Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Forget it, Jake, it’s liberals

Some useful historical perspective: the FBI was always corrupt, Democrat-Socialist politicians have always found this corruption useful for election-tampering, and Enemedia has always been complicit in the undermining the right of non-liberal Americans to have a say in their own governance.

More specifically: the earth-shattering Watergate mega-scandal was pretty small potatoes, and the self-proclaimed Heroes Who Saved The Republic…weren’t.

I look back now and the whole thing seems a sham, a self-congratulatory illusion created by leftists in both the news media and in Hollywood.

Recently, reading Mark Levin’s “Unfreedom of the Press”, I was reminded that, before reporters went on their great crusade against Richard Nixon, they had overlooked a whole lot of corruption in the Democrat presidents who preceded him.

Levin tells how John F. Kennedy, with the knowledge of his brother and Attorney General Robert, nudged the IRS into auditing conservative groups. With Kennedy’s approval, the FBI was also employed to investigate those the administration disliked, including Martin Luther King Jr. Lyndon Baines Johnson would later increase the politically motivated auditing and spying. None of this was uncovered until later on.

Ben Bradlee — the editor of the Washington Post, where Woodward and Bernstein broke the Watergate story — was well aware of his pal Kennedy’s misuse of the tax and investigative agencies. Not only did he not report it, he allowed himself and his paper to be manipulated by information JFK had wrongly obtained.

This totally changes the Watergate narrative. Nixon’s dirty tricks and enemy lists may have been creepy and wrong, but the press exposure of these misdemeanors came after years of ignoring similar and worse malfeasance by Democrat administrations.

That changes what Watergate means. That transforms it from a heroic crusade into a political hit job, Democrat hackery masquerading as nobility. The press turned a blind eye to the corruption of JFK and LBJ, then raced to overturn the election of a man they despised — despised in part because he battled the Communism many of them had espoused.

Like the Nixon takedown, the attacks on Trump come after years of turning a blind eye to the corruption of a Democrat. Obama’s IRS campaign against the Tea Party? His lies about Benghazi? His Fast and Furious fiasco? His shutdown of a massive drug investigation to appease Iran? No big deal. Obama was, as almost every mainstream outlet has declared, “scandal free.”

The crawly thing Obama was le chevalier sans peur et sans reproche, see. Meanwhile, Trump is Literally Hitler, which justifies using any means whatsoever to nullify the results of the 2016 election—or, to the Left’s way of thinking, “correct” them.

So what else is new? Nothing under the sun, as the saying goes.

Share

Pack ’em up, move ’em out, bring ’em home

End this war.

Lindsey Graham Is Wrong: It’s Long Past Time to Get Out of Afghanistan
The occasionally courageous and insightful Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) predicted Tuesday that if President Trump withdraws American troops from Afghanistan, “there will be another 9/11.” Sounding as tough as he ever does, Graham warned: “You may be tired of fighting radical Islam, but they’re not tired of fighting you.” But that’s not what getting out of Afghanistan would mean. If leaving American troops in Afghanistan until the end of time is the only way we can fight the global jihad, we’re done for.

Graham is ignoring the fact that we’re not really fighting “radical Islam” in Afghanistan as it is, and another 9/11 could happen while we are there. 

The fool’s errand in Afghanistan has no goal, no endpoint, no definition of victory. It should have been ended years ago and should be ended now. What are we fighting for at this point, anyway? The Taliban are never going to surrender. American forces have supervised the implementation of an Afghan constitution that enshrined Islamic law as the highest law of the land. Yet Islamic law is nothing like the democratic principles that we went into Afghanistan to defend (over here) and establish (over there). Sharia institutionalizes the oppression of women and non-Muslims, extinguishes the freedom of speech, and denies the freedom of conscience.

Was that what we were fighting for?

Nonetheless, America continued to pour out her blood and treasure for this repressive state, with no clear objective or mission in view other than a never-defined “victory.” No one has defined what victory would look like in Afghanistan. What could it possibly look like? Has the Ghani regime ever allowed women to throw off their burqas and take their place in Afghan society as human beings equal in dignity to men? Does the Ghani government, or any Afghan government that would follow it, ever intend to guarantee basic human rights to the tiny and ever-dwindling number of non-Muslims unfortunate enough to live within its borders? Of course not.

And no matter how long American troops stay in Afghanistan, no Afghan regime is ever going to do such things.

The real problem, as Spencer somewhat obliquely states, is our refusal to admit that no Muslim regime is ever going to do such things. There can never be any meaningful “victory,” in Afghanistan or anywhere else, until we get over our cowardly squeamishness and face the facts: in the phrase “Islamic terrorism”—whether you choose to water it down with the evasive “radical” or not—it’s the “Islamic” part that matters most.

Share

Stonewallery

Yeah, about those “declassified” documents and all.

Entrenched officials in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) are refusing to declassify key documents related to the Trump-Russia affair more than three months after President Trump granted his attorney general the power to declassify the documents, Paul Sperry of RealClearInvestigations reported on Wednesday.

The office is in limbo in the wake of the resignations last month of its director, Dan Coats, and principal deputy, Sue Gordon, who is reportedly a close ally of former CIA Director John Brennan. According to sources, “establishment officials in that agency are still dragging their feet.”

For the time being, intelligence officials are not in any trouble, according to sources, as Attorney General Bill Barr has only requested, rather than demanded, the documents. Barr is hoping for their cooperation. But that could soon change.

Frustrated with intelligence agency officials’ resistance, President Trump orchestrated a shake-up of senior leadership in ODNI, leading to the departures of Coats and Gordon.

Well, fine. But who was the danged fool that appointed Coats in the first place, I wonder? Hmmm

Dan Coats, a veteran of the US Army Corps of Engineers who served from 1966 through 1968, was an Indiana congressman throughout the 1980s. He was elected to the first of two stints in the Senate in 1988, filling the seat of Vice President Dan Quayle. Coats left the Senate in 1998 and was appointed ambassador to Germany by George W. Bush in 2001. He was re-elected to the Senate in 2011 where he served until Donald Trump appointed him DNI in 2017.

Oooops. Kinda ironic, innit, that one of Trump’s most-repeated campaign boasts was that he would be appointing nothing but “the best people, believe me” to posts in his administration, when he’s shot himself in the foot time and again with blunders like this. Between the Ogabe stay-behind saboteurs, entrenched Deep State remoras doggedly determined to resist anything resembling change or reform, and outright fanatical enemies of his administration appointed by Trump, the man has done himself no favors.

Stupid questions update! Corrupt forever, forever corrupt.

Why is the FBI obstructing the release of its disgraced former director’s memos? As they say, just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should. Whatever harm releasing these memos might cause to the FBI’s legitimate crime-fighting ability is surely offset by the lack of accountability for one of the most controversial episodes in the bureau’s history. The public must know that the FBI is not operating as a government unto itself.

It is to laugh; that’s exactly what the FBI IS doing, and has been since its inception.

Fellow son of Kansas City Harry S Truman wrote during his presidency: “We want no Gestapo or secret police.”

But we got both.

“FBI is tending in that direction. They are dabbling in sex-life scandals and plain blackmail… Edgar Hoover would give his right eye to take over, and all congressmen and senators are afraid of him.”

In spite of all the reforms, oversight, and internal regulations meant to protect the elected governance from the power of the unelected FBI, liberal journalist Michael Isikoff wrote this of Comey’s private meeting with Donald Trump, the subject matter of some of these memos: “Senior FBI officials were concerned then-director James Comey would appear to be blackmailing then-President-elect Trump

Which he was.

– using tactics notoriously associated with J. Edgar Hoover

Which they were.

– when he attended a fateful Jan. 6, 2017, meeting at which he informed the real estate magnate about allegations he had consorted with prostitutes in Moscow.”

He’s not the only one. The president-elect also thought the FBI director was using the occasion of a private pre-inauguration meeting as blackmail to gain control over the incoming president. Trump thought Comey used the Christopher Steele dossier story of Trump directing Russian hookers in a Moscow hotel room as “leverage“ to secure his job. Comey himself understood the appearance of his private briefing of the president: “I was very concerned that he might interpret it as an effort to pull a J. Edgar Hoover on him.”

Which you did.

Then, when the president fired Comey, the former FBI director retaliated by releasing some of the contents of memos for the stated purpose of prompting the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Trump. Isn’t that what unsuccessful blackmailers do when their targets balk?

Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck…

Comey had another reason to want the swift appointment of a special counsel. He literally lost sleep over the prospect that the president had made an audio recording of their meetings. “I woke up in the middle of the night on Monday night, because it didn’t dawn on me originally, that there might be corroboration for our conversation, there might be a tape.”

Pro tip for ya, Honest Jim: actual men of integrity—honorable, trustworthy, forthright men—are never plagued by such fears. NEVER.

Whatever spooks or spies might be outed by the release of Comey’s memos, the American people should have the right to insist upon the supremacy of constitutional interests over the reputations of career bureaucrats who might be embarrassed by a public airing of their misconduct. Attorney General William Barr should tell the FBI to pound sand.

Yeah, not holding my breath over here. The FBI has never been anything but a wholly corrupt and unaccountable agency: a rogue department of a government itself gone rogue. There is no “reforming” it; the problems stemming from its corporate degeneracy cannot be resolved short of dismantling it. Which, none of us should be holding our breath waiting on that, either.

SO(FBI)S update! The leopard’s spots do not change.

The IG concluded that by using sensitive information “to create public pressure for official action, Comey set a dangerous example for the over 35,000 current FBI  employees — and the many thousands more former FBI employees — who similarly have access to or knowledge of non-public information.” The IG report warned that “the civil liberties of every individual who may fall within the scope of the FBI’s investigative authorities depend on FBI’s ability to protect sensitive information from unauthorized disclosure.”

This is true but it ignores the FBI’s long record of violating Americans’ liberties and covert political interventions. As Yale University historian Beverly Gage noted, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover “insisted that investigative files be kept secret, waging repeated battles to keep them away from the courts and Congress. But he also became a master of the leak, parceling out choice tidbits to reporters at strategic moments.” Hoover’s FBI covertly intervened in the presidential elections of 1948 (seeking to sabotage Henry Wallace’s campaign), 1952 (smearing Democratic candidate Adlai Stevenson as gay), and 1964 (spying on the campaign of Republican nominee Barry Goldwater). 

Nothing but corruption and abuse of power, all the way down. That the once-proud American people blithely tolerate the continued existence of such an abominable affront to every Founding principle is as damning and shameful an indictment as can be imagined.

Share

The Deep State wins!

Game over.

The Justice Department inspector general released a scathing report on former FBI Director James Comey’s notes memorializing his conversations with President Trump, finding that he disclosed them without authorization “to achieve a personally desired outcome.”

The 83-page report on Comey’s handling of “sensitive information,” released Thursday, said the investigation found “no evidence that Comey or his attorneys released any of the classified information contained in any of the Memos to members of the media.”

