and the Department of Defense to establish an interagency task force to combat white supremacist infiltration of the uniformed services and federal law enforcement.
Those who read the bill aren’t so gung ho to shred the Constitution

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has some serious reservations. In a recent interview on Fox News Primetime, Gabbard stated that the bill effectively criminalizes half of the country. (Emphasis ours)
“It’s so dangerous as you guys have been talking about, this is an issue that all Democrats, Republicans, independents, Libertarians should be extremely concerned about, especially because we don’t have to guess about where this goes or how this ends,” Gabbard said.
She continued: “When you have people like former CIA Director John Brennan openly talking about how he’s spoken with or heard from appointees and nominees in the Biden administration who are already starting to look across our country for these types of movements similar to the insurgencies they’ve seen overseas, that in his words, he says make up this unholy alliance of religious extremists, racists, bigots, he lists a few others and at the end, even libertarians.”
Gabbard, stating her concern about how the government will define what qualities they are searching for in potential threats to the country, went on to ask:
“What characteristics are we looking for as we are building this profile of a potential extremist, what are we talking about? Religious extremists, are we talking about Christians, evangelical Christians, what is a religious extremist? Is it somebody who is pro-life? Where do you take this”
Tulsi said the bill would create a dangerous undermining of our civil liberties and freedoms in our Constitution. She also stated the DPTA essentially targets nearly half of the United States.
“You start looking at obviously, have to be a white person, obviously likely male, libertarians, anyone who loves freedom, liberty, maybe has an American flag outside their house, or people who, you know, attended a Trump rally,” Gabbard said.
Tulsi Gabbard is not the only one to criticize the legislation

Even the ACLU, one of the weakest organizations on civil liberties in the United States, has spoken out. While the ACLU was only concerned with how the bill would affect minorities or “brown people,” the organization stated that the legislation, while set forth under the guise of countering white supremacy, would eventually be used against non-white people.

The ACLU’s statement is true.

As with similar bills submitted under the guise of “protecting” Americans against outside threats, this bill will inevitably expand further. The stated goals of the DPTA are far-reaching and frightening enough. It would amount to an official declaration of the end to Free Speech.

Soon there will be no rights left for Americans

In the last twenty years, Americans have lost their 4th Amendment rights, and now they are losing their 1st. All that remains is the 2nd Amendment, and both the ruling class and increasing numbers of the American people know it.
Dark days are ahead.
 

Ku Commando

Inactive
This is what these fvkkin' idiots look like......of course it ain't pretty.

Y'know what we do out in the stix to rabies critters


tenor.gif
 

20Gauge

TB Fanatic
[COMMENT: Looks like if we are going to "split the sheets," American businesses are making it easier by splitting into politically aligned business.]

Sephora Cuts Ties With Beauty Influencer for Being a Conservative, Says Republicans 'Aren't Aligned' With Their Values

Sephora Cuts Ties With Beauty Influencer for Being a Conservative, Says Republicans ‘Aren’t Aligned’ With Their Values
By Cassandra Fairbanks
0-105.jpg

The beauty store Sephora has cancelled all future partnerships and cut ties with beauty influencer Amanda Ensing for being a conservative.

The makeup shop responded to liberal activists who were outraged that they would dare to work with a Republican by saying that she “shared content on social media that is not aligned with Sephora’s values around inclusivity.”

Ensing posts pretty standard beauty content mixed with some posts about her pretty standard conservative views — such as her support for the Second Amendment.

“Thank you for reaching out and bringing this to our attention. We were made aware that Amanda Ensing, an influencer contracted through one of our external vendors’ campaigns, recently shared content on social media that is not aligned with Sephora’s values around inclusivity. As soon as we were informed, we made the decision to cease all programming with Amanda and will not be engaging her for future partnerships,” Sephora wrote in a response to a social media activist.

Now, conservative women are rallying to Ensing’s defense.

“To any conservative woman out there that shops at Sephora …Take your money elsewhere,” Republican political commentator and activist Courtney Holland wrote. She added that Ensing has “brought LOADS of business to them over the years with her millions of followers across her platforms and promotion of their products.”


Ensing tweeted on Friday night that her legal team has asked the company for more information as to why they are ceasing the relationship.

“I am disappointed that a brand that claims to be inclusive seems to be excluding conservative voices,” Ensing wrote.
They keep forgetting that overall it is Republicans that have money. Yes there are very rich Dims, but there are far far more Republicans / Conservatives who have ready cash to spend.
 

SSTemplar

Veteran Member
You don't need no stinking secret police. Just give rewards to neighbors or children who report deviant behavior that leads to arrest. Cheap and affective.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

EXCLUSIVE: TSA Harasses Proud Boys Chairman On Family Vacation

By Jacob Engels
Published January 30, 2021 at 7:00am
enrique-tarrio-2.jpg

Enrique Tarrio, the Afro-Cuban Chairman of the right leaning men’s organization Proud Boys, was repeatedly harassed by TSA employees while attempting to travel to a regularly scheduled family vacation. Speaking exclusively and for the first time about the incidents to TGP, Tarrio told us that he was “aghast” and “shocked” by the harassment.

Apparently he was scheduled to travel a day earlier, but when he arrived at the airport to pick up his ticket at the ticket counter, the airline employee seemed confused and informed him that TSA was going to attempt to search his bags.

However, Tarrio had not yet checked his bags, meaning that TSA was not able to legally force him to turn over his property without probable cause. Still, they asked Tarrio. He refused and set a flight for Thursday.
“I thought that the harassment was over. I was wrong,” explained Tarrio.
Unfortunately for Tarrio and his traveling party, two of which are elderly individuals who are at extreme risk of contracting COVID-19 the longer they are in the airport or traveling, the nightmare had just begun. Upon arriving for his flight, Tarrio’s bag was meticulously unpacked and his person was searched aggressively by TSA agents. When he was eventually given the all clear, things got worse. As he was heading towards his gate for departure, he saw nearly twenty TSA agents present at the gate harassing other customers, but he knew the real reason they were there was because of him.
“At the gate, they did the same exact thing. Rudely rifling through my personal belongings, inspecting and disrupting every nook and cranny. I’m a big boy, but to demean me in front of the elders in my family was beyond the pale. Plus, it put them at elevated risk of contracting COVID-19, especially given the fact that the TSA agents were swarming and surrounding us,” a horrified Tarrio said to TGP.
Then after, nearly several hours being wasted on inspecting his belongings, Tarrio and his family were finally boarding the plane, but there was one small problem… they had a connecting flight. He told us that at that point he was frustrated and saddened by the experience, but that he thought that they couldn’t possibly plan to do that at the next flight gate. Sadly but surely, they did. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Nearly twenty TSA agents harassed Tarrio and his family in a show of force, letting him know that if he wants to travel as a free man in the United States, they intended on making it as difficult and miserable as possible.
“The TSA is one of the most hated and mismanaged “law enforcement” agencies in the world. It’s not the rank and file agents, who were for the most part very nice. It’s whomever sent this order from the top down to harass my family,” Tarrio concluded.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Biden's Executive Orders Are So Out of Control Even The NYT Is Pleading with Him to Slow Down
President Joe Biden reacts as he delivers his inaugural address at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2021. Biden had signed 22 executive orders as of Jan. 29.
Alex Wong / Getty ImagesPresident Joe Biden reacts as he delivers his inaugural address at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2021. Biden had signed 22 executive orders as of Jan. 29. (Alex Wong / Getty Images)

By C. Douglas Golden
Published January 30, 2021 at 11:09am

For political junkies — those of us who impose narrative structures on the news of the day — there are moments that frequently remind us of the movies.
Earlier this week, The New York Times reminded me of Uncle Frank from “Home Alone.”

If you forget who he is, don’t worry. He doesn’t play a major part in the story. However, the first time we see Macaulay Culkin’s character on screen, he’s complaining to his mother: “Uncle Frank won’t let me watch the movie, but the big kids can. Why can’t I? … It’s not even rated R. He’s just being a jerk.”

“If Uncle Frank says no,” Culkin’s mother said, pausing for a second, “then it must be really bad.”

I was reminded of that scene because, on Wednesday, The New York Times’ editorial board had a message for the new president: “Ease Up on the Executive Actions, Joe.”

If the Gray Lady says no, it must be really bad.

While noting that “President Biden is moving aggressively to turn the page on the Trump era” with executive orders — something that one assumes the editorial board doesn’t mind, per se — the board feared a “whipsaw” effect on key issues.

And there are a lot of them.

“A week into his presidency, Mr. Biden has issued a raft of executive orders and other actions,” the editorial board wrote.

“Already, he has committed to rejoining the Paris climate change agreement, ended the Muslim travel ban, canceled the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, rescinded funding for and halted construction on the wall at the southern border, reaffirmed the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, mandated mask-wearing on federal grounds, moved to end the federal government’s reliance on private prisons, reversed the ban on transgender military service and called for agency assessments aimed at advancing racial equity — just to name a few. The coming days will bring more such action.”

And yes, the board also noted that your reaction to the executive orders depends on which party you’re in, with “Democrats and others eager to see the legacy of Donald Trump’s presidency dismantled posthaste” and “Republicans … grumbling about presidential overreach and accusing Mr. Biden of betraying his pledge to seek unity.”

Yes, Democrats and unspecified “others” are on board with dismantling the Trump administration’s accomplishments, while only Republicans are grumbling at this. There’s a bit of irony, considering there was a fair bit of grumbling ahead and one can say, with a fair bit of confidence, that only “Democrats and others” edited this document. But we plow on.

“But this is no way to make law,” opined the editorial board.

“A polarized, narrowly divided Congress may offer Mr. Biden little choice but to employ executive actions or see his entire agenda held hostage. These directives, however, are a flawed substitute for legislation. They are intended to provide guidance to the government and need to work within the discretion granted the executive by existing law or the Constitution.

“They do not create new law — though executive orders carry the force of law — and they are not meant to serve as an end run around the will of Congress,” the board continued. “By design, such actions are more limited in what they can achieve than legislation, and presidents who overreach invite intervention by the courts.”

A key example of this would be DACA, established by executive order by Barack Obama and then repealed by executive order by Donald Trump. (Trump’s repeal later was overturned by the Supreme Court, which found, in one of those trademark 5-4 John Roberts specials, that the administration didn’t end the program in a legally proper manner.)

The Times editorial board said DACA recipients “have had their lives disrupted in recent years” and that Trump’s decision to undo it was “[setting] off years of legal challenges and throwing these people’s lives into a nightmarish limbo.”

No discernible castigation can be found for Obama putting DACA recipients “into a nightmarish limbo” by choosing to pursue the legislation without Congress, but the point still stands — a White House that builds its legacy upon sand will see it slide away once the opposition party gets into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

“Undoing some of Mr. Trump’s excesses is necessary, but Mr. Biden’s legacy will depend on his ability to hammer out agreements with Congress,” The Times editorial board wrote.