But Inspector General Michael Horowitz faulted Comey for his behavior, saying his actions “violated Department or FBI policy, or the terms of Comey’s FBI Employment Agreement. As described in this report, we conclude that Comey’s retention, handling, and dissemination of certain Memos violated Department and FBI policies, and his FBI Employment Agreement.”

Horowitz criminally referred Comey to the Justice Department for his conduct, but the agency declined to prosecute.

Because of course it did.

And that’s just about it for the sick joke some Americans have been pleased to refer to as “the rule of law,” folks. Now we know for sure that there is but one very simple Rule of Law, and it is this: everyday Americans are subject to them. Powerful liberal politicians and parasitic Deep State scumbuckets are not. Full stop, end of story.

For some, though, a sad, forlorn hope still remains. It’s kinda pitiful to see, in truth.

That might be expected from an OIG who accused FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe of “lacking candor,”and violating FBI policy. The OIG released the report just before the Labor Day weekend, when it was least likely to command attention. In similar style in 2016, FBI boss Comey released documents on Hillary Clinton’s emails on the afternoon of September 2, just before the holiday weekend. Comey took the August 29 OIG report as confirmation that, as he said of Hillary Clinton, no reasonable prosecutor would charge him with anything.

The former FBI boss went into his end-zone dance, tweeting that “a quick message with a ‘sorry we lied about you’ would be nice.” That celebration may be premature. OIG Michael Horowitz is also investigating abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and Comey signed off on three of the four FISA applications for Carter Page. In addition, Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham are investigating the origins of the Russia collusion probe.

I no longer can honestly say I am clinging to any hope at all of seeing justice done via Barr or Horowitz. At this point, it would be more honest for the Barr/Horowitz dumbshow to simply fold the tents and shut down; nothing whatsoever is going to come of these “investigations,” and justice will never be served on any of the Ruling Class conspirators who plotted an actual coup d’ état, and very nearly pulled it off too. As the above piece goes on to say:

Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani told reporters that Comey’s investigation of Hillary Clinton was “a sellout, a fix from day one.” The DOJ and establishment media should have seen it all coming.

Comey became FBI director in 2013 under POTUS 44, formerly known as Barry Soetoro. He was in the process of transforming the USA into a country where the outgoing president appoints his successor and rigs the system in her favor. So no surprise that Comey would not recommend prosecution of an influence peddler who kept an illegal private server, destroyed more than 30,000 subpoenaed emails, smashed up electronic devices, and other violations that would have landed anyone else in prison.

Clinton crony Comey did his job and kept Hillary in the race. After she lost, Comey did his best to target the winner, Donald Trump, for which the DOJ Inspector General has now tapped him on the wrist. On the other hand, the investigation of Comey is hardly the only game in town.

So? The conspirators, just like HILLARY!™ and Obama, will remain, in the gloating words of murdering terrorist and Obama mentor Bill Ayers, “guilty as hell, free as a bird.” Tell me, does Her Herness—pictured in the posh Hamptons resort area on her way to another drunken binge, no doubt—look worried at all to you folks?

Looking_relaxed_Hillary.jpg

Of course she doesn’t. Because she isn’t. Because she has no reason to be; as a card-carrying member of the Ruling Class, she enjoys complete immunity from consequences for absolutely any and all felonious, treasonous, seditious, or otherwise deplorable acts she may commit. She knows it; with this Comey whitewash, it has just been re-confirmed for all of us.

There’s been some discussion recently about a widespread and growing loss of faith and trust in America’s institutions. At this point, any even minimally-aware person who still retains the slightest shred of such is a damned fool. This country and its government is a disgrace, an abomination. ZMan brings it all home:

The reason that most people have been holding out hope that this seditious plot would be prosecuted is they don’t really believe everyone in the ruling class is a villainous gangster. Again, even the jaded on this side of the divide thought something would come from this caper, even if it was just the release of a documents showing there was a plot. Maybe a few low-level punks like Lisa Page and Peter Strzok would get a show trial and be sent off to Club Fed for a few years.

It is increasingly clear, that nothing will happen. Bill Barr is just the latest flim-flam man to bamboozle Donald Trump into trusting him. It is clear now that his assignment is to cover up the crimes of official Washington. It has been six months since he was authorized to start releasing the classified documents describing the actions of the FBI during this caper. So far, nothing has been released. In fact, Bill Barr is fighting public disclosure of documents a federal judge ordered released months ago.

As Bill Barr slowly and efficiently covers up the seditious plot and other crimes committed by the FBI and DOJ during the Obama years, it is not unreasonable to wonder how far down the scale this moves the political center. Twenty-five years ago, most dissidents would have thought this level of corruption was improbable, if not entirely impossible. The typical normie was still sure the next election would bring reformers, who would chase off the crooks and clean up the system.

…It is becoming increasingly difficult for the civic nationalist to operate in anything but a fantasy world. Whatever you may think of Trump, the result of the last three years is proof that elections don’t matter. This shameless refusal by public officials to apply the law to Washington insiders makes a mockery of the rule of law. Throw in the stunning dishonesty of the mass media and the metastasizing surveillance state and it is impossible for even the most gullible to remain a civic nationalist.

Indeed. As I’ve said many times: the fourth of July ought to be a day not of celebration, but of mourning.

Update! Bottom line:

If you have one set of laws for the members of the government and another set for everyone else, you are not being governed, you are being ruled.

Bingo.

Anything goes update! A clear message, sent and received.

How can the I.G. Report say Comey’s actions were a “dangerous example for over 35,000 current FBI employees — and the many thousands more former FBI employees” and the DOJ determine that those actions are not prosecutable? Is this not a clear message from the DOJ to those 35,000-plus FBI employees that there are no legal consequences if they ever decide to do what James Comey did?

This not only stinks to high heaven, but absolutely makes no sense — unless you believe in the existence of a “Deep State” that is in control of our government.

This is not a conspiracy theory; this is solid evidence that the entire justice system of our country is corrupt.

The DOJ has just let the world know that from this day forward, the FBI is unable to dispatch its law enforcement duties properly. How safe do you feel now?

Read the I.G. Report conclusion and ask yourself where you would be sitting tonight if you did what James Comey did.

I gotta wonder now if the “no criminal intent” wheeze Comey cooked up to exonerate Her Herness was something of a trial run to gauge its effectiveness should he ever need such a handy escape hatch himself.

Share

Revisionism 101

The Old Grey Whore, at it again.

Last week, a little pamphlet of the working man called the New York Times announced a new initiative in moral enlightenment for the great mass of ignorant Americans. The “1619 Project,” as it’s called, “aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story.”

Those with questions about this exercise in revisionism are being cast as bigots who just hate that America’s “paper of record” is acknowledging our “real past.” Right. Because if there’s one thing Americans don’t hear enough about, it’s how evil and racist their country is.

The Times is asking for more than a “re-examination” of the country’s history. The editors are not really looking to “explore” anything in earnest: they’ve already reached their conclusions, assumed to be obvious and beyond dispute. Here is a declaration from the nation’s leading newspaper that the Founding as we understand it is illegitimate, that America needs to be fundamentally re-imagined and reconstructed.

Well, duh. They’ve only been screaming this very thing directly in our faces for years now—since at least “fundamental transformation” and “for the first time I’m proud of my country,” if not well before. So how many more times do we all need to hear it before we stop pretending to be shocked by it and take them at their word?

No serious person would disagree that American slavery was a disgraceful system, or that racial disparities persist today. But what, exactly, do the revisionists expect to keep the nation together once the ancien regime has been abolished?

Brute force, subjugation, and iron-fisted tyranny, natch. More from Steve Sailer:

How exactly retconning American history will get rid of Trump was left vague, but Baquet was confident that it was all part of the Times’ seamless plot.

By the way, that’s some hilariously shameless boasting about the power of The Narrative to warp minds.

As I’ve pointed out, The Narrative is pushed less by printing fake news or by completely censoring true news than by the power of the prestige press to pick out ideologically convenient items from the vast surfeit of events and declare them the news about which we are all supposed to have a “conversation.”

Did, say, a Catholic schoolboy “smirk” at a “tribal elder”?

Now, that’s national news!

In contrast, in the wake of the vaunted Black Lives Matter protests in Ferguson, did four Teens of Color in St. Louis, shouting “Kill the white people,” hammer a white man to death?

Why are you interested in a local police blotter detail?

And if there is a lot of news for powerful interests to pick and choose amongst, there’s even more history.

Lots, lots more from Sailer, who wanders pretty far afield in this nonetheless interesting analysis.

Share

“All The People Who Think They Are Better Than You Are Much, Much Worse”

Ironic, innit?

Our elite is anything but. It’s a collection of pedestrian mediocrities who inherited our civilization from the people who actually created it and fought for it, and like every spoiled child who was handed free stuff by his doting mommy and daddy, our elite is resentful and obnoxious.

We’re ruled by a bunch of Veruca Salts.

Of course they don’t appreciate what it takes to build, feed, fuel and defend what we have – as a group, they didn’t do any of those things. No one appreciates what he didn’t work for and earn, and our alleged betters did not work for and earn the positions and prestige they hold at the heads of our institutions. They got where they are by just showing up, and by parroting hacky, politically correct dogma, not by actual achievement.

Look at the freaks our universities are pumping out – they can’t read, they can’t write, they think history started in 1996, and the only things they ever created are evermore tiresome and weird gender identities.

Hello, I am Teddy Roosevelt. I was born wealthy, won the Medal of Honor, busted the trusts like this Facebook atrocity of which you speak, and I literally punched out a bear once.

Yo, my name is Kaden. I’m an otherkin-identifying, non-binary gendered, two-spirit from Brooklyn with a degree in Climate Change Ventriloquism from Yale. I’m not ashamed to cry when I see a MAGA hat because my mom says my feelings are important. Bernie is too patriarchal for me, so Beto 2020!

Here’s a question, and it’s a fair one. What has the ruling class done right in the last 20 years? 

We are actually losing ground. Our light bulbs don’t light anymore, our front-loading washing machines don’t wash anymore and our straws don’t straw anymore. Even our Star Wars movies today are exponentially crappier than the ones from 40 years ago.

So, what’s just one great thing the magnificent, magical masterminds of our elite have pulled off since maybe 2000?

Just one.

One thing.

Go.

Let’s not any of us be holding our breath waiting, ‘kay? This next bit ends with one of my own personal pet peeves:

What have they ever solved? Hell, they created most of these problems in the first place. They whine about student loans, but who set up the college cash machine that is American academia? Our medical system is a wreck? Dudes, our medical system is Obamacare, and you’re the ones who stuffed it down our gullets!

I’ve griped here several times about the sudden onslaught of blah-blah about “fixing” Obamacare after Trump took office. Not to seem pedantic here or anything, but…ummmm…let’s see now…Obamacare WAS the fix, wasn’t it? That’s how they sold it to us, anyway. But remember Mike’s Iron Law regarding Progressivists: the only solution to the problems they themselves create is always and forever MORE OF THE SAME, STAT! The problem is never, ever that they did the wrong thing, that they screwed the pooch, that they don’t know what the hell they’re doing, that they’re in over their empty, pointed heads. No, the problem—each and every single time, on every issue—is that we just didn’t go far enough.

They’ll never admit either error or cluelessness. They’ll never admit the fundamental impossibility of micro-micromanaging a nation of 350 million souls, spread over an entire continent, from their well-insulated enclaves in Mordor On The Potomac. They’ll never acknowledge the simple wisdom behind the Founders’ insistence that keeping government as close as possible to the people it governs must inevitably maximize its efficiency, its flexibility, and its accountability. Hell, they’ll never even ‘fess up to their myriad failures being failures.

They can only keep on cramming all possible power into the hands of our DC “elite” masters—trying, and failing at everything except strictly that—and just never you serfs mind about all the failure, arrogance, and incompetence, thanksverymuch.

Share

Burn in Hell

Hate on (((DEM JOOOOOZ!!!))) all you want. Just remember, though, your juvenile stupidity and paranoia is putting you squarely on the same team as these two terrorist-supporting, genocidal Muslim slimeballs.

Omar said she and Tlaib were “being denied the right to see for ourselves the reality on the ground in the West Bank” and the ban was “nothing less than an attempt by an ally of the United States to suppress our ability to do our jobs as elected officials.

Yeah, fuck you. You aren’t the slightest bit interested in any “reality on the ground,” bitch. You’re interested solely in propagandizing for the “drive the Jews into the sea” agenda of a bunch of murdering subhumans. Israel was right—and well within their rights—to keep you out, being under no obligation whatsoever to roll out the welcome mat for terrorist-supporting shitstirrers seeking only to undermine their security and sow discord. Would that the US still had the gumption and self-respect to turn your sorry ass back at its own border and deny you re-entry, too.

“We give Israel more than $3 million in aid every year,” she said. “This is predicated on they’re being an important ally in the region and the ‘only democracy’ in the Middle East,” making air quotes with her fingers.

OOOOOOOOH, 3 million a year, is it? STAGGERING sum, that. Many of our own homegrown ((((JOOOOOO!!)))) haters like to bitch about that too, to bolster their argument against Israel’s existence. Only one little problem.

According to the US Consulate in Jerusalem’s website, the United States has been the largest donor of aid to the Palestinians since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1994. This aid has totaled around $600 million annually in recent years, and can be roughly divided into three categories.

The first is USAID, the conduit by which the State Department provides aid to countries across the world. The second is the economic support for law and order in the Palestinian Authority. These two categories were perhaps the aid that Trump had in mind in his tweet, though the president did not specify. The third is the US support for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA, as addressed by Haley.

So, let’s see then: 3 mill for support for the only functioning democracy in the ME, a nation which as far as I’m aware hasn’t seen a single incidence of anti-American protests featuring shouts of “Death to America,” burning and stomping of the US flag, placards with 3rd-grade-level artwork of troglodytic Muslim murderers slaughtering American soldiers, etc. In return for that relative pittance, we get reliable support of all kinds in every global forum or venue from Israel’s government; access to the uncountable medical, military, and technological innovations Israel provides the world; and a stable, prosperous, rational, and responsible state smack in the middle of one of the most violent, primordial, chaotic shitpits on the entire planet.

That’s in contrast to *6 FUCKING HUNDRED MILLION* US DOLLARS per year shoveled to a passel of useless swine, most of which is clandestinely misappropriated to provide support for a global terrorist network that has savagely murdered who even knows who many innocent civilians all over the world, including thousands upon thousands of Americans. The rest is simply stolen, lining the pockets of various kleptocratic Paleosimian “officials.”

I dunno, call me a dupe of the Interplanetary ((((JOOOOOOOO!)))) Conspiracy here (yes, they’re putting JEW COOTIES on the moon now, apparently), but if we’re going to complain about how much aid goes where, I know which beneficaries of US largesse I’d prefer to see cut off from Uncle Sugar Tit’s pursestrings, and which one we’re getting some kind of actual return on investment from. Back to our original article for more subversive whining from this rectal polyp.

“We must be asking, as Israel’s ally, the Netanyahu government stop the expansion of settlements on Palestinian land, and ensure full rights for Palestinians if we are to give them aid. These are not just my views. These are the views held by the range of experts, peace advocates on this issue.”

“Peace advocates.” “Experts.” *snort*

“We know Donald Trump would love nothing more than to use this issue to pit Muslims and Jewish Americans against each other. The Muslim community and the Jewish community are being othered and made into the bogeyman by this administration. But as we will hear today, people of all different faiths are coming together to speak up against the status quo in the region,” she continued.

Au contraire, Muzzrat scum; Trump doesn’t need to “use” this or any other issue to pit Muslims and civilized people against each other, nor does anybody else. Your own filthy little murder book, the Koran, already accomplished the task quite completely, filled cover to cover as it is with your pedophile prophet’s exhortations to slaughter, subjugation, and genocide, all at the behest of your false “God.” And it’s Pisslam’s stubborn, millenia-long campaign of war, terror, and conquest against Western civilization that long ago established your “people” as a very real “bogeyman,” “otherizing” you far more effectively than Trump ever could.

600 million a year to the Paleosimians. Not just one time, but per annum, for YEARS—adding up to a grand total of 5.2 BILLION since 1994. For absolutely nothing. Sorry to dwell on it and all, but I’m having a little trouble getting past that one, folks.

Share

Prog-nosis: piss poor

More like an endlessly-metastasizing tumor, I think. Or a parasitical infection, like tapeworms, maybe. But still, the man…uhh, gorilla has a point.

I was thinking the other day that progressivism is like a virus. This is no doubt a bit of an oversimplification, but this is how viruses work: when they come in contact with a cell, they trick it into thinking it’s something they need, like a nutrient, so the virus gets pulled in. Once inside, the virus repurposes the cell’s DNA into making more viruses. The cell gets turned into, literally, a virus factory. Eventually, so many viruses will be manufactured that the cell will burst, releasing all of the new viruses to infect other cells.

You can see the parallels with progressivism. First, unlike a normal cell, which has a function as part of some larger organism and can reproduce itself, viruses can’t exist independently. They’re kind of like a parasite. Similarly, progressives don’t really do anything useful or productive.

Also, viruses don’t do anything except cause illness. I guess there are some viruses that have been indentified as beneficial, but not many. So, generally speaking, if you have a virus, it’s bad. And any time a progressive shows up and wants to do something or be in charge of something, it’s bad. When left unchecked, viruses will reduce healthy organisms to a sickly caricature of what they formerly were. Case in point: The Star Wars franchise. Or the State Department.

Second, progressives also gain entry into institutions and organizations by deception. They trick the unwary into opening the door for them by using words such as ‘peace’, ‘justice’, ‘equality’ and ‘fairness’ as if they are actually interested in peace, justice, equality, and fairness. Which they’re not. Everything they tell you is a lie.

GP goes on to lay out several more good points of comparison, winding up with this:

Finally, like most viruses, science hasn’t really found a cure for progressivism.

Well, maturity usually does the trick. As Churchill put it (or, possibly, didn’t): if you’re not a liberal at 20, you have no heart; if you’re not a conservative at 40, you have no brain. Failing that, a single dose of lead in a copper or steel jacket, topically applied to either the head or the Sniper’s Triangle area, would work nicely too.

Share

Less talk, more action

Julie Kelly loses patience.

While Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s name quickly has vanished from the front pages following his disastrous testimony before Congress last month, the investigation into “Russiagate”—how top officials in the Obama Administration fabricated the phony Russian collusion hoax and weaponized the country’s most powerful law enforcement tools against an American political campaign—appears to be moving at a snail’s pace. 

The results of a long-awaited probe by the Justice Department’s inspector general into potential abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by Comey’s FBI has been delayed again until at least early fall. In a separate inquiry, Inspector General Michael Horowitz reportedly concluded that Comey illegally leaked classified information and referred the former FBI director to the Justice Department for possible prosecution, but Attorney General William Barr reportedly rejected that advice: “Prosecutors found the IG’s findings compelling but decided not to bring charges because they did not believe they had enough evidence of Comey’s intent to violate the law, according to multiple sources,” reported John Solomon at The Hill earlier this month. 

Umm, forgive my ignorance in bringing it up and all, but wasn’t Comey’s transparently corrupt use of the spurious “lack of intent” standard to paint over Hillary!™‘s crimes something we were all making sport of not too long ago? And now BARR is resorting to it?

Sorry, y’all excuse me for a moment.

Doublefacepalm.jpg

Okay, onwards.

The House Intelligence Committee last year asked the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to declassify and publish depositions by dozens of people the committee interviewed about the Trump-Russia collusion hoax. That request remains unfulfilled. 

In May, the White House empowered Barr to declassify all materials needed to expedite his office’s investigation into Russiagate.

“Today’s action will help ensure that all Americans learn the truth about the events that occurred, and the actions that were taken, during the last Presidential election and will restore confidence in our public institutions,” announced former White House press secretary Sarah Sanders. Nearly three months later, the public has not seen one document.

In January 2018, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) referred Steele to the Justice Department for a criminal investigation for lying to federal officials. Steele has not been charged. In April 2018, 11 House Republicans sent a letter to the DOJ asking for criminal investigations into Comey, McCabe, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and others for various offenses. Comey continues to rant on Twitter and write anti-Trump columns for the New York Times; McCabe is a regular on MSNBC and now is suing his former employer for wrongful dismissal based on—get this—political reasons. McCabe also has been under grand jury investigation for at least a year.

The Mueller report concluded that Joseph Mifsud, the man who allegedly triggered the FBI’s probe into the Trump campaign in July 2016 after he met with George Papadopoulos, lied three times to investigators. Unlike several other Trump associates, including Papadopoulos, Mifsud has not been charged with perjury.

Alas, Kelly presents plenty more support for the depressing idea that the Deep State fix is well and truly in. Even my own hope of seeing justice done for the dastardly crimes against American self-government committed by the coup conspirators is beginning to fade. It all makes Sanders’ statement about “restoring confidence” in our tainted, toxic institutions sound like either pathetically naive blather or some kind of sick, sick joke. Lends considerable weight to that last post about the importance of resisting the gun-grabbers, now don’t it?

Share

Resistance: not futile

Don’t obey unlawful orders.

Once again, responding to a horrendous crime by inflicting knee-jerk, authoritarian restrictions on innocent people proves to be an ineffective means of convincing people to obey. Specifically, New Zealand’s government—which also stepped up censorship and domestic surveillance after bloody attacks on two Christchurch mosques earlier this year—is running into stiff resistance to new gun rules from firearms owners who are slow to surrender now-prohibited weapons and will probably never turn them in.

Officials should have seen it coming.

“Police are anticipating a number of people with banned firearms in their possession won’t surrender them,” Stuff reported at the end of May, based on internal government documents.

As of last week, only around 700 weapons had been turned over. There are an estimated 1.5 million guns—with an unknown number subject to the new prohibitionon semiautomatic firearms—in the country overall.