“On the campaign trail, he often touted his skill at finding compromise, and his decades as a legislator, as reasons to elect him over Mr. Trump. The country faces significant challenges to recovering from the pandemic, from a global recession, from years of safety nets and institutions and trust being eroded. Now it is time for the new president to show the American people what permanent change for a better nation can look like.”

The Biden administration’s take? “Nah, we’re good.”

“As the NYT ed board criticizes Biden this am for taking swift executive action to reverse the most egregious actions of the Trump Admin, I can’t help but recall that during the primary they encouraged voters to consider what a president could accomplish through exec Action,” tweeted White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield.

“So my question is which actions that the President took to reverse Donald Trump’s executive orders would they have liked to see him not pursue?”
Action. So my question is which actions that the President took to reverse Donald Trump’s executive orders would they have liked to see him not pursue? /2
— Kate Bedingfield (@WHCommsDir) January 28, 2021
Of course we are also pursuing our agenda through legislation. It’s why we are working so hard to get the American Rescue Plan passed, for starters! 3\3
— Kate Bedingfield (@WHCommsDir) January 28, 2021
Bedingfield’s rhetorical question is intellectually dishonest; the editorial board named one and can’t go through each of the 22 executive orders Biden had signed as of Friday in a brief editorial. They simply told him to ease up.

Meanwhile, the American Rescue Plan, Biden’s $1.9 trillion stimulus package, can’t be willed into being by executive order.

Ironically, candidate Biden seemed to acknowledge President Biden should ease up on the executive orders, too.

“That’s why — you know, the one thing that I — I have this strange notion,” Biden said during an October town hall event in Philadelphia. “We are a democracy. Some of my Republican friends and some of my Democratic friends even occasionally say, ‘Well, if you can’t get the votes by executive order, you’re going to do something.’ Things you can’t do by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus.”

So there you have it, Kate Bedingfield. If you won’t listen to Uncle Frank from “Home Alone,” at least listen to Uncle Joe from the campaign trail. It’s really bad.

[COMMENT: Article II Section 3 of the US Constitution on the duties of the President: "he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,"

FAITHFULLY
THELAW.COM LAW DICTIONARY & BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 2ND ED.
"As used in bonds of public and private officers this term imports not only honesty but also a punctilious discharge of all the duties of the office requiring competence diligence and attention without any malfeasance or nonfeasance aside from mere mistakes."

This does not mean making new law through E.Os or policies to ignore existing law such Congress's direction and allocation of funds to build the southern border wall. ]
 

stop tyranny

Veteran Member
[Marsh has been adding multiple posts that will scare the living snot out of you. You really need to spin through all her posts. Make sure you’re strapped-in though. You’ll be in a white-hot fury by the time you read them all - Dennis]



Leftists Call For New "Secret Police" Force To Spy On Trump Supporters

WEDNESDAY, JAN 20, 2021 - 18:45
Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

Perhaps channeling the spirit of the Soviet NKVD, leftists are now literally calling for a new “secret police” unit to be created at the federal level to spy on Trump supporters.


In an article published by the Daily Beast, Jeff Stein argues that existing federal agencies like the FBI are ill-equipped to stop “white terror” because they missed signs of the the pre-planning of the Capitol building siege.

The solution is to create a new “secret police” (yes, he literally uses those words) in order to “infiltrate and neutralize armed domestic extremists,” which according to the media’s latest narrative potentially includes 70 million Trump voters.

Stein even compares the Capitol breach to 9/11, an attack that killed nearly 3,000 people, and argues that a similar response to that should be directly inwardly against American citizens directed by a new “domestic spy agency.”

“One response to the 9/11 tragedy may well get renewed attention after the Capitol assault—especially if armed white nationalists are successful in carrying out more attacks in the coming days and weeks: The call for a secret police,” he writes.

The existence of a “secret police” force that subverts constitutional norms to repress the population is of course a hallmark of all dictatorial regimes, but that doesn’t appear to bother self-proclaimed “progressives.”

He also hits the nail on the head about the real reason why the creation of a new secret police unit would be necessary.

As we highlighted yesterday, in addition to a new secret police, some are calling for the creation of a Stasi-like citizen spy network that would recruit Biden supporters to spy on Trump supporters and grass them up to the authorities.

Presumably, this is all part of the national “healing” and “unity” that Joe Biden has called for.
It is well past time for the conservatives and constitutionalists to start organizing and financing there own secret police as well as militias to collect intel and defend against this communist insurgency.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Facial Recognition Now Being Used To Target and Harass Trump Supporters!

by daniel16 hours ago16 hours ago

trump-supporters-honk-their-horn-768x432.jpg

Is it 2021?
Or 1984?

The reality of “big brother” watching your every move is here.

Unfortunately, it appears that the government is only interested in stalking and harassing Trump voters.

Check out this warning from OAN journalist Jack Posobiec:
Trump supporter in PA just posted this. Stopped by TSA over ‘facial recognition match’ pic.twitter.com/y7r7Y81oK3
— Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) January 29, 2021
Let’s break this down…

A passenger was stopped by TSA before being able to get on the plane.
Why?

Because of a “facial recognition” match that identified the passenger as a Trump supporter.

The traveler was there with his daughter, which is embarrassing and a shame.

The person posted this on Facebook not to “complain,” but whether to ask whether this has happened to other Trump supporters.

Has this happened to you?

Please let us know in the comments below!

And be sure to share this with your friends, so that people in your network are aware of the risks!

This apparent harassment of Trump voters is especially troubling after calls to “deprogram” people who voted for his reelection.

Fox News confirms:
In response to some people claiming Trump supporters need to be “deprogrammed,” Fox News contributor Mike Huckabee on Tuesday explained why people voted for the former reality TV star to lead the country.
“The first thing would be to get some of these leftist loons [to] take their boot off my neck. I don’t need that, I’m supposed to be a free American with the capacity to think for myself,” Huckabee told “Fox & Friends.”

“If my views are as horrible as they think they are, then nobody will follow them,” Huckabee said.
Liberal journalists and social media voices have stepped up their calls to “deprogram,” deplatform or outright threaten right-leaning voices in the aftermath of the deadly Capitol riot earlier this month.
During an appearance Friday on “Real Time with Bill Maher,” former CBS News anchor Katie Couric ripped the Republicans in Congress who voted against impeaching President Trump over a charge of inciting rioters on Jan. 6.
“The question is how are we going to really almost deprogram these people who have signed up for the cult of Trump,” Couric said.
Her language mirrored that of liberal Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson in the aftermath of the riot, when a pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol building in a deadly melee.
Robinson said last week on MSNBC “there are millions of Americans, almost all White, almost all Republicans, who somehow need to be deprogrammed,” calling them members of a “Trumpist cult.”
Huckabee asserted that there is “no cult” of Trump supporters, but rather people who “appreciate the many” actions that President Trump made for the country such as “standing up for the sanctity of life, standing with Israel by moving an embassy into that country, and resetting the Middle East.”
“I’m glad he cut taxes, deregulated for businesses so that people had the highest number of jobs among Hispanics, Blacks and women in the history of the country. I’m glad that he pushed back against China so we’re not rolling over as these Communists continue to steal everything, including our information and our data and every single secret and innovation we’ve created,” Huckabee said.
Huckabee is right!

People voted for Trump not because they’re radicals, but because they love America!
They love our flag!
And they love the Constitution!

There is nothing “radical” about that at all!
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Man and daughter detained, questioned at airports for being at the DC Trump rally
Are we really still in the land of the free and the home of the brave? Was it all just an illusion?
by Scott Boyd
January 29, 2021

Man and daughter detained, questioned at airports for being at the DC Trump rally

A disturbing story was posted to Facebook earlier that should ring alarm bells at their highest volume for American citizens. According to the anonymous traveler, he and his daughter were detained and questioned by TSA officers because he was caught by facial recognition as being a potential domestic terrorist. His crime? He attended the DC Trump rally on January 6th and is therefore considered a risk.

Freedom to peaceably assemble is a constitutional right that separates the United States from other western nations that have adopted authoritarianism. But apparently that right is being questioned, specifically for those who have or still do support President Trump. Here’s the tale as posted by One America’s Jack Posobiec:
Trump supporter in PA just posted this. Stopped by TSA over ‘facial recognition match’ pic.twitter.com/y7r7Y81oK3
— Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) January 29, 2021
This past week I travelled to Mexico for a planned trip with my daughter. When I tried to check in for my American Airline flight I was held at the gate, told I was being screened by TSA and would not be able to make my flight because of it.
I was put on a later flight after going through a very intensive TSA screening. I thought it was just random bad luck. I finally arrived, had a lovely week with my daughter and attempted to fly home.
I was again held at the check in counter of United Airlines for extra screening but did make my scheduled flight. I arrived in Newark NJ last night and proceeded to passport control, as I have done numerous times in the past with absolutely no issues, and was stopped at immigration and told I needed to follow them into the back room and be interviewed/interrogated. At this point I am beyond upset (I’m a tax paying law abiding American with absolutely no record) and asked curtly what is going on???
(They also took my adult daughter in for questioning) The officer informed me that due to facial recognition I have been flagged as a participant in the DC domestic terrorist attack on the capitol and they needed to question me!!!
I WAS SHOCKED. I told them I did travel to DC on Jan 6th to attend the rally and to listen to the President BUT I was absolutely no where near where the incident occurred and how is it possible for me to be associated at all with the few radicals that went into the capitol when the majority of the people at the rally were peaceful and respectful?
Are we as Americans no longer allowed the right to assemble?
Thankfully the officer was very nice and after my initial shock I was able to answer his questions calmly and we were let go. Only on my way home did I realize the reality of what had just happened.
I had been flagged by my government as a potential domestic terrorist simply because I attended a rally in support of the President and if the officer hadn’t been a nice man they literally could have held me indefinitely and there would have been absolutely nothing I could have done.

I am putting this out there because I am wondering if this has happened to anyone else and if so how did they get off this “list” and most importantly I am asking have we ever been the land of the free or has it all been an illusion?
Is that why Trump was so hated? Did he try to pull the curtain back and expose the people behind it? TIA
While the validity of this post cannot be confirmed, it seems completely legitimate. Well, the actions taken by our government have no legitimacy at all if this tale is true but the story itself seems credible. It also jibes with other stories we’ve been hearing for the past couple of weeks as those who were close to the Capitol riots have reported similar incidents.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Freshman GOP Sen. Tuberville Says Capitol Hill Is ‘A War Zone’ With ‘Millions Of The Taxpayers’ Dollars’ Wasted On National Guard Presence

By Allan Miller | Jan 30, 2021


Friday, during an interview on Mobile, AL radio’s FM Talk 106.5, Freshman GOP Sen. Tommy Tuberville discussed the current situation on Capitol Hill, which he likened to a “war zone” with the National Guard presence.