That gun owners would, in large numbers, defy restrictions should have been anticipated by anybody who knows the history of government attempts to disarm their subjects—or who just glanced across the Tasman Sea to Australia.

“In Australia it is estimated that only about 20% of all banned self-loading rifles have been given up to the authorities,” wrote Franz Csaszar, professor of criminology at the University of Vienna, after Australia’s 1996 compensated confiscation of firearms following a mass murder in Port Arthur, Tasmania. Csaszar put the number of illegally retained arms in Australia at between two and five million.

Even here at home, gun owners in such presumably-cowed deep Blue states as Connecticut (15% compliance) and New York (5% compliance) raised a defiant middle finger and refused to stack arms when government demanded it of them, to their eternal credit. As Vox says:

The people of New Zealand have seen what has happened post-gun control in both Australia and England. The violence has gotten worse, not better. The governments have gotten more authoritarian, not less. And given the degraded demographic situation in all these countries, only a complete fool would comply with these intrinsically immoral laws and disarm himself.

Amen to that. The above article is over a month old; a commenter posts that the number of weapons turned in as of a few days ago is up to 15,511—still a paltry few, relatively speaking, most assuredly far less than the authoritarian authorities hoped and/or expected.

The dark cloud to this silver lining, obviously, is that those defiant gun owners are going to find getting themselves the requisite skill-honing range time a bit, shall we say, problematic going forward. A freedom that must be carefully concealed and never openly exercised ain’t no freedom at all. As Bracken always says, if you think it’s time to start burying the guns in the backyard, it’s probably time to start digging them up instead.

But still, resistance to the gun-grabbers is a good thing wherever and whenever it’s to be found, infinitely preferable to the kind of sheeplike acquiescence so disgracefully displayed by our once-doughty British cousins. So hats off to the good Kiwis; may the rediscovery of their balls not have come too late, and may their example provide a cautionary note to all those who would rule rather than govern.

Share

The Costanza Principle

“Remember: it’s not a lie if you believe it.”

Two Democratic presidential candidates recently observed the fifth anniversary of Michael Brown’s death by police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Mo. — a case that sparked the Black Lives Matter movement as well as days of unrest locally.

Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., tweeted, “Michael Brown’s murder forever changed Ferguson and America.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., tweeted, “5 years ago Michael Brown was murdered by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri.”

Of course, being the reliably liberal propaganda outlet it is, Politi”fact” immediately gets to work weaving its rhetoricomagical smokescreen to obscure the hard truth:

After these tweets came out, PolitiFact heard from numerous readers who asked us to check whether Harris and Warren were correct in calling Brown’s death a “murder.”

There is no question that Wilson killed Brown, and there’s strong evidence that it was not accidental.

In discussing the case with legal experts, however, we found broad consensus that “murder” was the wrong word to use — a legal point likely familiar to Harris, a longtime prosecutor, and Warren, a law professor.

In fact, two other Democratic senators with law degrees now running for president — Cory Booker and Kirsten Gillibrand — more accurately referred to it as a killing.

That said, experts who have studied police-related deaths and race relations said that focusing too much on the linguistics in controversial cases comes with its own set of problems.

It’s all just the usual mealy-mouthed bullshit, twisting and warping and dissembling in order to Keep Lefty Hope Alive. Just one problem (bold mine):

As discussed above, Darren Wilson has stated his intent in shooting Michael Brown was in response to a perceived deadly threat. The only possible basis for prosecuting Wilson under section 242 would therefore be if the government could prove that his account is not true – i.e., that Brown never assaulted Wilson at the SUV, never attempted to gain control of Wilson’s gun, and thereafter clearly surrendered in a way that no reasonable officer could have failed to perceive. Given that Wilson’s account is corroborated by physical evidence and that his perception of a threat posed by Brown is corroborated by other eyewitnesses, to include aspects of the testimony of Witness 101, there is no credible evidence that Wilson willfully shot Brown as he was attempting to surrender or was otherwise not posing a threat. Even if Wilson was mistaken in his interpretation of Brown’s conduct, the fact that others interpreted that conduct the same way as Wilson precludes a determination that he acted with a bad purpose to disobey the law. The same is true even if Wilson could be said to have acted with poor judgment in the manner in which he first interacted with Brown, or in pursuing Brown after the incident at the SUV. These are matters of policy and procedure that do not rise to the level of a Constitutional violation and thus cannot support a criminal prosecution.

Because Wilson did not act with the requisite criminal intent, it cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt to a jury that he violated 18 U.S.C.§ 242 when he fired his weapon at Brown.

VI.
Conclusion

For the reasons set forth above, this matter lacks prosecutive merit and should be closed.

Should be, right enough—but won’t, not as long as scurrilous, Democrat-Socialist hacks think there’s still a skoche of political mileage to be wrung from it.

The above lancing of this boil of suppurating Leftist falsehood is from the official DoJ report on the matter (PDF link). That, mind you, would be the Obama junta’s own DoJ, under the control of one Eric Holder at the time. Which matters greatly because, given what we’ve all now seen of how deeply the rot and corruption sown by Obama in those parts goes, it’s clear they would NOT have balked at using even the flimsiest pretext to have Wilson brought up on murder charges if there had been one to be found. And it wasn’t just the Obama DoJ that could find no “there” there, either:

A Missouri grand jury also declined to indict the officer for the shooting. Normally when you have not one but two investigatory bodies, one of which had political reasons to be skeptical, nonetheless conclude that a homicide was justifiable then by definition it’s not properly described as “murder.” But if PolitiFact took that view, it would risk being seen as insensitive to police shootings by people whose opinion it values.

AP is being way too gentle with the scoundrels, as far as I’m concerned. Fact is, Politi”fact” is trying to help their Democrat-Socialist partners in crime perpetuate a useful lie—a particularly destructive and dangerous one, at that. There’s only one possible thing to be gained from continuing to burnish this tawdry deception, and that only for those who consider advancing the careers of Democrat-Socialist political hacks by fraudulent means any kind of “gain” in the first place. For the rest of us, we’ll have to reckon with the likelihood of being burned by the flame they’re stoking for purely partisan purposes.

Share

DAMNED PESKY ((((JOOOOOZ!!!)))) STRIKE AGAIN!

Cavil and kvetch all you like about ((((DEM JOOOOOZ!)))) and Israel. I’m all for ’em myself.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

No country in the world respects America and the American Congress more than the State of Israel.

As a free and vibrant democracy, Israel is open to critics and criticism with one exception: Israeli law prohibits the entry into Israel of those who call for and work to impose boycotts on Israel, as do other democracies that prohibit the entry of people who seek to harm the country.

In fact, in the past the US did this to an Israeli member of Knesset, as well as to other public figures from around the world.

Congresswomen Tlaib and Omar are leading activists in promoting the legislation of boycotts against Israel in the American Congress.

Only a few days ago, we received their itinerary for their visit in Israel, which revealed that they planned a visit whose sole objective is to strengthen the boycott against us and deny Israel’s legitimacy.

For instance: they listed the destination of their trip as Palestine and not Israel, and unlike all Democratic and Republican members of Congress who have visited Israel, they did not request to meet any Israeli officials, either from the government or the opposition.

A week ago, Israel warmly welcomed some 70 Democratic and Republican members of Congress, who expressed broad bipartisan support for Israel, which was also demonstrated a month ago in a resounding bipartisan vote against BDS in Congress.

However, the itinerary of the two Congresswomen reveals that the sole purpose of their visit is to harm Israel and increase incitement against it.

In addition, the organization that is funding their trip is Miftah, which is an avid supporter of BDS, and among whose members are those who have expressed support for terrorism against Israel.

Therefore, the minister of interior has decided not to allow their visit, and I, as prime minister, support his decision.

Ace helpfully provided the above transcription of Netanyahu’s most edifying Tweetstorm, which I fucking love every word of. For his own part Da Prez is fully on board too, bless his heart:


“Disgrace” is right, along with every other word. Now if only Trump could see his way clear to barring them entry back into the States and send their worthless asses off to “Palestine” instead, where the two wretched, hateful shit-stirrers can sit and stew among their own people and leave civilized folks alone. Like I said: bitch about ((((DEM JOOOOOZ!!!)))) to your heart’s content for all me. I’ll happily take a single Netanyahu over ten thousand Omars and Tlaibs every time—six days a week, thanks, and twice on Sundays.

Ace also chronicles the predictably unhinged reaction from the despicable Left and their #NeverTrumpTard rumpswabs, if you have a strong stomach. If I wasn’t firmly in the “I stand with Israel” camp already, the thought of being associated in any way with the whole clown-car full of such asshats would be plenty enough to drive me there all by itself.

Share

Why trust the untrustworthy?

None but a fool would believe a proven liar, nor should trust ever be granted those who have proved themselves unworthy of it.

Suddenly, rather than focus its attention on the alleged suicide of one of the most notorious and politically connected sex traffickers in history, the media instead targeted those malicious “conspiracy theorists” who refused to accept as fact the questionable circumstances around Epstein’s death. The media’s collective attitude is best summed up with this tweet posted by Politico early Sunday morning: “Jeffrey Epstein’s death has brought conspiracy theories into the political mainstream, with some influential people unable to take the details at face value.”

In the accompanying article, without irony or a shred of self-reflection, Politico editor-in-chief John Harris lamented that “the signature of American politics in the Trump era is a conviction—shared initially by many people who backed Trump but now embraced with similar fervor by many who loathe him—that things are not what they seem, that the official version of events is sustained by lies, that the institutions of American life are not on the level.”

But Harris doesn’t explore the reasons why this is the dim lens through which millions of his fellow countrymen now view our country’s most powerful institutions. Harris doesn’t wonder aloud why people distrust the government, our political leadership and our national news media so much that they actually believe the Clintons or some other shadowy figures might be responsible for Epstein’s death.

Harris doesn’t raise the possibility that perhaps a litany of ongoing embarrassments for the news media coupled with the fact that the previous administration weaponized the country’s law enforcement and intelligence apparatus to sabotage a rival political campaign and then tried to cover it up are contributing to a general climate of hostility, rage, and doubt.

Harris has good reason to eschew any such quest for insight: Because it would lead him straight to a mirror. Harris’ own website and his media colleagues in general have lost all credibility with the American public. From assuring us the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to influence the outcome of the 2016 election to reporting every unproven allegation of rape against Brett Kavanaugh, Politico and its brethren have fueled this crisis of confidence. (Harris authored an article in September 2018 with the headline, “Why God is Laughing at Brett Kavanaugh.”)

Pro-life high schoolers wearing Make America Great Again hats were “mocking” and “laughing at” a Native American elder, the media told us. Hillary Clinton will win the presidency. The stock market will tank after Trump is elected. Donald Trump won’t serve a full term. White supremacy is on the rise and poses a greater threat to national security that Islamic extremism because Trump and Republicans are using special “code words” to fan the flames of racism. There is no national emergency at the southern border. The Trump Administration is the first to lock migrant children “in cages.”

That is only a partial list of falsehoods, flat-out lies and legitimate conspiracies that the untrustworthy folks who populate our once respected institutions have told us in the past three years.

Meanwhile, the media continue to ignore or to justify what many Republicans see as the biggest political scandal in our history, which is the way in which the Obama Administration sought to destroy the candidacy and then the presidency of Donald Trump by using the most powerful government methods—including secret surveillance tools—to do it.

This is nothing more than government and Enemedia reaping what they’ve so diligently sown—a planting that took place over many, many years. Harris’s lamentation about “the signature of American politics in the Trump era” is especially rich; the institutions of American life—having been co-opted, undermined, and perverted by a Left that is hostile to them—are NOT “on the level,” and “the Trump era” was by no means the beginning of our awareness of it, either. As always, Trump has merely spoken things Real Americans have been saying amongst themselves for years—giving full-throated voice to people and ideas that our would-be masters would much prefer remain voiceless.

These institutions not only forfeited our faith in them, they actively spurned it. Having expressed it a thousand times, in a thousand ways, their arrogant contempt for the Normals has now come back to haunt them. Mollie Hemingway says Enemedia’s abominable performance last week represents a turning point:

Host Howard Kurtz started the discussion by noting:

Mollie, there is no longer any pretense of a debate. Journalists, commentators say….President Trump is a racist, President Trump is a white supremacist. {And} maybe leap into charging that he is condoning, inciting, that he’s directly responsible for mass violence.

Hemingway agreed: “It was really horrible, what we saw this week. We had two horrible mass shootings, and we had people in the media kind of absolve both of the shooters of their crimes in order to blame President Trump and his voters for mass murder.”

“This is completely beyond journalistic responsibility,” she added, “and a real turning point for the worst in American discourse.”

Making note to point out how many primetime FNC hosts support Trump, Kurtz then asked if the media are at “a point where the President can do nothing right, and many journalists [have] basically become part of the Resistance?”

Hemingway pointed to the significant differences between the shooters, noting that one of them “had these anti-immigrant viewpoints, and there was a shooter who was very supportive of Antifa and Elizabeth Warren and what not it’s not like he was saying out of thin air.”

Kurtz then turned to a front-page report in the New York Times stating: “Trump uses day of healing to deepen the nation’s division” and “A day intended to show compassion devolved into anger-fueled broadsides at Democrats and the media.”

“As if all the partisanship in this matter comes only from Donald Trump,” he continued.

Hemingway responded by calling the situation “an amazing game that’s being played” and stated:

So you have days of blaming Donald Trump for mass murder and his supporters for mass murder and then, when he responds to any of these things, well then, he’s acting unpresidential.

There is now simply no way any reasonable, observant person can credibly dispute their bias and dishonesty. None. They long ago made their choice; hearing them whine now about having to live with the consequences, å la Harris’s self-serving bleat above, should be sweet music to every Real American’s ears.

Share

Call to arms

As the Left’s desperation grows, their unhinged refusal to abide by the results of any election they don’t win becomes more frenzied; their resolve to overthrow the duly-elected President by any means at all becomes more mulish; and their calls to revolution, disorder, and violence become less subtle, more open, and more dangerous.

PARIS—From Algeria to Hong Kong, Sudan to Puerto Rico, people all over the world have been turning out in the streets this year to confront policies and regimes that previously seemed all but invulnerable. And through relentless, largely peaceful protests they’ve had amazing success.

“Largely peaceful.” Uh huh. You’ll squeal like stuck little piggies when Real Americans finally get themselves a bellyfull, and some of that same mostly-peacefulness that far too many of us have already experienced from your side gets unleashed upside your heads for a change.

There is a lesson here. Americans disgusted by Donald J. Trump, disheartened by his control over the Senate and Supreme Court, demoralized by the consistent support he enjoys from two-fifths of the population, and appalled by his incitement of gun-toting racists, might want to take note.

The examples of mass demonstrations that have taken on, and in some cases taken down, terrible leaders show there are formulas that can be applied in many places, including the mainland of the United States of America. There’s even an illustrative equation.

Why have we not seen this kind of concerted, continuous combination of mass and velocity in the United States?

Maybe the American opposition to the Trump regime really isn’t as impassioned as many rants on Twitter might suggest. Or maybe those are just onanistic ends in themselves. There’s been a lot of obvious passivity: waiting for Robert Mueller to take care of everything, or pretending that the symbolic act of impeachment will squeeze the sleaze out of office.

Certainly, by comparison with the demonstrators in other parts of the world there’s a hint of sloth and even of cowardice.

When I broached some of these ideas on Twitter (where else?) one tweep complained impotently that “we” couldn’t even get Twitter to take down the president’s account, as if that would solve anything.

More than one suggested fear of Trump supporters with guns acts as a deterrent.

Glad to hear it; that means the Second Amendment, against all odds, is still working as intended. It also suggests there might actually remain some small hope, however miniscule, of you frothing fascists coming to your senses and stepping back from the brink before it’s too late. People like you are precisely whom the Founders warned us about; the 2A was written not to protect anybody’s right to hunt but to act as a deterrent to your kind, a last line of defense should you fail to heed its warning at last.

Your fear is wise and proper. May God grant that you never lose or dismiss it—for ALL our sakes.

Share

Gun Rights Cake

So in last night’s “die gun-grabbers die!” post, the Aesop excerpt included a link to LawDog’s classic “Gun Rights Cake” essay, one I’ve also mentioned here myself a time or three. But it suddenly occurred to me that some of y’all may not have seen it before, and probably passed Aesop’s glancing mention on by without a thought or care. And that’s too bad, because you’re missing out on a real standout of a gem of a prize: one of the most pithy, unusual, and well-put-together arguments against any further concessions to the maneuverings and manipulations of gun-grabbers who aren’t ever going to be placated no matter what we agree to give up—people for whom the word “compromise” has always meant “We win, you surrender.”

So as a public service, I’m gonna do y’all a solid and repost it again. There’s a comic-strip version which I’m all but certain I ran here a while back, and LawDog also helpfully provides a link to his own GRC repost which features some quite worthy additional material as well. But the Q&A discussion from the original text-only post is worth including a bit of, which I don’t believe I ever have put up here. So we’ll go with that one this time around.

Do you believe that a background check infringes on your constitutional right to “keep and bear arms”?

Yes.

Do you believe that I and people with whom I work intend to ban your guns?

Yes.

If yes to #4, how do you think that could happen ( I mean the physical action)?

The same way you banned guns in New York. The same way you banned guns in Chicago. The same way you banned guns in Washington DC. Duh.

Do you believe that all law-abiding citizens are careful with their guns and would never shoot anybody?

You mean never shooting anybody, or never shooting anybody who needs it? I believe that all law-abiding citizens are human, and thus, not perfect. That’s not a reason to ban their guns, though.

All good stuff, and there’s plenty more of it. And then comes the question that leads to the timeless and immortal “Gun Rights Cake” response.

Will you continue a reasonable discussion towards an end that might lead somewhere or is this an exercise in futility?

Since what you consider to be reasonable isn’t even in the same plane of reality with what I consider reasonable, probably not.

Allow me to explain.

I hear a lot about “compromise” from your camp … except, it’s not compromise.

Let’s say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with “GUN RIGHTS” written across the top in lovely floral icing. Along you come and say, “Give me that cake.”

I say, “No, it’s my cake.”

You say, “Let’s compromise. Give me half.” I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.

Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.

There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, “Give me that cake.”

I say, “No, it’s my cake.”

You say, “Let’s compromise.” What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what’s left of the cake I already own.

So, we have your compromise — let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 — and I’m left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.

And I’m sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again. You want my cake. Again.

This time you take several bites — we’ll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders — and I’m left with about a tenth of what has always been MY DAMN CAKE and you’ve got nine-tenths of it.

Then we compromised with the Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble), the HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble), the Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM), the School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act (sweet tap-dancing Freyja, my finger!)

I’m left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you’re standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being “reasonable”, and wondering “why we won’t compromise”.

I’m done with being reasonable, and I’m done with compromise. Nothing about gun control in this country has ever been “reasonable” nor a genuine “compromise”.

Nope. It’s always been subterfuge, a diabolical stratagem that demonstrates what the Left learned from the unexpected failure of another of their pet projects, Prohibition. Incrementalism has been their preferred approach to stripping Americans of their freedom ever since, on just about any issue you care to name. The inch-by-inch, step-by-step approach ensures the frog stays in the pot, see, until he’s all boiled and done. But if there’s one core, take-it-to-the-bank truth about them, it is that they will NEVER stop. They will have to BE stopped.

Share

Warning order

Strong message follows. STRONG.

Dear Leftards:

You irrepressible commie halfwits think you’ve got the cards. You’re the idiot talking tough with the shotgun in your hand, and you’re about to get comeuppance. In Louis L’Amour’s memorable phrase, you’re about to have your meathouse torn down. With a mere couple of nutbags (mainly your own nutbags, nota bene) doing what nutbags do, you imagine you’ve got enough pull now to leverage your way into more asinine abridgments of the Constitution.

You haven’t, you won’t, and you really, really need to knock it off.

We’re really not kidding.

You’ve had all the slices of our cake you’re ever getting.

A lot of people thought we’d be facing ramped up anti-gun legislation long before now, because Shrillary and the Clinton Family Crime Syndicate looked like a shoe-in…until she wasn’t. 

And serious people were ready, then, to open the ball you’re itching for now.

If TPTB were to decide they could set the last vestiges of the Constitution on fire, there’s more than a few that would take it upon themselves as a point of honor, not to wait cowering inside their homes, but to go out hunting OPFOR, 24/7/365. And they’d get more than one scalp apiece.

In short, minions of Leftardia and Stupidia, you have blundered into a minefield, on a pogo stick.
Stop what you’re doing, tiptoe out, and pray to whatever deity you think appropriate that you get away with your skins.

Because if you insist on pushing your revolution, you’re going to get the war of which you cannot grasp, and the results of which you cannot even conjure in your wildest fever-swamp nightmares.

And your opponents, who’ve been stacking in supplies and loading magazines, are shifting from backing away, and hoping the fight you long for doesn’t come, and instead coming to a feeling of thinking it’s about time to roll up their sleeves, and end you.

Not your party.
Not your progressive communist utopia.
You.
For all values of that word
.

Every goddamned traitorous last one of you. Followed by your spouses, your children, your pets, your semi-domesticated illegal alien hordes, your schemes, your putrescent institutions, your metastasizing socialist programs, and every festering vestige of pustulence you’ve spewed onto a country you do not understand, didn’t build, and over which you and yours will never rule.

The comments-section discussion goes in all sorts of directions one might not expect, including a fairly devious gun-grab proposal from someone claiming to be “military intelligence” (but probably isn’t) and another claiming to be a “Real Conservative” (but DEFINITELY isn’t). In response to both of those fantasy-fascist douchebags—along with every other half-assed pantywaisted gun-grabbing Stalin wannabe all the way down to the umpteenth generation of ’em—I’ll just repeat my usual offer: Come and take them.