The freshman U.S. Senator also questioned the treatment of the guardsman deployed around the U.S. Capitol.

live a hundred yards from my office,” he said. “I actually bought a house next to Mitch McConnell. Having a lot of it reworked. It’s only 1,000 square feet. That is kind of a small place. That’s all you need, but it’s a war zone. I’ve never seen anything like it. My dad was in the military forever and National Guard. We’ve had 25,000 National Guard people there, I guess for now for three weeks. I guess now we’re down to maybe 10,000 now. But we have 20 miles of razor wire all the way around all of the buildings — the Capitol, the Senate buildings. These guys and girls have been sleeping outside my office on the floor. We take candy out to them, popcorn. They’ve been MREs. It’s a shame.”

They were treated badly — not they were abused or anything,” Tuberville continued. “There was just no planning, and how are you going to sleep that many people? They’re walking about with M5s and M16s. It is very different. I talked to the Alabama troops who were up there. We took pictures and ran into a lot of them. Every time I would walk by a National Guard — ‘Hey, where are you from?’ ‘I’m from Tennessee.’ ‘Where are you from?’ You know, we had troops from all 50 states. We’ve spent millions of the taxpayers’ dollars on this.
Had the opportunity to meet with members of the Alabama National Guard yesterday! I am incredibly grateful for these men and women being here and faithfully fulfilling their mission to keep us safe.
Thank you. pic.twitter.com/1mqK0eyZIX
— Senator Tommy Tuberville (@SenTuberville) January 23, 2021
Tuberville speculated the continued National Guard troops on Capitol Hill is attributed to the security lapse, one which he said fell under House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s watch.

“I guess this came from Nancy Pelosi because she dropped the ball,” he said.

“She’s the head of security for the Capitol. Of course, she isn’t going to take the blame for anything. They’re all there, and I think they’re going to stay there through the State of the Union address. But they don’t need to be there. Capitol Police obviously were overwhelmed.”
While I am glad to see that @NationalGuard have been allowed back in the Capitol buildings – this outrageous treatment is a disgrace.

These men & women came from around our country to protect the Capitol & they filled out their mission faithfully.

We need to get answers ASAP.
— Senator Tommy Tuberville (@SenTuberville) January 22, 2021
The Alabama Republican lawmaker said the January 6 incident set the Republican Party back “a good ways,” and added those involved “had no business going in the Capitol.”

“It really disappointed me how people handled that,” Tuberville added. “It is what it is, and it is kind of like in a football game. We fumbled three or four times in a row there as Republicans, and now we’ve got to fight back because they’re using it against us every day with all these troops and the razor wire, and ‘Republicans are bad,’ and you know ‘we want to take over the world.’ But we’ll come back. We just got to keep a positive attitude, and work and work for the people of this country.”
Great to see SGT Edwards and SPC Luschen of the Alabama National Guard here in D.C. today!
Thank you for protecting the Capitol & keeping members and staff safe! pic.twitter.com/feVM7M0JlR
— Senator Tommy Tuberville (@SenTuberville) January 21, 2021
We need answers ASAP.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

marsh

On TB every waking moment

"Republicans Need To Suffer": Drake Prof Triggers Free Speech Debate With Hateful Tweets Against Men, Conservatives

SATURDAY, JAN 30, 2021 - 16:00
Authored by Jonathan Turley,
There is a free speech debate at Drake University over hateful and vulgar tweets from Associate English Professor Beth Younger, who called for Republicans “to suffer.” We have seen increasing vulgar attacks from academics, including such high-profile figures as Laurence Tribe in the last few years. Notably, Twitter did not suspend Younger’s account for calling for harm to all Republicans. I do not believe that she should be barred from social media or fired from Drake as a matter of free speech. Even with professors who have justified the murder of conservatives or killing police are protected in such hateful expressions.

The solution to such hate speech is more (and better) speech. I would rather we denounce such speech than censor it.

Beth Younger tweeted on October 26th that “I was just pondering how much hatred I feel towards all the Republican a**holes. They need to suffer.”

Younger also declared that all “men are trash.” and sent a message to U.S. Senator Josh Hawley on Jan. 7 that stated “f**k of you piece of shit.” She also attacked Melania Trump and called Secretary Mike Pompeo a “f**king moron and a traitor.”

Such sentiments are obviously concerning given many Republican students and presumably faculty on campus. It also have an impact on male students taking her class with her stated hatred for their gender. In a compelling and well-considered email, President Marty Martin correctly condemned Younger’s comments as “unacceptable.” Martin however stressed freedom of speech in her email this week:
The Drake University Statement of Principles declares that freedom of thought and freedom of expression are central to our educational mission. We therefore carefully refrain from restricting the exchange of ideas or regulating the content of speech. We recognize that the frank and open discussion of social, cultural, artistic, religious, moral, scientific, and political issues may be disturbing and even hurtful for some individuals, but the principle of free exchange and inquiry takes precedence because of its fundamental role in our educational enterprise. We seek to create through this robust exchange of ideas a community in which shared purpose transcends difference and respect for human dignity transcends conflict.
Younger’s tweets raise serious questions over sexist and political intolerance. However, there is no allegation that she has engaged in discriminatory or hateful conduct in classes. The question is whether universities would maintain such a position in favor of free speech if the statements targeted other groups like a male professor saying the same thing about women. It is not clear if there is a coherent line or policy on such cases. Free speech demands bright lines but the record among universities has been conflicted. I often hear from conservative and libertarian faculty about what they view as a double standard. They do not believe that the universities would show equal tolerance for criticism, let alone hateful attacks, of other groups. Certainly many liberal faculty and students have not shown the same tolerance.

As many on this blog are aware, I tend to be predictable on free speech issues.

My natural default is to protect speech, particularly when exercised off campus or on social media. These are difficult cases when statements reflect prejudice and sexism as in the case of Professor Younger. However, there is a fear of a slippery slope once universities begin to punish those with unacceptable views expressed in their private capacity. We have been discussing efforts to fire professors who voice dissenting views of the basis or demands of recent protests including an effort to oust a leading economist from the University of Chicago as well as a leading linguistics professor at Harvard and a literature professor at Penn. The silence of many faculty in the face of crackdowns on free speech has been chilling in the last few years.

There is a palpable sense of fear among many conservative and libertarian faculty and students that they cannot express themselves on campus or in classes without be ostracized or even subjected to retaliatory measures, including attacks by the student government. While faculty member like Professor Younger might not show the same tolerance for opposing views, we have a greater responsibility to regain the trust of our communities in the tolerance for opposing views and expression on our campuses. She is the cost of free speech.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Revolution, Revenge Of The Nerds, Or The Matrix Reloaded?

SATURDAY, JAN 30, 2021 - 15:00
Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, 'n Guns blog,
I have to say as revolutions go, this one is hilarious.

GameStop opened Friday morning above $330 per share, a sentence I never thought in a million years I’d ever write.

This open nearly ensures that all the attempts Thursday to push the price back down to bail out the hedge funds desperately short have failed spectacularly.

There’s options expiration today which will fundamentally change the way we look at markets if Game Spot closes in this range.

Because it shows that when people act in the aggregate they can overwhelm the attempts by a few central planners to control you.

Your best proof that this is at least a part of what’s going on is the way Wall St. and the regulators in D.C. are reacting. Because they are screaming that this is outrageous, that we need stronger enforcement tools to ‘ensure the integrity of our markets.’

That’s just code for ‘only we’re allowed to game the markets not the little people.’

And with options expiring on GameStop nearly every week in February and March this game isn’t over by any stretch of the imagination.

Populist is a Four-Letter Work

In fact, It’s the beginning of a new form of populist revolt.

We’ve seen what they think of populist revolts. They have utter disdain for them. They squash them and hope to ignore the consequences.

Vote for Trump? Can’t have that happen again.

Speak out against any facet of the Great Reset? Get censored.

Try to build a new platform not controlled by them? Get deplatformed.

Show up at the Capitol to peacefully assemble? Get caught up in a false flag to justify arresting you and shaming you into submission.

Today’s price action in Game Spot and other stocks heavily-shorted by hedge funds is simply the next iteration of the people finding ways to make their voices heard.

If you remove someone’s ability to speak in one arena they will find a way in another.

And don’t for a second think the irony of this evolution of Occupy Wall St. occurring during the World Economic Forum’s virtual Davos is lost on me.
It isn’t.

In an age where we are forced to wear masks in ritual submission to oligarchic control they hide behind ever bigger barriers to our hatred of them.

As we saw on Capitol Hill three weeks ago, public assembly in the age of COVID is a recipe for even more ‘wound collecting‘ by the oligarchy, who have their media quislings turn into it bad PR for how unruly the little people are to scare the ‘normies.’

Black-Scholes Event Horizon

But what happens when the little people don’t care about making money or any of those other ‘rational’ investor/actor assumptions which undergird the value-at-risk equations used by most hedge funds and Wall St. quants?

What happens when someone finally blows the lid off the assumption that the risk-free rate of return, R* in the Black Scholes Equation, is anything less than 1000% for $100 call option on Game Spot?

Well, today it means a few rich people will be made poor and a lot of poor people richer.

The bigger question however, about all of this is what happens when, finally, the markets admit that R* for U.S. Treasuries is not zero?

Because that’s what this whole Game Spot Revolution is really about, opening up major cracks in the confidence and validity of the institutions that are supposed to be so unassailably powerful that markets rely on to justify insane valuation models.

They made a mistake staging their failed Tiananmen Square moment at the Capitol. No one other than them was really upset about it other than people getting shot (Her name was Ashli Babbitt).

It means that for a moment, and possibly a few more moments, given how screwed up our financial system is, the little guy’s anger just got capitalized.

They Hate US for Our Freedoms

And the irony is the seed capital for this came from their own disdain for us.

When the last round of stimulus checks showed up, I don’t know about you but I was angry. My wife and I stared at it for a few days and doing so made us viscerally mad.

It represented just how little they thought of all the people whose lives they’d ruined. Paying out the bare minimum to hold us over until they’d fully consolidated power behind barricades and 25,000 troops in D.C.

When asked about what I would do with my stimmy check I replied the same way every time, “Pay my taxes with it.”

But even if 2020 was good for you financially as it was, admittedly for me, all of this COVID-destruction destroyed something far more important: quality of life.

It wasn’t about the money, it was about what was truly lost. The personal bonds broken, the psychological damage to my daughter trying to school via Zoom while going slowly insane.

The destruction of my weekly ‘guys night out’ board gaming group and, now, my martial arts school, a staple in our lives for over 25 years. We shared one last pitcher of beer last night holding back tears.

The haunted looks of my friends and favorite local vendors trying to keep it together.

We all have those stories. They take their toll. The scar tissue builds.

So, when that check showed up after six months of Nancy Pelosi burning down people’s lives even more to burn down her nemesis Donald Trump, we all knew what the score was.

They care about you like a virus cares about its host.

And finally, after a year of this, instead of sitting around wondering what DLC to buy for Fortnight with their stimulus check a bunch of really angry smart guys said, “You know what? **** these assholes.”
Hours after we tweeted this in June, we got the following letter from Citadel's lawyers pic.twitter.com/Zy2m2fC6kM
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 29, 2021
And they got a whole lot of people with nothing left to lose (except their payola to not disturb Queen Nancy) to go along with them.

Revenge of the Nerds?