Enough talking. It’s your move, Lefty asstards. So make it already. Let’s all see how that works out for ya.

Share

Republican pounces!

From his cold, dead hands.

Lindsey Graham Politely Explains to Idiot Reporters Why He needs an AR-15
Sen. Lindsey Graham knocked down the idea of banning semi-automatic weapons nearly identical to those used by soldiers on the off chance a hurricane slams into his South Carolina town.

“Here’s a scenario that I think is real: There’s a hurricane, a natural disaster, no power, no cops, no anything,” the Republican lawmaker told reporters aboard Air Force One.

A reporter asked if he meant looters.

“Yeah, people, they’re not going to come to the AR-15 home,” Graham responded. “Well, I think if you show up on the porch with an AR-15, they’ll probably go down the street.”

Good on Lindsey for speaking up and all, but it was a futile effort; not one mind will be changed, not one gun-grabbing shitlib will see the simple logic and pause for a moment’s reconsideration. There’s only one answer to give them, it should be delivered like a good swift kick right square in the teeth, and Stephen Kruiser knows what it is.

Although he can occasionally be a firebrand, Graham is still a United States senator and was flying with the president on Air Force One when asked about this. He remained very decorous and didn’t offer the answer that a regular, law-abiding gun owner might.

I sleep with a loaded Beretta on my nightstand and was once asked why.

“Because I (expletive deleted) want to.”

That’s really the only answer anyone needs in response to being asked why he or she is doing something perfectly legal that isn’t harming anyone else.

Fuckin’ A right, buddy.

Have I ever had to use a gun for self-defense? Thankfully, no. And I hope I never have to.

I am not, however, obligated to explain to anyone why I would prefer not to be killed.

You damned sure ain’t at that. Let Lefty huff and puff and beat and blow and weep and moan to his little heart’s content. Let him issue his demands and threats and be damned. More and more of us have reached the conclusion that we’ve conceded way too much ground already, and no matter how much we give it will never be enough. You don’t get another inch, gun-grabbers. Not just no, but HELL NO, with a big fat “fuck you” on top for garnish. That’s it—fini, omega, het-ay nde-ay. Come and fucking take them, you miserable worms. Do it, if you dare. Better bring help.

There’s another peril in play with this one, though, and it’s perched right on Trump’s lap.

Then there are the “red flag laws,” which is the left’s new approach to confiscating guns. These laws are unconstitutional three ways to Sunday, violating three of the rights within the Bill of Rights. These laws usurp the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms, the Fourth Amendment’s protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, and the Sixth Amendment’s right of the accused to a speedy and public trial.

My home state of Colorado passed such a law this past April, one of the consequences of voters giving Democrats control of the executive and legislative branches of a state. Other states have similar laws and there is now a push for a national red flag law. If President Trump is smart, he will see the color red before signing such a law, if it ever even makes it to his desk, as signing such a law may be a large red stop sign in his quest for a second term as president.

Red flag laws will have the effect of disarming those best able to stop a shooter. But that’s not the real goal of these laws. Instead it’s a new approach to thwarting the Second Amendment. President Trump is hopefully thinking long and hard about signing on to such measures, as this has the potential to be his “read my lips, no new taxes” moment.

Hopefully, he’s not thinking about it at all. If there’s any single unforced error almost certain to reverse Trump’s currently solid re-election odds, this is the one. As staunch a Trump supporter as I am and always have been, a needless cave to the Left on this would drive even me to the sidelines—me, and a whole hell of a lot of others too. No, I wasn’t happy about the noises he made in the aftermath of last week’s shootings. That said, I am also fully cognizant of Vox Day’s Two-Day caution: on any seemingly worrisome Trump statement, wait at least two days to see what actually transpires before deciding that all is lost.

Happily, that has proven to be sage advice time after time. Tossing a rhetorical hook out as bait to misdirect Democrat-Socialists into a false bargaining position based on anticipation of concessions he has no intention of making has been a useful enough ploy for Da Prez that I can’t quite see him abandoning it now. Nor do I think the record suggests that Trump is out of touch or naive enough to be unaware of how his most loyal supporters would react to a betrayal of that magnitude. Quite the opposite, actually; it would be completely out of character for the man to make such a boneheaded move.

But who knows, stranger things have happened. Only one thing is certain: should he falter this time, the cost of his blunder will be steep—not just for him personally, but for all of us.

Trump appeal update! Expanding the base. Note the final pic, which is what puts it into the “related” category for this post.

Shitlib has Teh Sadz update! Reassuring words of gun-grabber despair from the hoplophobic com-symps at the New Yorker. Naturally, it’s full of phony statistics, cooked polls, and outright fabrications, so I ain’t gonna recommend you read it all. But I can’t help but be encouraged to see that even these devious pissants aren’t holding out much hope.

Also, it is Trump we are dealing with, and he is notoriously averse to crossing rural and suburban gun owners, who make up a key part of his base. Even if the polls currently show overwhelming support for expanded background checks and other measures, Trump will be sensitive to a possible backlash, especially if the opposition includes some of his right-wing media outriders, such as Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.

Furthermore, there is a possibility that Trump will try to tie any gun-control measures he endorses to immigration-law changes that Democrats oppose, such as lengthening the period for which asylum-seeking families can be detained after crossing the border. In a tweet on Monday, Trump suggested “marrying” immigration and gun control. On Thursday, the Times reported that he has toldsome advisers that he “would like a political concession in exchange” for acting on gun control. If he insists on this linkage, the chances of getting any legislation passed are slim.

From your lips to God’s ears, asswipe.

Share

Fear the Bee!

How many liberals does it take to screw in a lightbulb? That’s not funny.

Progressives take their partisan comedy seriously. It helps that they have a stranglehold on the comedy landscape. When David Spade announced he wouldn’t attack President Donald Trump it made headlines.

Which brings us to The Babylon Bee.

For the uninitiated, the Bee serves up Christian satire with a heaping helping of political humor. Yes, the site often pokes fun at President Trump.

That’s what any respectable humor outlet would do, no matter who’s in the Oval Office. It’s also what comedians did prior to Obama’s election.

What the Bee produces that few, if any, comedy institutions attempt are stories that tweak the Left, often sans mercy.

Snopes rigorously fact checks Bee stories over and again that are obviously false, funny and targeting progressive stars like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Bee stories skewering conservative figures? Snopes.com leaves them unchecked.

Here’s why it matters.

Few comic voices are standing up to the Snopes.com bullies…yet. That’s not surprising. While Jimmy Kimmel laments Kathy Griffin’s struggle after posing with a president’s bloodied head he hasn’t, to our knowledge, rushed to the Bee’s defense.

Kimmel stands behind Griffin because they’re on the same ideological side. He wouldn’t dare mock Ocasio-Cortez, even if she’s the most mockable politician in our lifetime.

Why? Mocking her could ding her credibility and, by extension, hurt the Democrats. It’s why Snopes.com can’t leave The Babylon Bee alone. The outlet fears the power of their very funny viral jokes aimed at the Left. They may wish Twitter would ban their account already.

Given Twitter’s usual speedy resort to the ban stick for everybody else who isn’t a dyed-in-the-wool fellow traveler, it’s amazing they haven’t already. Must be time for me to post another Bee excerpt.

ATLANTA, GA – According to a report from the Centers for Disease Control released on Thursday, people with inside, compromising knowledge of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s financial and political dealings are 843% more likely to commit suicide.

“We’ve never seen a single risk factor cause a spike of this magnitude,” a CDC spokesperson told reporters. “Interestingly, in spite of their increased suicide risk, people with dirt on the Clintons rarely show any warning signs of suicide, and they never leave a suicide note.”

As always with the incredibly deft satirists at the Bee, it’s funny ’cause it’s damned near true. Their adroitness at skating along today’s increasingly rapier-thin line between the literal truth and the completely absurd makes their work all the more effective against the humorless Left. It’s a dead cert that many of them find themselves reduced to unmanned, spluttering discombobulation under the Bee’s withering assault on their lunacy, their hypocrisy, and their tail-chasing self-contradiction.

Laughter is not only the best medicine, it also makes a damned fine weapon too—especially when wielded against the scolds, killjoys, and whey-faced schoolmarms of the Left. Alinsky knew it:

Rule 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
Rule 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”

So nice to finally see their own Rules being used to shred the Radicals into bloody gobbets.

Share

Ask a silly question

Get an honest answer.

When did it become ­acceptable for politicians, and their media helpers, to target private citizens for their ­political opinions?

When those opinions diverged even slightly from Democrat-Socialist dogma, of course.

In the wake of the mass shooting in El Paso, Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) released the names of a few dozen San Antonio residents who had donated to President Trump’s re-election campaign. (Castro is chairman of the presidential campaign of his twin brother, Julián.)

Castro was apparently unconcerned by the prospect that these people — retirees and small-business owners — would be inevitably targeted for ­harassment. They had voted the wrong way and donated to the wrong campaign, and they needed to be punished.

He wasn’t “unconcerned.” Harrassment and, ultimately, violent assault was the whole idea from the git-go. Unapproved beliefs, you see, must not only be punished—they must be suppressed.

Liberals view the election of President Trump as a monstrous anomaly, something that should never have happened. They view all Trump supporters, be they Acela Corridor denizens or car-dealership owners in suburban Texas, as complicit in this great evil and therefore fair game.

The media is only too happy to help. Everyone remembers what The Washington Post and The New York Times did to the Covington Catholic boys. Or recall the way CNN went after an anonymous tweeter after Trump retweeted an image he had created mocking the network.

The message to anyone who dares not march in lockstep with liberalism: You don’t matter, and we will target you for ruination whenever we feel like it.

NOW you’re getting it.

Liberals, in short, have ­resolved that anything goes as they seek to thwart and undermine democracy in the name of liberalism.

Sure, liberals always say they want more political participation from the masses, but it turns out the only participation they welcome is the kind that helps them win.

Hence, too, their efforts to use underhanded juridical means to undo the outcome of elections they lose, whether that’s the “collusion” probe in America or endless bureaucratic stalling aimed at preventing Brexit.

But the attacks on private citizens is a new low.

Perhaps. But rest assured: you ain’t seen nothin‘ yet. For the Left, the end of totalitarian tyranny justifies any and all means, and they’ll inflict casualties and stack bodies just as high as they think they need to so as to accomplish our subjugation irreversibly. When it comes to gaining, securing, and expanding power and control for themselves, the Left recognizes no limits whatsoever. That is the only rule they follow, the only morality they have, and the only rationalization they need.

Share

Four more years terms!

Endorsed from here, because why the hell not.

Peter Strzok, the central figure in both the FBI’s burying of Hillary Clinton’s crimes and in carrying out the “insurance policy” of his lover, Lisa Page, to use the powers of the national security establishment to take out a U.S. presidential candidate, is strolling back in to FBI Headquarters these days as though it was just another day at the office.

I am not making this up.

“Strzok is in the (HQ) building all the time,” one FBI insider revealed, according to a recent media report at True Pundit. “He is taking meetings or part of meetings.” The article goes on, “FBI sources confirm Strzok has been granted access to FBI facilities in Washington, D.C. and its headquarters building on numerous occasions since he was sacked in August 2018.”

Strzok is the man who emphatically told former FBI lawyer Lisa Page that they would “stop” Mr. Trump from winning the 2016 election. And they would do that using a fraudulently predicated counterintelligence investigation based on “evidence” planted by one of their own assets, Joseph Mifsud, a mysterious Maltese professor widely linked to Western intelligence services, on a hapless Trump campaign volunteer, George Papadopoulos.

Yet now we learn that not only is Strzok being permitted back into FBI Headquarters (perhaps as a paid contractor?), but he still holds his security clearances. “He (Strzok) is getting in with a visitor’s badge and is involved in meetings,” one FBI insider said. The same article notes, “Maybe they are all trying to get their story straight before things go public.” Moreover, it continues, “FBI sources said when Strzok is not at the Hoover building he has been holding meetings with high-level DOJ brass at a location across the street from the Bureau’s Pennsylvania Avenue base.”

One can only sit back and marvel at the churchbell-size balls on the guy. Strzzzoozzk’s obvious nonchalant confidence regarding his status and impunity doesn’t say anything good about the likelihood of Barr and Co’s investigations yielding much in the way of meaningful results, either. The entire cabal of seditious reprobates of right ought to be trembling their teeth loose at the prospect of a speedy trial, followed by a first-class hanging. That they clearly are not is disheartening, to say the very least.

Donald Trump’s presidency has revealed that our country is in the grip of an entrenched bureaucracy whose hold, I am of the increasing opinion, may take decades to break. This anecdote about Peter Strzok’s continued security clearances and access to a building that President Trump nominally controls illustrates the vicelike grasp that “Deep State” players continue to hold over our government. Presidents come and go, but the powerful, embedded apparatchiks remain, and protect their own.

This is why I say, figuratively speaking, that our country needs five terms of Donald Trump. President Trump of course is limited to two terms as president under the Twenty-Second Amendment, but if we are to break the incredible power of the Christopher Wray-types that populate the upper echelons of our government, we will need successor presidents with the same dogged mindset as President Trump to bring rogue agencies like the FBI to heel. It may take twenty years — a generation.

Gonna take a helluva lot more than that, I’m afraid. The Deep State was way longer than any 20 years a-building, and it was way more than just one guy a-building it, too. Even then, we’re assuming ridding ourselves of it can be done at all without violence, bloodshed, and national immiseration. As for “break the incredible power of the Christopher Wray-types” etc, a good start on that project would be for Trump to stop inexplicably hiring and/or promoting pernicious Deep State termites and Ogabe stay-behind saboteurs and start giving them the boot instead.

Share

No consent from losers

While we’re re-running oldies but goodies from 2016 and all, have another. Might want to find some really dark goggles, even a welder’s mask, to read it with though; the irony is so blazingly, piercingly incandescent it could easily blind somebody.

Donald Trump likes to sort the world into winners and losers, which isn’t a bad way of thinking about democracy. Winners and losers of elections have essential responsibilities in functioning democracies. Winners do not exact revenge on their opponent by, say, abusing the powers of their office and jailing that opponent, as the Republican candidate threatened to do at the second presidential debate. Losers do not refuse to accept the results of a vote judged free and fair by a country’s governing institutions.

Yet the Republican candidate has spent the past week—really, much of the general election—strongly suggesting that he will not accept a loss to Hillary Clinton. He has repeatedly claimed that “Crooked Hillary” is “rigging” the election with help from the media and a global network of power brokers. The rigging, he says with certainty but no compelling evidence, consists of the coordinated assassination of Trump’s character, as well as looming voter fraud. And the rigging will, in Trump’s telling, produce nothing less than the dissolution of the republic; the United States will be overrun by immigrants and ISIS. Trump’s message is that the election will be stolen from his supporters, as will the country. Many Trump supporters expect this outcome; roughly half aren’t confident that ballots will be accurately counted on Election Day.

Donald Trump’s loose talk of imprisoning Clinton and his preemptive rejection of the election’s outcome pose one of the most serious challenges to U.S. democracy in recent memory. They endanger the “democratic bargain,” to quote the authors of Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. That study examines how losing works in democracies around the globe, and the bargain at issue “calls for winners who are willing to ensure that losers are not too unhappy and for losers, in exchange, to extend their consent to the winners’ right to rule.” This bargain is also one of the core components of democracy.

Of course, now we know that the conspiracy to rig the election went far, far beyond Her Herness, the media and “inaccurately” counted votes. Its tentacles extended deep into the Obama junta, the DoJ, the CIA, and elsewhere in the darkest recesses of the Deep State labyrinth. The investigation into the corrupt, seditious plot is only beginning, with no guarantee that we’ll ever see justice done. And that doesn’t even touch the subsequent soft-coup attempt by those same players, a desperate ploy to not only conceal their seditious crimes but to hinder and ultimately remove a duly-elected President under false pretenses.

All of this—ALL of it, mind you—because the Democrat-Socialist Party, NOT Trump, flatly and traitorously refuses to abide by the results of any election it can’t swindle its way into “winning.”

This is why the democratic bargain is so important: Winners do not suppress losers, which means losers can hope to be winners in the future. As a result, the losers’ doubts about the legitimacy of the political system gradually recede as they prepare for the next election.

But if the losing candidate doesn’t uphold his or her side of the bargain by recognizing the winner’s right to rule, that acute loss of faith in democracy among the candidate’s supporters can become chronic, potentially devolving into civil disobedience, political violence, and a crisis of democratic legitimacy. How the loser responds is especially critical because losers naturally have the most grievances about the election.

“[I]n the aftermath of a loss, there is plenty of kindling for irresponsible politicians to set fire to,” Bowler notes. “Most politicians who lose elections recognize this potential for mischief, and so they ordinarily make a creditable run at helping to keep matters calm.”

Ahh, but in this case it’s not just the losing politician acting “irresponsibly.” It is the entire party—along with its Praetorian Media allies; the overwhelming majority of its supporters; its already-elected officeholders in positions both high and low across the entire country; and the unelected officials seeded throughout the federal bureacracy who are either party members or sympathizers.

Then we come to a yearningly winsome recap of Honest Al AlGore and his forced “concession” after his loss in 2000. Yes, it’s every bit as full of shit as you would expect.

In December 2000, for example, Al Gore conceded defeat to George W. Bush after one of the country’s closest and most divisive elections. The Supreme Court halted the recount of votes in Florida and effectively handed the presidency to Bush, even though Gore won the national popular vote and had good reason to argue that the court’s decision was politically motivated.

The SC “halted the recount” after, what, six or seven previous ones had failed to gin up enough fraudulent ballots to convincingly hand the swine Gore the election. Inevitably, the Atlantic also trots out the good old “popular vote” hobbyhorse for another good flogging, the problem being that THERE IS NO RELEVANT “POPULAR VOTE” IN A US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION—as is explicitly mandated by the US Constitution for some very excellent reasons. The Electoral College, God willing and in defiance of the most devious efforts of those Constitution-loving Democrat-Socialists, will be with us for a while longer, for which everyone not interested in being governed according to the whim of the residents of the nation’s blighted urban areas should be deeply thankful. Yet more twaddlelicious bullshit then ensues:

By the time Clinton’s statement was delivered, all those bitter complaints had been removed from the text, save for brief mentions of disagreement with the court’s ruling and the need for bipartisan election reforms. Clinton’s team clearly recognized that it was time to put out fires, not to leave kindling lying around. “President-elect Bush and Vice President Gore showed what is best about America,” Clinton said. “In this election, the American people were closely divided. The outcome was decided by a Supreme Court that was closely divided. But the essential unity of our Nation was reflected in the words and values of those who fought this great contest.”

The SC, “closely divided,” yeah. As I recall, the vote that decided things ended up being 7-2. That, after our noble Albert “Arnold The Pig” AlGore had duly made his election-stealing preparations beforehand, by flying teams of lawyers out to certain places ready to contest the results by any grubby means necessary. Why, how very big of this noble Knight-Protector Of America Democracy to graciously concede after EVERY SINGLE LAST AVENUE likely to enable him to hoodoo his way into the Oval Office had been thoroughly exhausted, and not one moment before! Gee, what a guy!

Here’s the fact of the matter: Gore, his army of legal-beagle rumpswabs, and his criminal conspiracy masquerading as a legitimate political party happily dragged the country through every fetid puddle of lawyerized sewage they could find FOR MONTHS before finally backing down and slinking away. The Atlantic’s zealous attempt at turd-polishing aside, Al Gore remains exactly what he always was and always will be: a sleazy, slimy, duplicitous, dimwitted, professional-politician hack. Nothing less. And damned sure nothing more.

As for that “essential unity” bushwa, I suppose we must in fairness recognize a distinction betwixt Gore’s eventual if reluctant submission to defeat and the unhinged, delusional rejection of American electoral reality we’re being subjected to now. Bad as Gore and the rest of the Demonrat den of iniquity all were in 2000, their successors are unquestionably much, much worse. The distinction is one not of kind but of degree, yes. But at this point AlGore should at least have developed sense enough to take what he can get.

Share

How it all starts

There’s a bad moon on the rise.

Senator Kneepads is about to get an education on delusional grandstanding.

“I also have as part of my background and experience working on this issue, when I was attorney general [of California], and we put resources into allowing law enforcement to actually knock on the doors of people who were on two lists — a list where they had been found by a court to be a danger to themselves and others and another list where they were precluded and prohibited from owning a gun because of a conviction that prohibited that ownership,” she added.

Harris commented that she would send law enforcement door-to-door to confiscate guns from illicit people.
“Those lists were combined and then we sent law enforcement out to take those guns, because, listen, we have to deal with this on all levels, but we have to do this with a sense of urgency and we have to act. Enough with the talk,” she said.

Let’s be clear here, if you’re a felon in possession, or you’ve failed a court hearing on your sanity, with counsel present on both sides, I have no problem with this. But Sen. Kneepads isn’t talking about that. Those people should have ALREADY had their guns taken away. She’s talking about doing this with “Red Flag” laws, which violate all constitutional and common law, and every rule of jurisprudence going back to before Magna Carta. (Common Core grads, look it up.)

That illegal abomination of ideas is going to get Officer Friendly a face full of buckshot, and he’ll deserve it, every single time. And I hope it happens, until the cops wise up and tell the politicians they’re under arrest for violating everyone’s civil rights.