That anger, as I said, is now pretty well capitalized, the same way that 2017’s cryptocurrency rally capitalized a whole lot of committed anarcho-assholes of all political stripes to build on top of bitcoin’s reserve status.

The early fruits of that labor are also on display today. Not because these guys are pushing their GameStop profits into Dogecoin but because after a massive coordinated attack to break Bitcoin after the peak near $42,000 two weeks ago, it couldn’t be beaten back below $20,000, the previous all-time high.

All of a sudden there were places to park crypto-profits which weren’t U.S. dollars, the asset where all the off-ramps could be shut off and the little people trapped inside Coinbase getting slaughtered while it’s ‘down for maintenance.’

That’s why today is so fascinating. Wall St. thought all they had to do was double down on their GameStop shorts and use their hammer to beat the nails back into the board.

It didn’t work. By then this thing had gone global.

Now, you have to wonder who was helping the rabble push GameStop back above the $210 Maginot Line? Once something like this starts Wall St.’s enemies start coming out of the woodwork to piggy back on the chaos and change the board state of global markets.

Think China, Russia and everyone else sanctioned to hell and gone by Neocons in our government in the service of Israel.

And yesterday’s close forced a lot of people to scramble and find the money they need to cover their losses or these meme-lords will own enough shares to not only own Game Spot’s board but also have money left over to go after someone else.

Maybe American Airlines? Maybe Blackberry? Maybe Nokia?

This is the first real battle in an asymmetric war.

And those stocks would be very interesting to see successful populist raids on. Can we say hostile takeover and a recapitalization of Blackberry or Nokia outside of the Apple/Google mobile web duopoly?

I’d sell my iPhone if that happened.

Hey, I’m just vamping here, but if these guys are serious about doing damage and re-leveling the playing field that financial advice I’m not allowed to give you can have for free.

Reality is that which, when you stop….

At the same time there’s also the reality that when the masses storm the financial Bastille like this there’s a lot of bystanders run over in the process.

The guys at r/WallStreetBets understood the structure of the markets. They understand that Robinhood had to shut down trading on Game Spot and others simply because Robinhood wouldn’t have enough cash to post the required collateral thanks to Dodd-Frank.
Postscript: This thread is the best explainer on the regulatory capital issues I referenced. (Ht: @The_Analyst) https://t.co/jWjtXjh5aQ
— Diogenes (@WallStCynic) January 29, 2021
Moreover, it’s going to cause real problems with clearinghouses and primary banks. Robinhood had to tap more than a billion dollars to cover the collateral.

And today’s close will make that number bigger. Which makes me wonder if this chaos unleashed by the Game Spot Revolution doesn’t have a more sinister angle.

One where an upstart retail brokerage was stealing too much market share for trading fees and, like the proles on Reddit, was making too much money threatening the someone else’s business.

… Believing in it Doesn’t Go Away.

So, is this an elaborate hit job inside of this populist uprising like what we saw at the Capitol on January 6th?

Like I said at the outset the usual suspects are all out their today saying we need wealth taxes and trading fees on stock trades. There will be punishment for upsetting the sanctity of our capital markets.

Are we all just, as always, having our chain jerked by a bunch of psychopaths looking to advance a new regulatory environment where the validity of capital markets themselves are undermined?

Because, you don’t think the Commies who just performed a coup in D.C. through blatant election fraud and whose Masters are bloviating about ‘rebooting capitalism’ as I type this would concoct such a thing would you?

Surely things couldn’t be that corrupt? No. Power to the Short Squeeze and all hail Elon Musk!

If you don’t think that’s possible then I’ve got some GameStop January 2023 Leaps at $250 strike price to sell you. As many as you like… 140% of the float even.

I sincerely hope I’m wrong but something tells me I’m not being cynical enough.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

It's Not Just Robinhood, Reddit Rebellion Has Clogged Entire Financial System's Plumbing

SATURDAY, JAN 30, 2021 - 13:40
While mainstream media is juggling with just who to be angry at, and who to virtue-signal for in the WallStreetBets Reddit Rebellion and Robinhood Rout episiode, the reality under the surface is that the US financial markets have just been punctured by the thin blades of truth. As CHS recently noted, "it is fatally wounded but nobody dares notice."



So, what's really happening with Robinhood et al...?
As @Compound248 details in this excellent thread, "this is a 'plumbing' issue. It is esoteric, even for those on Wall Street."

Here is the explanation of how the toilet is clogged.


First: RH was not the only brokerage to restrict buying in $GME et al. Much of the below applies to many brokerages. I'm going to use "RH" in my writing for simplicity and because it's the most prominent, but it's not fair to call this a RobinHood issue, per se.

The restrictions impacted retail AND institutional players – many institutional prime brokers ("PBs") did the same thing to their hedge fund clients.

Why?

Surely PBs can't be trying to punish their own clients just to benefit Citadel. There must be something else happening...

Let's talk plumbing.
Most RH clients (& all HFs) use “margin” accounts, not “cash” accounts. RH's sign up process nudges new customers into margin accounts by default.
Whether RH should do that is worthy of discussion another day.

This is a story of lending and capital.
Margin accounts are Wall Street's way of denoting lending accounts.

Practically speaking, in margin accounts, the client does NOT own *any* securities. Rather, margin account holders "own" a promise from their broker.

Yay.

When an RH’er buys $GME, a whole bunch of things happen behind the scenes, all of which are the ugly plumbing of Wall Street.
When an RH’er buys $GME, a whole bunch of things happen behind the scenes, all of which are the ugly plumbing of Wall Street. pic.twitter.com/qjVGaYeDEU
— Compound248 (@compound248) January 29, 2021
I’m simplifying, but because the buyer does not know who the seller is, the brokers for both buyer & seller use a 3rd company called DTCC to actually match & “clear” stock transactions, moving title from selling broker to buying broker while ensuring proceeds are moved on time.

[Remainder of long article here: It's Not Just Robinhood, Reddit Rebellion Has Clogged Entire Financial System's Plumbing | ZeroHedge ]
 

Grouchy Granny

Deceased
So just how in the seven circles of hell are they going to identify all the people who voted for Trump? Unless they subpoena all the ballots from all the states? I can just see the reaction to that one!

I really wish someone would put an entire roll of 50 MPH tape on AOC's mouth and another one on Pee-lousy. Over the mask of course.

I've been watching Tucker, Dave Rubin and a couple of others.

They all say it's going to get worse before it gets better, so keep your head on a swivel and go gray.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

New Gun Control Bill Would Create Public Registry Of Firearms

Posted at 3:30 pm on January 28, 2021 by Patrick Richardson

New Gun Control Bill Would Create Public Registry Of Firearms

Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas), is proposing legislation which would create an Orwellian database of gun owners.

Jackson-Lee filed H.R. 127 as a placeholder bill earlier this year, but the text was updated on Jan. 28. Once again restorting to one of the favored tactics of the left — “waving the bloody shirt — “The Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act,” is named after an exchange student murdered in a mass shooting in Texas, and would require the registration of all firearms in the United States.
Retroactively.

The bill reads, in part:
The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, shall establish a system for licensing the possession of firearms or ammunition in the United States, and for the registration with the Bureau of each firearm present in the United States.
“(b) Firearm Registration System.—
“(1) REQUIRED INFORMATION.—Under the firearm registration system, the owner of a firearm shall transmit to the Bureau—
“(A) the make, model, and serial number of the firearm, the identity of the owner of the firearm, the date the firearm was acquired by the owner, and where the firearm is or will be stored; and
“(B) a notice specifying the identity of any person to whom, and any period of time during which, the firearm will be loaned to the person.
“(2) DEADLINE FOR SUPPLYING INFORMATION.—The transmission required by paragraph (1) shall be made—
“(A) in the case of a firearm acquired before the effective date of this section, within 3 months after the effective date of this section; or
“(B) in the case of a firearm acquired on or after the effective date, on the date the owner acquires the firearm
Got all that? It’s not just a gun you bought after the day the law took effect, but you would be required to personally send in a registration on any gun you own.
National Shooting Sports Foundation Public Affairs Director Mark Oliva said the bill would be a “blunder.”
A national firearm registry is against federal law. Even Rep. Jackson-Lee’s home state of Texas refuses to consider a registry because of the Orwellian gun control incursions on Second Amendment rights. An examination of the bloated and expensive failure of Canada’s attempt at a national registry demonstrates the tremendous blunder this would be.
The bill, as Oliva notes, is likely a violation of federal law itself, but the legislation only gets more police-state from there.

The bill would create a database of all registered firearms in the U.S., maintained by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
The Attorney General shall make the contents of the database accessible to all members of the public, all Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities, all branches of the United States Armed Forces, and all State and local governments, as defined by the Bureau.
You read that right, the database wouldn’t just be available to law enforcement, but the military and the general public.

But really, comrade, we’re not planning to send the Marines to take your guns, or gin up a mob to run you out of town, or just get the local Karens on your HOA to force you out of your home.

Just as dangerous — and unlikely to pass a court challenge, but with SCOTUS’ unwillingness to take up Second Amendment cases who knows — are the provisions about licensing.

Under this bill, you would have to be 21, pass a background check, pass a psychological examination and have liability insurance — which would cost $800.
You would even have to have a license to display an antique firearm.

There’s even a separate license for owning a “military-style firearm,” that would require jumping through even more hoops.

Perhaps most frightening are the requirements for the psych eval.
“(2) PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION.—A psychological evaluation is conducted in accordance with this paragraph if—
“(A) the evaluation is conducted in compliance with such standards as shall be established by the Attorney General;
“(B) the evaluation is conducted by a licensed psychologist approved by the Attorney General;
“(C) as deemed necessary by the licensed psychologist involved, the evaluation included a psychological evaluation of other members of the household in which the individual resides; and
“(D) as part of the psychological evaluation, the licensed psychologist interviewed any spouse of the individual, any former spouse of the individual, and at least 2 other persons who are a member of the family of, or an associate of, the individual to further determine the state of the mental, emotional, and relational stability of the individual in relation to firearms.
And yes, you read THAT right too, the AG gets to decide what standards are required to pass the eval, and the shrink has the right to evaluate everyone in your house, your ex wife/husband and a couple of random “associates” chosen by the shrink.

Naturally this is all about public safety and would never be abused, but does anyone honestly think the “standards” set by the AG would allow anyone with a mildly-right-of-center bent to pass the check?

Fortunately, while it’s entirely possible this nonsense will get past the House, the idea that it will get through the senate is almost laughable. With the 50-50 split, even were Majority Leader Chuckie Schumer (D-New York). to abolish the filibuster, only one Democrat would have to peel off to kill this, and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia), would almost certainly do so, given that he’d like to continue to be elected.

Recommended Bearing Arms Video:
Video on website 35:20 min
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
HAMMER: American Elites Seek To Rig the Game

by Josh Hammer
January 30, 2021

Josh Hammer, American elites, Elites, American, Big Tech, Twitter, Trump, GameStop, Ted Cruz, AOC,

Charlotte, NC — In the aftermath of the disgraceful Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, the American ruling class has flexed its muscles like never before.

Big Tech oligarchs moved in unison to kneecap upstart Parler, a would-be Twitter competitor, and ban former President Donald Trump and scores of other conservatives. Simon & Schuster, one of the nation’s most reputable book publishers, canceled a book deal that it had commissioned with the conservative Sen. Josh Hawley. President Joe Biden, in direct defiance of his campaign-season vows to unify the country, oversaw a deeply divisive and ideological first week in office. And just this week, popular retail brokerage Robinhood took severe measures to restrict trading of GameStop’s stock after a populist Reddit-induced stock-buying frenzy dramatically spiked the firm’s share price and wreaked havoc for short-selling hedge funds.

One harkens back to that most paradigmatic of progressive mantras, once uttered by former Obama White House Chief of Staff and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Emanuel’s rank opportunism is highly revealing. But the American ruling class seeks more than mere political opportunism. Instead, the ruling class seeks uniform control over defining the contours of permissible opinion and tolerable belief, and it is willing to wield all available levers at its disposal in order to do so.

But in order to achieve this goal, the ruling class — which, in the United States in the year 2021, is effectively coterminous with elected political left and left-adjacent, quasi-“private” appendages such as “woke capital” corporatists — needs some extra assistance. The ruling class needs more tools in its arsenal than simple gatekeeping based on requisite diplomas and proper partisan affiliation.

The ruling class’s tool of choice is to rig the game. Across all of American society, the left increasingly plays the game by one set of rules, and the “deplorable” right plays by a different set of rules. While such discriminatory tactics were, for a while, devised in subtler fashion, promulgated behind closed doors and concealed beneath euphemistic public-facing language, this concerted effort increasingly plays out before our eyes in broad daylight.

Consider how, in every presidential election since 2000 won by a Republican, Democratic congressmen and/or senators objected to at least some portion of the Electoral College result. Yet in 2020, when some Republicans in both the House and Senate did much the same, following a midpandemic election that saw the unprecedented proliferation of inherently destabilizing mail-in balloting and myriad mid-election season changes to states’ election laws, those involved are tarred as “insurrectionists” and “seditionists” because of the unrelated lawless actions of an impassioned mob. And those same Republicans lose donors, book deals and even event-space availability for fundraisers, to boot.

Consider also how, for four years during the Trump presidency, Democrats endlessly bleated and promoted the wholly implausible “Russiagate” narrative, wherein Vladimir Putin and vague “Russian bots” somehow colluded to steal the presidency for Trump. Hillary Clinton has still, to this day, never fully reconciled herself to her defeat — nor, for that matter, has Stacey Abrams ever formally conceded the 2018 gubernatorial race. But for continuing to raise questions about an election decided by a smaller margin of voters than the previous one — roughly 43,000 votes spread out across three states in 2020, compared with roughly 79,000 votes spread out across three states in 2016 — Silicon Valley oligarchs banned from social media everyone from the leader of the free world, Trump himself, to the founder and CEO of MyPillow.

Finally, consider how stock exchanges and trading brokerages this week halted trading — and, as appears to be the case, sometimes induced forcible stock selling against retail investors’ will — of GameStop’s stock in a barely concealed attempt to protect favored short-selling hedge funds and undercut mom-and-pop investors spurred on by the “WallStreetBets” subreddit. As everyone from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Sen. Ted Cruz pointed out, such actions reek of cronyism and illicit market manipulation. It is difficult to recall the last time the stock market has been so clearly revealed as a pawn of the ruling class, under which high-frequency traders and individual 401(k) savers so clearly play by different sets of rules.

The great irony of our current politics is that the very populism so decried by the ruling class is only buttressed by that very ruling class’s censoriousness and attempts to rig the game in its own favor. It is not yet too late for elites to look in the mirror, take some deep breaths and stop before it is too late.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Schumer Says Biden Should Declare ‘Climate Emergency’, Rule Like A Dictator

Now that Democrats are in one-party control, fairness, equity, diversity of thought, and rules don’t matter any more

Frank Salvato
by FRANK SALVATO
January 30, 2021

Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell

For all the talk of bi-partisanship and respecting the rights of the minority party, US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), now that he holds the reins of power, has no problem with Democrats ruling, as Joe Biden once described, like a dictator.

Schumer, during an interview with the cable news opinion outlet MSNBC, declared that not only would Democrats use reconciliation to pass major Biden agenda items, but that the President should declare a national “climate emergency” as a way to bypass Congress to implement main elements of his radical climate agenda.
President Biden should declare a national emergency on the climate crisis.
Donald Trump declared some fake emergency for his ineffective, wasteful wall. That wasn't an emergency.
If there was ever an emergency, the climate crisis is an emergency.

— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) January 26, 2021
The Majority Leader made no qualms about his intention to move Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID stimulus bill through reconciliation rather than to debate the measure on its merits on the Senate floor.

Reconciliation can be employed in affecting certain types of legislation that impact the federal budget. The tactic requires only a simple majority for final passage instead of the super majority needed for revenue legislation.

Regarding Biden’s extreme and radical climate agenda – an agenda that mirrors the position of the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset initiative, Schumer said, “I think it might be a good idea for President Biden to call a climate emergency…Then he can do many, many things under the emergency powers of the president that wouldn’t have to go through – that he could do without legislation.
Chuck Schumer is playing with fire. By calling on @POTUS to declare a climate emergency, he is trying to muzzle Congress. @SenSchumer wants the president to go it alone & produce more punishing regulations, raise energy costs, and kill even more American jobs.

— Sen. John Barrasso (@SenJohnBarrasso) January 26, 2021
Schumer exampled President Trump’s emergency declaration along the southern border of the United States where tens of thousands of illegal immigrants risked their lives – many losing them – in the false promise of nirvana in the America.

The New York Liberal called President’s effort to secure the border “stupid” saying it, “wasn’t an emergency.”

“But if there ever was an emergency, climate is one,” Schumer showboated. “So I would suggest that they explore looking at climate as an emergency which would give them more flexibility. After all, it’s a crisis.”

In speaking of the filibuster – a subject that has been front and center in “power sharing” negotiations between Schumer and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Schumer intimated that the filibuster will remain as long as Republicans acquiesce to the Progressive agenda.

“The caucus is united with a belief that I have: We must get big, strong, bold things done,” Schumer said. “We will not let Mitch McConnell dictate to us what we will do and not do. Period. And these first five days have shown that. And as I said, my caucus is totally united, from one end to the other, that we’re not letting him go forward.”
The American people chose to retire four Republican Senators and elect a Democratic majority to this Senate.
Senator McConnell’s proposal for how to organize the Senate is unacceptable—and it won’t be accepted.
— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) January 22, 2021
“We have some tools we can use right now and will not hesitate to use them if Republicans continue to just block,” a heavy-handed Schumer added. “We are united in the view McConnell is not going to dictate what this Senate does.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

JANUARY 28, 20213:32 PMUPDATED 2 DAYS AGO
U.S. Justice Department probes SpaceX after hiring discrimination complaint
By Reuters Staff

(Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Justice is probing Elon Musk’s rocket company SpaceX over whether the company discriminates against non-U.S. citizens in its hiring, according to court documents filed on Thursday.

The Justice Department’s Immigrant and Employee Rights division received a complaint of employment discrimination from a non-U.S. citizen, who alleged that SpaceX discriminated against him based on his citizenship status.

“Specifically, the charge alleges that on or about March 10, 2020, during the Charging Party’s interview for the position of Technology Strategy Associate, SpaceX made inquiries about his citizenship status and ultimately failed to hire him for the position because he is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident”, DOJ attorney Lisa Sandoval wrote in the complaint filed on Thursday.
The Immigrant and Employee Rights division of the DOJ notified SpaceX by email on June 8 that it had opened an investigation, and requested that SpaceX provide information and documents relating to its hiring process, according to the court filings made on Thursday.

The filings were made in the United States District Court for the central district of California.

The Justice Department and SpaceX did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Clarity in Trump’s Wake
The United States of America is now a classic oligarchy. The clarity that it has brought to our situation by recognizing this fact is its only virtue.

By Angelo Codevilla
January 19, 2021

"Either the Constitution matters and must be followed . . . or it is simply a piece of parchment on display at the National Archives."
— Texas v. Pennsylvania et al.

Texas v. Pennsylvania et al. did not deny setting rules for the 2020 election contrary to the Constitution. On December 10, 2020, the Supreme Court discounted that. By refusing to interfere as America’s ruling oligarchy serves itself, the court archived what remained of the American republic’s system of equal justice. That much is clear.

In 2021, the laws, customs, and habits of the heart that had defined the American republic since the 18th century are things of the past. Americans’ movements and interactions are under strictures for which no one ever voted. Government disarticulated society by penalizing ordinary social intercourse and precluding the rise of spontaneous opinion therefrom. Together with corporate America, it smothers minds through the mass and social media with relentless, pervasive, identical, and ever-evolving directives. In that way, these oligarchs have proclaimed themselves the arbiters of truth, entitled and obliged to censor whoever disagrees with them as systemically racist, adepts of conspiracy theories.

Corporations, and the government itself, require employees to attend meetings personally to acknowledge their guilt. They solicit mutual accusations. While violent felons are released from prison, anyone may be fired or otherwise have his life wrecked for questioning government/corporate sentiment. Today’s rulers don’t try to convince. They demand obedience, and they punish.

Russians and East Germans under Communists Leonid Brezhnev and Erich Honecker in the 1970s lived under less ruling class pressure than do today’s Americans. And their rulers were smart enough not to insult them, their country, or their race.

In 2015, Americans could still believe they lived in a republic, in which life’s rules flow from the people through their representatives. In 2021, a class of rulers draws their right to rule from self-declared experts’ claims of infallibility that dwarf baroque kings’ pretensions.

In that self-referential sense, the United States of America is now a classic oligarchy.

The following explains how this change happened. The clarity that it has brought to our predicament is its only virtue.

Oligarchy had long been growing within America’s republican forms. The 2016 election posed the choice of whether its rise should consolidate, or not.

Consolidation was very much “in the cards.” But how that election and its aftermath led to the fast, thorough, revolution of American life depended on how Donald Trump acted as the catalyst who clarified, energized, and empowered our burgeoning oligarchy’s peculiarities. These, along with the manner in which the oligarchy seized power between November 2016 and November 2020, ensure that its reign will be ruinous and likely short. The prospect that the republic’s way of life may thrive among those who wish it to depends on the manner in which they manage the civil conflict that is now inevitable.

From Ruling Class to Oligarchy

By the 21st century’s first decade, little but formality was left of the American republic. In 1942, Joseph Schumpeter’s Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy described the logic by which government and big business tend to coalesce into socialism in theory, oligarchy in practice. But by then, that logic had already imposed itself on the Western world. Italy’s 1926 Law of Corporations—fascism’s charter—inaugurated not so much the regulation of business by government as the coalescence of the twain. Over the ensuing decade, it was more or less copied throughout the West.

In America, the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act’s authors had erected barriers against private oligopolies and monopolies. By maintaining competition between big business, they hoped to preserve private freedoms and limit government’s role. But the Great Depression’s pressures and temptations led to the New Deal’s rules that differed little from Italy’s. No matter that, as the Supreme Court pointed out in Schechter Poultry v. U.S., public-private amalgamation does not fit in the Constitution. It grew nevertheless alongside the notion that good government proceeds from the experts’ judgment rather than from the voters’ choices. The miracles of production that America brought forth in World War II seemed to validate the point.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who had come to understand large organizations that feed on government power and dispense vast private benefits, was not shy in warning about the danger they pose to the republic. His warning about the “military-industrial complex” that he knew so well is often misunderstood as a mere caution against militarism. But Ike was making a broader point: Amalgams of public and private power tend to prioritize their corporate interests over the country’s.

That is why Eisenhower cautioned against the power of government-funded expertise. “The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever-present and is gravely to be regarded,” he said, because “public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.” Government money can accredit a self-regarding elite. Because “a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity,” government experts can end up substituting their power for truth.

The expansion of government power throughout the 1960s and ’70s in pursuit of improving education, eradicating poverty, and uplifting blacks created complexes of public-private power throughout America that surpassed the military-industrial complex in size, and above all in influence.

Consider education. Post-secondary education increased fourfold, from 9 percent of Americans holding four-year degrees in 1965 to 36 percent in 2015. College towns became islands of wealth and political power. From them came endless “studies” that purported to be arbiters of truth and wisdom, as well as a growing class of graduates increasingly less educated but ever so much more socio-politically uniform.

In the lower grades, per-pupil expenditure (in constant dollars) went from $3,200 in 1960 to $13,400 in 2015. That money fueled an even more vast and powerful complex—one that includes book publishers, administrators, and labor unions and that has monopolized the minds of at least two generations. As it grew, the education establishment also detached itself from the voters’ control: In the 1950s, there were some 83,000 public school districts in America. By 2015, only around 13,000 remained for a population twice as large. Today’s parents have many times less influence over their children’s education than did their grandparents.

Analogous things happened in every field of life. Medicine came to be dominated by the government’s relationship with drug companies and hospital associations. When Americans went to buy cars, or even light bulbs and shower nozzles, they found their choices limited by deals between government, industry, and insurance companies. These entities regarded each other as “stakeholders” in an oligarchic system. But they had ever less need to take account of mere citizens in what was becoming a republic in name only. As the 20eth century was drawing to a close, wherever citizens looked, they saw a government and government-empowered entities over which they had ever less say, which ruled ever more unaccountably, and whose attitude toward them was ever less friendly.

The formalities were the last to go. Ever since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215 A.D., the rulers’ dependence on popular assent to expenditures has been the essence of limited government. Article I, section 9 of the U.S. Constitution enshrines that principle. Congressional practice embodied it. Details of bills and expenditures were subject to public hearings and votes in subcommittees, committees, and the floors of both Houses. But beginning in the early 1980s and culminating in 2007, the U.S government abandoned the appropriations process.
Until 1981, Congress had used “continuing resolutions” to continue funding government operations unchanged until regular appropriations could be made.

Thereafter, as congressional leaders learned how easy it is to use this vehicle to avoid exposing what they are doing to public scrutiny, they legislated and appropriated ever less in public, and increasingly put Congress’ output into continuing resolutions or omnibus bills, amounting to trillions of dollars and thousands of pages, impossible for representatives and senators to read, and presented to them as the only alternative to “shutting down the government.”

This—now the U.S government standard operating procedure—enables the oligarchy’s “stakeholders” to negotiate their internal arrangements free from responsibility to citizens. It is the practical abolition of Article I section 9—and of the Magna Carta itself.

In the 21st century, the American people’s trust in government plummeted as they—on the political Left as well as on the Right—realized that those in power care little for them. As they watched corporate and non-profit officials trade places with public officials and politicians while getting much richer, they felt impoverished and disempowered. Since the ruling class embraced Republicans and Democrats, elections seemed irrelevant. The presidential elections of 2008 and 2012 underlined that whoever won, the same people would be in charge and that the parceling out of wealth and power among stakeholders would continue.

Americans on the Right were especially aggrieved because the oligarchy had become culturally united in disdain for Western civilization in general and for themselves in particular. The cultural warfare it waged on the rest of America inflamed opposition. But it also diluted its own focus on solidifying profitable arrangements.

By 2016, America was already well into the classic cycles of revolution. The atrophy of institutions, the waning of republican habits, and the increasing, reciprocal disrespect between classes that have less in common culturally, dislike each other more, and embody ways of life more different from one another, than did the 19th century’s Northerners and Southerners precluded returning to traditional republican life. The election would determine whether the oligarchy could consolidate itself. More important, it would affect the speed by which the revolutionary vortex would carry the country, and the amount of violence this would involve.

The Trump Catalyst

By 2015, the right side of America’s challenge to the budding oligarchy was inevitable. Trump was not inevitable. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) had begun posing a thorough challenge to the “stakeholders” most Americans disrespected.

Candidate Trump was the more gripping showman. His popularity came from his willingness to disrespect them, loudly. Because the other 16 Republican candidates ran on different bases, none ever had a chance. Inevitably, victory in a field so crowded depended on when which minor candidate did or did not withdraw. There never was a head-to-head choice between Trump and Cruz.

Trump’s candidacy drew the ferocious opposition it did primarily because the entire ruling class recognized that, unlike McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012, he really was mobilizing millions of Americans against the arrangements by which the ruling class live, move, and have their being. Since Cruz’s candidacy represented the same threat, it almost certainly would have drawn no less intense self-righteous anger. Nasty narratives could have been made up about him out of whole cloth as easily as about Trump.

But Trump’s actual peculiarities made it possible for the oligarchy to give the impression that its campaign was about his person, his public flouting of conventional norms, rather than about the preservation of their own power and wealth. The principal consequence of the ruling class’ opposition to candidate Trump was to convince itself, and then its followers, that defeating him was so important that it legitimized, indeed dictated, setting aside all laws, and truth itself.

Particular individuals had never been the oligarchy’s worry. In 2008, as Barack Obama was running against Hillary Clinton and John McCain—far cries from Trump—he pointed to those Americans who “cling to God and guns” as the problem’s root. Clinton’s 2016 remark that Trump’s supporters were “a basket of deplorables,”—racists, sexists, homophobes, etc.—merely voiced what had long been the oligarchy’s consensus judgment of most Americans. For them, pushing these Americans as far away as possible from the levers of power, treating them as less than citizens, had already come to define justice and right.

Donald Trump—his bombastic, hyperbolic style, his tendency to play fast and loose with truth, even to lie as he insulted his targets—fit perfectly the oligarchy’s image of his supporters, and lent a color of legitimacy to the utterly illegitimate collusion between the oligarchy’s members in government and those in the Democratic Party running against Trump.

Thus did the FBI and CIA, in league with the major media and the Democratic Party, spy on candidate Trump, concocting and spreading all manner of synthetic dirt about him. Nevertheless, to universal surprise, he won, or rather the oligarchy lost, the 2016 election.

The oligarchy’s disparate members had already set aside laws, truth, etc. in opposition to Trump. The realization that the presidency’s awesome powers now rested in his hands fostered a full-court-press #Resistance. Trump’s peculiarities helped make it far more successful than anyone could have imagined.


Part 1 of 3
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Part 2 of 3

“Dogs That Bark Do Not Bite”

Applying this observation to candidate Trump’s hyperbole suggested that President Trump might suffer from what Theodore Roosevelt called the most self-destructive of habits, combining “the unbridled tongue with the unready hand.” And, in fact, President Trump neither fired and referred for prosecution James Comey or the other intelligence officials who had run the surveillance of his campaign. He praised them, and let himself be persuaded to fire General Michael Flynn, his national security advisor, who stood in the way of the intelligence agencies’ plans against him. Nor did he declassify and make public all the documents associated with their illegalities.

Four years later, he left office with those documents still under seal. He criticized officials over whom he had absolute power, notably CIA’s Gina Haspel who likely committed a crime spying on his candidacy, but left them in office. Days after his own inauguration, he suffered the CIA’s removal of clearances from one of his appointees because he was a critic of the Agency. Any president worthy of his office would have fired the entire chain of officials who had made that decision. Instead, he appointed to these agencies people loyal to them and hostile to himself.

He acted similarly with other agencies. His first secretary of state, secretary of defense, and national security advisor mocked him publicly. At their behest, in August 2017, he gave a nationally televised speech in which he effectively thanked them for showing him that he had been wrong in opposing ongoing war in the Middle East. He railed against Wall Street but left untouched the tax code’s “carried interest” provision that is the source of much unearned wealth. He railed against the legal loophole that lets Google, Facebook, and Twitter censor content without retribution, but did nothing to close it. Already by the end of January 2017, it was clear that no one in Washington needed to fear Trump. By the time he left office, Washington was laughing at him.

Nor did Trump protect his supporters. For example, he shared their resentment of being ordered to attend workplace sessions about their “racism.” But not until his last months in office did he ban the practice within the federal government. Never did he ban contracts with companies that require such sessions.

Thus, as the oligarchy set about negating the 2016 electorate’s attempt to stop its consolidation of power, Trump had assured them that they would neither be impeded as they did so nor pay a price. Donald Trump is not responsible for the oligarchy’s power. But he was indispensable to it.

#TheResistance rallied every part of the ruling class to mutually supporting efforts. Nothing encourages, amplifies, or seemingly justifies extreme sentiments as does being part of a unanimous chorus, a crowd, a mob—especially when all can be sure they are acting safely, gratuitously. Success supercharges them.

#TheResistance fostered the sense in the ruling class’ members that they are more right, more superior, and more entitled than they had ever imagined. It made millions of people feel bigger and better about themselves than they ever had.

Logic and Dysfunction

Disdain for the “deplorables” united and energized parts of American society that, apart from their profitable material connections to government, have nothing in common and often have diverging interests. That hate, that determination to feel superior to the “deplorables” by treading upon them, is the “intersectionality,” the glue that binds, say, Wall Street coupon-clippers, folks in the media, officials of public service unions, gender studies professors, all manner of administrators, radical feminists, race and ethnic activists, and so on.

#TheResistance grew by awakening these groups to the powers and privileges to which they imagine their superior worth entitles them, to their hate for anyone who does not submit preemptively.

Ruling-class judges sustained every bureaucratic act of opposition to the Trump Administration. Thousands of identical voices in major media echoed every charge, every insinuation, non-stop and unquestioned. #TheResistance made it ruling-class policy that Trump’s and his voters’ racism and a host of other wrongdoing made them, personally, illegitimate. In any confrontation, the ruling class deemed these presumed white supremacists in the wrong, systemically. By 2018, the ruling class had effectively placed the “deplorables” outside the protection of the laws. By 2020, they could be fired for a trifle, set upon in the streets, prosecuted on suspicion of bad attitudes, and even for defending themselves.

Because each and every part of the ruling coalition’s sense of what may assuage its grievances evolves without natural limit, this logic is as insatiable as it is powerful. It is also inherently destructive of oligarchy.

Enjoyment of power’s material perquisites is classic oligarchy’s defining purpose. Having conquered power over the people, successful oligarchies foster environments in which they can live in peace, productively. Oligarchy, like all regimes, cannot survive if it works at cross-purposes. But the oligarchy that seized power in America between 2016 and 2020 is engaged in a never-ending seizure of ever more power and the infliction of ever more punishment—in a war against the people without imaginable end. Clearly, that is contrary to what the Wall Street magnates or the corps of bureaucrats or the university administrators or senior professors want. But that is what the people want who wield the “intersectional” passions that put the oligarchy in power.

As the oligarchy’s every part, every organ, raged against everything Trump, it made itself less attractive to the public even as Trump’s various encouragements of economic activity were contributing to palpable increases in prosperity.

Hence, by 2019’s end, Trump was likely to win reelection. Then came COVID-19.

The COVID Fortuna

The COVID-19 virus is no plague. Though quite contagious, its infection/fatality rate (IFR), about 0.01 percent, is that of the average flu, and its effects are generally so mild that most whom it infects never know it.

Like all infections, it is deadly to those weakened severely by other causes. It did not transform American life by killing people, but by the fears about it that our oligarchy packaged and purveyed. Fortuna, as Machiavelli reminds us, is inherently submissive to whoever bends her to his wishes. The fears and the strictures they enabled were not about health—if only because those who purveyed and imposed them did not apply them to themselves. They were about power over others.

COVID’s politicization began in February 2020 with the adoption by the World Health Organization—which is headed by an Ethiopian bureaucrat beholden to China—and upon recommendation of non-scientist Bill Gates, of a non-peer-reviewed test for the infection. The test’s chief characteristic is that its rate of positives to negatives depends on the number of cycles through which the sample is run. More cycles, more positives. Hence, every test result is a “soft” number. Second, the WHO and associated national organizations like the U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported COVID’s spread by another “soft” number: “confirmed cases.” That is, sick persons who tested positive for the virus.

When this number is related to that of such persons who then die, the ratio—somewhat north of 5 percent—suggests that COVID kills one out of 20 people it touches. But that is an even softer number since these deaths include those who die with COVID rather than of it, as well as those who may have had COVID. Pyramiding such soft numbers, mathematical modelers projected millions of deaths. Scary for the unwary, but pure fantasy.

For example, the U.S. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), which modeled the authoritative predictions on which the U.S. lockdowns were based, also predicted COVID-19 deaths for Sweden, which did not lock down. On May 3, the IHME predicted that Sweden would suffer 2,800 COVID deaths a day within the next two weeks. The actual number was 38. Reporting on COVID has never ceased to consist of numbers as scary as they are soft.

Literate persons know that, once an infectious disease enters a population, nothing can prevent it from infecting all of it, until a majority has developed antibodies after contracting it—so-called community immunity or herd immunity. But fear leads people to empower those who promise safety, regardless of how empty the promises. The media pressed governments to do something. The Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan screamed: “don’t panic is terrible advice.” The pharmaceutical industry and its Wall Street backers salivated at the prospect of billions of government money for new drugs and vaccines. Never mind the little sense it makes for millions of people to accept a vaccine’s non-trivial risk to protect against a virus with trivial consequences for themselves. All manner of officials yearned to wield unaccountable power.

Because the power to crush the general population’s resistance to itself is the oligarchy’s single-minded focus, it was able to bend fears of COVID to that purpose. Thus, it gathered more power with more consequences than the oligarchs could have imagined.

But only President Trump’s complaisance made this possible. His message to the American people had been not to panic, be mindful of the scientific facts—you can’t stop it, and it’s not that bad—while mitigating its effects on vulnerable populations. But on March 15, Trump bent, and agreed to counsel people to suspend normal life for two weeks to “slow the spread,” so that hospitals would not be overwhelmed. Two weeks later, the New York Times crowed that Trump, having been told “hundreds of thousands of Americans could face death if the country reopened too soon,” had been stampeded into “abandoning his goal of reopening the country by Easter.” He agreed to support the “experts’” definition of what “soon” might mean. By accrediting the complex of government, industry, and media’s good faith and expertise, Trump validated their plans to use COVID as a vehicle for enhancing their power.

Having seized powers, the oligarchs used them as weapons to disrupt and disaggregate the parts of American society they could not control.

The economic effects of lockdowns and social distancing caused obvious pain. Tens of millions of small businesses were forced to close or radically to reduce activity. More than 40 million Americans filed claims for unemployment assistance. Uncountable millions of farmers and professionals had their products and activities devalued. Millions of careers, dreams that had been realized by lifetimes of work, were wrecked. Big business and government took over their functions. Within nine months, COVID-19 had produced 28 new billionaires.

Surplus and scarcity of food resulted simultaneously because the lockdowns closed most restaurants and hotels. As demand shifted in ways that made it impossible for distribution networks and processing plants to adjust seamlessly, millions of gallons of milk were poured down drains, millions of chickens, billions of eggs, and tens of thousands of hogs and cattle were destroyed, acres of vegetables and tons of fruit were plowed under. Prices in the markets rose.

Persons deprived of work with less money with which to pay higher prices struggled to feed their families. This reduced countless self-supporting citizens to supplicants. By intentionally reducing the supply of food available to the population, the U.S. government joined the rare ranks of such as Stalin’s Soviet Union and Castro’s Cuba.

But none of these had ever shut down a whole nation’s entire medical care except for one disease. Hospitals stood nearly empty, having cleared the decks for the (ignorantly) expected COVID flood. Emergency rooms were closed to the poor people who get routine care there. Forget about dentistry. Most Americans were left essentially without medical care for most of a year. Human bodies’ troubles not having taken a corresponding holiday, it is impossible to estimate how much suffering and death this lack of medical care has caused and will cause yet.

The oligarchy’s division of all activity into “essential”—meaning permitted—and “nonessential”—to be throttled at will—had less obvious but more destructive effects. Private clubs, as well as any and all gatherings of more than five or 10 people, were banned. Churches were forbidden to have worship services or to continue social activities. The “social distancing” and mask mandates enforced in public buildings and stores, and often on the streets, made it well-nigh impossible for people to communicate casually. Thus, was that part of American society that the oligarchy did not control directly disarticulated, and its members left alone to face unaccountable powers on which they had to depend.

Meanwhile, the media became the oligarchy’s public relations department. Very much including ordinary commercial advertising, it hammered home the oligarchy’s line that COVID restrictions are good, even cool. These restrictions reduced the ideas available to the American people to what the mass media purveyed and the social media allowed. Already by April 2020, these used what had become near-monopoly power over interpersonal communications to censor such communications as they disapproved. Political enforcers took it upon themselves even to cancel statements by eminent physicians about COVID that they judged to be “misleading.” Of course, this betrayed the tech giants’ initial promise of universal access. It is also unconstitutional. (In Marsh v. Alabama, decided in 1946, the Supreme Court barred private parties from acting as de facto governments). Since these companies did it in unison, they also violated the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act. But the ruling class that had become an oligarchy applauded their disabling whatever might be conducive to conservatives’ interests and inconvenient to their own candidates.

Private entities wielding public powers in coordination with each other without having to observe any of government’s constitutional constraints is as good a definition of oligarchy as there is. Oligarchy had increasingly taken power in the buildup to the 2020 election. In its aftermath, it would try to suffocate America.

Sovereignty of the Vote Counters

The oligarchy’s proximate objective, preventing the 2020 presidential election from validating the previous one’s results, overrode all others. The powers it had seized under COVID’s cover, added to the plethora that it had exercised since the 2016 campaign’s beginning, had surely cowered some opposition. But as November 2020 loomed, no one could be sure how much it also had energized.
Few people were happy to be locked down. It was a safe bet that not a few were unhappy at being called systemically racist. The oligarchy, its powers notwithstanding, could not be sure how people would vote. That is why it acted to take the presidential election’s outcome out of the hands of those who would cast the votes and to place it as much as possible in the hands of its members who would count the votes.

Intentionally, traditional procedures for voting leave no discretion to those who count the votes. Individuals obtain and cast ballots into a physical or electronic box only after showing identification that matches their registration. Ballot boxes are opened and their contents counted by persons representing the election’s opposing parties. Persons registered to vote might qualify to vote-by-mail by requesting a ballot, the issuance and receipt of which is checked against their registration. Their ballots are counted in the same bipartisan manner.

The Democratic Party had long pressed to substitute universal voting by mail—meaning that ballots would be sent to all registered voters, in some states to anyone with a driver’s license whether they asked for them or not and regardless of whether these persons still lived at the address on the rolls or were even alive.

The ballots eventually would arrive at the counting centers, either through the mail, from drop boxes, or through “harvesters” who would pick them up from the voters who fill them out, and who may even help them to fill them out. Security, if any, would consist of machine-matching signatures on the ballot and on the envelope in which it had come. The machine’s software can be dialed to greater or lesser sensitivity.

But doing away with scrutiny of ballots counted by representatives of the election’s contenders removes the last possibility of ensuring the ballot had come from a real person whose will it is supposed to represent. Once the link between the ballot and the qualified person is broken, nothing prevents those in charge of the electoral process from excluding and including masses of ballots as they choose. The counters become the arbiters.

Attorney General William Barr pointed out the obvious: Anyone, in America or abroad, can print up any number of ballots, mark them, and deliver them for counting to whoever is willing to accept them and run them through their machines. Since the counters usually dispose of the envelopes in which ballots arrive—thus obviating any possibility of tracing the ballot’s connection to a voter—they may even dispense of the fiction that there had ever been any signed envelopes. That is especially true of late-found ballots. Who knows where they came from? Who cares to find out?

Only in a few one-party Democratic states was universal vote-by-mail established by law. Elsewhere, especially in the states sure to be battlegrounds in the presidential election, mail-in voting was introduced by various kinds of executive or judicial actions. Questions of right and wrong aside, the Constitution’s Article II section 1’s words—“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct”—makes such actions unconstitutional on their face.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Part 3 of 3

Moreover, in these states—Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin—the counting of votes in the most populous counties is firmly in the hands of Democratic Party bosses with a well-documented history of fraud.

To no one’s surprise, the 2020 presidential election was decided by super-majorities for the Democratic candidate precisely from these counties in these states. Yes, Trump’s percentage of the vote fell in certain suburbs. But Trump received some 11 million more votes in 2020 than four years earlier, and nearly doubled the share of votes he received from blacks. The Democrats’ gain of some 15 million votes came exclusively from mail-in ballots, and their victory in the Electoral College came exclusively from the supermajorities piled up in these corrupt counties—the only places where Trump’s share of the black vote was cut by three-quarters. Did people there really think so differently?

This is not the place to recount the list of affidavits sworn under penalty of perjury by persons who observed ballot stuffing, nor the statistical anomaly of successive batches of votes that favored Biden over Trump by precisely the same amounts, of un-creased (i.e., never mailed) ballots fed into counting machines, nor the Georgia video of suitcases of ballots being taken from under tables and inserted into counting machines after Republican observers had been ousted.

Suffice it to note that references to these events have been scrubbed from the Internet. It is more important to keep in mind that, in America prior to 2020, sworn affidavits that crimes have been committed had invariably been probable cause for judicial, prosecutorial, or legislative investigations. But for the first time in America, the ruling class dismissed them with: “You have no proof!” A judge (the sister of Georgia’s Stacey Abrams) ruled that even when someone tells the U.S. Postal Service they have moved, their old address is still a lawful basis for them to cast a ballot. Certainly, proof of crime is impossible with such judges and without testimony under oath, or powers of subpoena.

Just as important, Republicans in general and the Trump White House in particular bear heavy responsibility for failing to challenge the patent illegality of the executive actions and consent decrees that enabled inherently insecure mail-in procedures in real-time, as they were being perpetrated in key states. No facts were at issue. Only law. The constitutional violations were undeniable.

Pennsylvania et. al. answered Texas’s late lawsuit by arguing it demanded the invalidation of votes that had been cast in good faith. True. But Texas argued that letting stand the results of an election carried out contrary to the Constitution devalued the votes cast in states such as Texas that had held the election in a constitutional manner. Also true. Without comment, the Supreme Court chose to privilege the set of voters on the oligarchy’s side over those of their opponents.

Had the lawsuit come well before the election, no such choice would have existed. Typically, the Trump Administration substituted bluster for action.

The Oligarchy Rides its Tigers

Winning the 2020 election had been the objective behind which the oligarchy had coalesced during the previous five years. In 2021, waging socio-political war on the rest of America is what the oligarchy is all about.

The logic of hate and disdain of ordinary Americans is not only what binds the oligarchy together. It is the only substitute it has for any moral-ethical-intellectual point of reference. Donald Trump’s impotent, inglorious reaction to his defeat offered irresistible temptations to the oligarchy’s several sectors to celebrate victory by vying to hurt whoever had supported the president. But permanent war against some 74 million fellow citizens is a foredoomed approach to governing.

The Democratic Party had promised a return to some kind of “normalcy.” Instead, its victory enabled the oligarchy’s several parts to redefine the people who do not show them due deference as “white supremacists,” “insurrectionists,” and Nazis—in short, as some kind of criminals—to exclude them from common platforms of communication, from the banking system, and perhaps even from air travel; and to set law enforcement to surveil them in order to find bases for prosecuting them. Neither Congress nor any state’s legislature legislated any of this. Rather, the several parts of America’s economic, cultural, and political establishment are waging this war, uncoordinated but well-nigh unanimously.
Perhaps most important, they do so without thought of how a war against at least some 74 million fellow citizens might end. The people in the oligarchy’s corporate components seem to want only to adorn unchallenged power with a reputation for “wokeness.” For them, causing pain to their opponents is a pleasure incidental to enjoying power’s perquisites. The Biden family’s self-enrichment by renting access to influence is this oligarchy’s standard.

But the people who dispense that reputation—not just the professional revolutionaries of Antifa and Black Lives Matter, but “mainstream” racial and gender activists and self-appointed virtue-crats, have appetites as variable as they are insatiable. For them, rubbing conservative America’s faces in excrement is what it’s all about. A Twitter video viewed by 2.6 million people urges them to form “an army of citizen detectives” to ferret out conservatives from among teachers, doctors, police officers, and “report them to the authorities.” No doubt, encouraged by President Biden’s characterization of opponents as “domestic terrorists,” any number of “authorities” as well as private persons will find opportunities to lord it over persons not to their taste. This guarantees endless clashes, and spiraling violence.

Joseph Biden, Kamala Harris, and the people they appoint to positions of official responsibility are apparatchiks, habituated to currying favor and pulling rank.

They have neither the inclination nor the capacity to persuade the oligarchy’s several parts to agree to a common good or at least to a modus vivendi among themselves, never mind with conservative America. This guarantees that they will ride tigers that they won’t even try to dismount.

At this moment, the oligarchy wields an awesome complex of official and unofficial powers to exclude whomever it chooses from society’s mainstream. Necessarily, however, exclusions cut both ways. Invariably, to banish another is to banish one’s self as well. Google, Facebook, and Twitter let it be known that they would exclude anything with which they disagree from what had become the near-universal means of communication. They bolstered that by colluding to destroy their competitor, Parler. Did they imagine that 74 million Americans could find no means of communicating otherwise? Simon and Schuster canceled a book by Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) critical of communications monopolies.

Did its officials imagine that they would thereby do other than increase the book’s eventual sales, and transfer some of their customers to Hawley’s new publisher? The media effectively suppressed inconvenient news. Did they imagine that this would prevent photos of Black Lives Matter professionals in the forefront of the January 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol from reaching the public?

In sum, intending to relegate conservative America to society’s servile sidelines, the oligarchy’s members drew a clear, sharp line between themselves and that America. By telling conservative Americans “these institutions and corporations, are ours, not yours,” they freed conservative America of moral obligations toward them and themselves. By abandoning conservative America, they oblige conservative America to abandon them and seek its own way.

Clarity, Leadership, and Separation

To think of conservative America’s predicament as an opportunity is as hyperbolic as it was for Machiavelli to begin the conclusion of The Prince by observing that “in order to know Moses’ virtue it was necessary that the people of Israel be slaves in Egypt, and to know the greatness of Cyrus’s spirit that the Persians be oppressed by the Medes, and to know the excellence of Theseus, that the Athenian people be dispersed, so at the present, in order to know the virtue of an Italian spirit it was necessary that Italy reduce herself to the conditions in which she is at present . . .”

Machiavelli’s lesson is that the clarity of situations such as he mentions, and such as is conservative America’s following the 2020 election, is itself valuable. Clarity makes illusions of compromise untenable and points to self-reliant action as the only reasonable path. The people might or might not be, as he wrote, “all ready and disposed to follow the flag if only someone were to pick it up.” But surely, someone picking up the flag is the only alternative to servitude.

What, in conservative America’s current predicament, might it mean to “pick up the flag?” Electoral politics remains open to talented, courageous, ambitious leadership. In Florida and South Dakota, Governors Ron DeSantis and Kristi Noem have used their powers to make room for ways of life different from and more attractive than that in places wholly dominated by the oligarchy. Texas and Idaho as well attract refugees from such as California and New York by virtue of such differences with life there as their elected officials have been able to maintain. Governmental and corporate pressures on such states to conform to the oligarchy’s standards, sure to increase, are opportunities for their officials to lead their people’s refusal to conform by explaining why doing this is good, and by personally standing in the way. They may be sure that President Kamala Harris would not order federal troops to shoot at state officials for closing abortion clinics or for excluding men from women’s bathrooms.

For more than a generation, a majority of Americans have expressed growing distrust of, and alienation from, the establishment. The establishment, not Donald Trump, made this happen. That disparate majority, in many ways at cross purposes with itself, demands leadership. Pollster Patrick Caddell’s in-depth study of the American electorate, which he titled “We Need Smith,” showed how the themes that made it possible for the hero of the 1939 movie “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” to prevail against the establishment then are even more gripping now and appeal to a bigger majority. Trump was a bad copy of Mr. Smith.

More than ever, an audience beyond the 74 million Americans who voted for Trump hungers for leadership. The oligarchy came together by ever more vigorously denigrating and suppressing these deplorables. Already before the 20th century’s turn, the FBI and some elements in the Army and the Justice Department had concluded that they are somehow criminal, and that preparations should be made to treat them as such. The official position of the administration taking power after the 2020 election is that domestic terrorism from legions of “white supremacists” is the primary threat facing America. No wonder those so designated for outlawry demand protection.

The path to electoral leadership is straightforward. Whoever would lead the deplorables-plus must explain their cause to friend and foe, make it his own, and grow it by leading successful acts of resistance.

Increasingly, conservative Americans live as if under occupation by a hostile power. Whoever would lead them should emulate Charles de Gaulle’s 1941 basic rule for la résistance: refrain from individual or spontaneous acts or expressions that produce only martyrs. But join with thousands in what amount to battles to defeat the enemy’s initiatives, weaken his grip on power, and prepare his defeat.

Thus, an aspirant to the presidency in 2024, in the course of debunking the narrative by which the oligarchy seized so much power over America, might lead millions to violate restrictions placed on those who refuse to wear masks. Or, as he pursues legislative and judicial measures to abolish the compulsory racial and gender sensitivity training sessions to which public and private employees are subjected, he might organize employees in a given sector unanimously to stay away from them in protest. They can’t all be fired or held back.

Such a persuasive prospective president, or president, could finish the process that, beginning circa 2010, initiated the process of reshaping the Republican Party into something like Caddell’s Mr. Smith would have personified.

Electoral politics, however, is the easy part. Major corporations, private and semi-private institutions such as schools, publishing houses, and media, are the oligarchy’s deepest foundations. These having become hostile, conservative Americans have no choice but to populate their own. This is far from impossible.

Sorting ourselves out into congenial groups has been part of America’s DNA since 1630, when Roger Williams led his followers out of Massachusetts to found Providence Plantations. In the 19th century, the Mormons left unfriendly environments to establish their own settlements. Since 1973, Americans who believe in unborn children’s humanity have largely ceased to intermarry with those who do not. Nobody decided this should happen. It is in the logic of diverging cultures.

As American primary and secondary education’s dysfunction became painfully apparent, parents of all races have fled the public schools as fast as they could. Businesses have been fleeing the Rust Belt for the Sun Belt for generations.

When Democratic governors and mayors used COVID to make life difficult in their jurisdictions, people moved out of them. When Twitter’s censorship of conservatives became undeniable, Parler added customers by the hundreds of thousands each day. Facebook and Twitter’s stock lost $50 billion in a week.

Much more separation follows from the American people’s diverging cultures.

As conservative America sorts itself out from oligarchy’s social bases, it may be able to restore something like what had existed under the republic. Effectively, two regimes would have to learn to coexist within our present boundaries. But that may be the best, freest, arrangement possible now for the United States.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

MSNBC SLAMS Violent Rhetoric on the Right – Then Argues President Trump Deserved to Have Been Drone Bombed

By Jim Hoft
Published January 30, 2021 at 5:20pm
drone-strike-trump.jpg

After accusing President Trump’s supporters of inciting violence for weeks now an MSNBC guest actually argued that President Trump should have been drone bombed.

During a MSNBC segment, Clint Watts, a former FBI agent and senior fellow at the Center for Cyber and Homeland Security at George Washington University argued Trump would be bombed for his rhetoric.
That’s completely insane!


Via WeLoveTrump.com:

MSNBC guests considering whether President Trump’s political speech protesting the vast irregularities may have warranted a DRONE STRIKE: pic.twitter.com/4yOHBIEEHS
— Brando (@undercontractHS) January 29, 2021
Anwar Al-Awlaki was a Yemeni-American imam who supported Islamic terrorism. Barack Obama killed him in a drone strike in 2011 in Yemen. Awlaki was allegedly plotting terror strikes in America.
 
Top