As I said in Aesop’s comments, Officer Friendly already knows all about that face-full of buckshot, he doesn’t care for the idea, and so has gotten himself busy in several at-risk locales to officially announce his desire to be included out of the festivities before they commence (examples here and here, with further common-sense analysis from a Utah LEO here). Now, not all cops are as bothered by the prospect of betraying their oaths and finishing the Constitution off for good, of course. Maybe even a majority of them aren’t, I dunno. However it works out, though, I’m confident that, for whatever reason, enough of them will sell their souls to Gun Grabber Satan as to create a real mishegoss of a mess of a clusterfuck when we get down to nut-cutting time. So, in sum:

This is not going to go like they planned when the entire country goes all Flight 93 on them.

The look of surprise on their faces will be priceless, and the last thing that goes through their minds will likely be 158 grains of lead.

Minds? Hell, if they had those, we wouldn’t even be talking about this crap at all.

Share

Forecast: increasing spiciness, with a strong chance of Hell on Earth

Big John has his latest CW2.0 Weather Report up. It’s a link-rich roundup that, taken all in all, might very well freeze your gizzard.

Share

Storm clouds a-gathering

Codevilla on how to ignite a civil war.

In societies riven by mutual hate, the people who control the police and public communications make all the difference. When they maintain impartiality, as did Germany’s Weimar government while the Nazis and Communists struggled for primacy, partisan warfare tends to be resolved politically—though the results are harsh. When societal hatred or the partiality of authorities results in deaths, long-smoldering cold civil war can blaze into holocaust.

We Americans are now facing the danger of a civil war thus ignited. We do not think of civil war this way because our Civil War from 1861 to 1865 was less a conflict within society than it was a highly organized war between states. That war notwithstanding, personal friendships and mutual esteem persisted on both sides, such as that between Ulysses S. Grant and prominent Confederate General James Longstreet.

What we face now is worse.

Probably, yeah. What I’m even more confident of, though, is this: we have NO IDEA what it will actually be like. Not how it might begin, nor how it might play out, nor how long it might go on, nor how it might end, nor what shape its aftermath might take.

I’ve long been annoyed at how most politicians, pundits, and others—left, right, whatever—insist on viewing the Trumpian uprising exclusively through the lens of the past. They base their analyses on established rules that have been upended and made irrelevant. Vanishingly few of them seem able to grasp that maybe, just maybe, the societal tsunami represented by Trump and his supporters might not play out in precise accord with the old, established playbook they’re comfortable with. Even some of the writers I like and regularly excerpt here fall into this trap.

And I don’t get that, I really don’t, especially when it comes from the people who were most shocked and stunned by Trump’s 2016 victory. Seems to me that those most humiliated by the shattering of their predictions of a surefire Hillary!™ win would be a little more circumspect about their obviously misplaced faith in Ye Olde Ways now, and would be among the quickest to consider abandoning them. Guess sometimes hindsight ain’t 20-20 after all.

And the same principle applies to CW speculation. Any civil war we might wind up stumbling blindly into will likely share one, and only one, characteristic with any of its predecessors: it will be nothing like what any of us expects now. In any event, though, Codevilla knows who should be held accountable.

What should happen, what can happen, when the real, existing violent organizations of the Left—Antifa and the several radical black organizations—try to exclude or to punish? Several cities—Portland, Oregon and Charlottesville, Virginia among them—have had their streets taken over. What happens when these organizations organize mobs to harass their least favorite people? What happens when some of them wind up dead?

At a certain point, the other side shoots back. Here as elsewhere, the several police forces may be expected to split and take opposite sides. Then the army’s special forces become the arbiters, and the war rages.

We know that our ruling class having largely made government into a partisan thing, America has crossed the threshold of revolution. While we have no way of knowing what lies ahead, we know that the spiral of political violence has already taken its first fateful turns, and that the logic of our partisan ruling class is pushing for more.

Heaven help them should they get it.

Update! Call me a weirdo, maybe, but I find at least some reassurance among Bill’s words of despair:

What is there to say? It’s all so frickin’ predictable.

We’ve got a bunch of new judges, many of whom seem…oh…shaky, at best.

We replace swamp monsters with new swamp monsters. Everybody has lots of excuses and explanations for that, but the fact remains – one step forward, one step back.

It’s depressing. And starting to get, at least for me, profoundly uninteresting.

Is there going to be a hot civil war?

No, because there are not enough people in this country willing to point a gun at another person and pull the trigger over political differences. The vast majority of fatal gun violence is carried out over disputes over real things like drugs and familial hatreds. The percentage where somebody pulls the trigger because they hate conservatives, or hate immigrants, or hate leftists is tiny, little more than statistical noise.

That may change, but I’d be surprised if it happens any time soon.

I bolded the comforting part to distinguish it from the rest, which is all the more bleak because it’s, y’know, true.

Share

The more things change…

Then again, some things NEVER do.

It may be that the best book that will ever be written about today’s progressive mind-set was published in 1941. That in The Red Decade author Eugene Lyons was, in fact, describing the Communist-dominated American Left of the Depression-wracked 1930s and 1940s makes his observations even more meaningful, for it is sobering to be confronted with how little has been gained by hard experience. The celebration of feelings over reason? The certainty of moral virtue? The disdain for tradition and the revising of history for ideological ends? The embrace of the latest definition of correct thought? Lyons was one of the most gifted reporters of his time, and among the bravest, and his story of the spell cast by Stalinist-tinged social-justice activism over that day’s purported best and brightest—literary titans, Hollywood celebrities, leading academics, religious leaders, media heavies—would be jaw-dropping if it weren’t so eerily familiar.

Indeed, looking backward from a time when, according to surveys, more millennials would rather live under socialism than capitalism, it’s apparent that Lyons was documenting not just a historical moment but also a species of historical illiteracy as unchanging as it is poisonous, its utopianism able to flourish only at the expense of independent thought. On a range of issues, alternative views were defined as not merely mistaken but morally reprehensible; and among the elites who dominated the cultural sphere, deviants from approved opinion were subject to special abuse. Of course, having lived and worked in Soviet Russia, Lyons made distinctions about relative abuses of power. Under Stalinism, dissidents were liquidated, or vanished into the gulag; the American Left could only liquidate careers and disappear reputations.

Well, not as hideous as being gulag-ed or Holodomor-ed, admittedly. But ask any one of the many who have had their ability to make a living destroyed, their home violated and damaged, themselves and their spouses/children hounded and stalked everywhere they went by gangs of violent commie thugs about it sometime, and just let them tell you all about how much fun it was. You’re sure to get an earful about those wonderful, compassionate humanitarians.

He acknowledges that most who followed the leftist line meant no evil—he calls them the Innocents Club, “high minded, idealistic, eager to be useful…Not their hearts, but the organs located in their skulls, were at fault.” Still, he gives no one a pass. Decades before Tom Wolfe wrote Radical Chic, Lyons showed a special disdain for the wealthy who embraced radicalism to salve their guilty consciences. Perhaps the most prominent of these was Corliss Lamont, son of the chairman of J. P. Morgan & Company, who, as head of the Friends of the Soviet Union, emerged as the chief public apologist for Stalin’s crimes. As Lyons wrote, Lamont spared “neither his money nor his energy in defending the mass slaughter in Russia, and in damning those who dared examine that horror.” Affronted, the multimillionaire sued. The suit went nowhere, but Lamont’s grandson is today governor of Connecticut.

Given his intimate acquaintance with the Left, Lyons well knew what calumnies the publication of The Red Decade would bring down on his head. At the time, especially in elite circles, the charge of “red baiting” was akin to that of racism, sexism, or homophobia today; whether made in anger or with premeditated intent, it was enough to halt any challenge to the Left’s worldview. It was a weapon deployed, he wrote, by “literary critics, book reviewers and political commentators…a neatly contrived device for heading off free and uninhibited discussion of little things such as man-made famines, horrifying blood purges, forced labor on a gigantic scale.” In fact, in almost every meaningful arena of American life, those who “ran afoul of the revolution were made to feel the full weight of their crimes; they were ostracized socially, handicapped professionally and not infrequently stripped of their jobs as well as their reputations for ordinary decency.”

Lyons’s own world of book and magazine publishing was so dominated by leftists that former adherents who turned against the Party, deemed “moral monsters and turncoats,” could be made essentially to evaporate from mainstream view. He lists no fewer than 30 writers who suffered that fate during “the intellectual red terror,” including (as if to underscore the point for contemporary readers) such now largely forgotten former luminaries as Max Eastman, John Dos Passos, and James T. Farrell. He includes himself on that list. “The part I cannot induce the uninitiated to believe is how effective the terror could be,” he writes. “When you first met a particularly far-fetched libel on your character, it merely seemed funny in its absurdity.” But continually repeated, he adds, the lies take their toll, for wherever one tried to make one’s way professionally, “there were manuscript readers, casting directors, book reviewers who—consciously or by a sort of pack instinct—took their prejudices ready-made from the Popular Front comrades.”

For all the Left’s capacity to shape opinion in Lyons’s time, the power wielded by today’s progressives is even more malign, for its heavy hand is all but unconstrained by countervailing forces. For one thing, 70 or 80 years ago, organized religion held such sway in America that even committed leftists understood that it could be derided only behind closed doors; and while there were some prominent clergymen who fell hard for the progressive line, they usually made sure to do so only as private citizens. Even they would have dismissed as lunacy the possibility that one day not only their congregants, but entire religious orders, might be widely characterized as dangerous zealots for adhering to traditional beliefs, or that agencies of government would compel them to violate their most deeply held spiritual convictions.

At least rhetorically, the Communists of the late 1930s were, in fact, far less hostile to the American idea than are today’s run-of-the-mill progressives. In an age where Americans were raised to revere their country’s singular history, they all but wrapped themselves in the flag. “Communism Is Twentieth-Century Americanism” went the party’s famous Popular Front slogan, and they did not hesitate to name their Spanish battalions for Lincoln and Washington or the Party school for Marxist instruction after Jefferson. The contrast with today’s Left, which sees American history as a cavalcade of oppression, could not be more striking. Little wonder that today’s Democrats, seeking to stay abreast of their fervent base, are as publicly invested in identity politics and collectivist economics as the denizens of any faculty lounge.

Indeed, this speaks to the most striking difference between the world that Lyons described and the one we contend with today: it’s no longer a tiny, if disproportionately influential, political entity waving the Left’s banner; it’s one of the two major parties.

This article is both chilling and infuriating simultaneously. Communism’s enduring appeal for dopes and dupes across the globe is way beyond baffling. It’s a zombie ideology that never seems to die—no matter how abject its failure, how cruel and demeaning the life-circumstances and conditions it invariably creates—nor does it ever want for fools advocating the imposition of its misery on everyone else. It just keeps staggering blindly on, to blight everything it touches along the road to ruin.

Share

CF Comments Policy Statement

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit. Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't.

Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar. Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

Notable Quotes

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

"To put it simply, the Left is the stupid and the insane, led by the evil. You can’t persuade the stupid or the insane and you had damn well better fight the evil." - Skeptic

"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine." - Joseph Goebbels

"Ain't no misunderstanding this war. They want to rule us and aim to do it. We aim not to allow it. All there is to it." - NC Reed, from Parno's Peril

"I just want a government that fits in the box it originally came in." -Bill Whittle

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix