WHO SHOT THE RAS? Did Bernel Tremel’s support for 45 lead to his untimely death? Hear Ras Bernel’s last and final words. #THEGODDEGREEWHO SHOT THE RAS? Did Ras Bernell’s support for Donald Trump lead to his untimely death? — The God Degree
By Daniel Bobinski
In the 1930’s, a skillful propagandist named Paul Joseph Goebbels was able to exercise great control over the news in Germany. Using radio – a new media at the time – and film, Goebbels influenced the country’s opinions on antisemitism, churches, and even the arts. One of his most useful techniques was censoring any message that didn’t agree with the Nazi Party’s objectives.
In 2020, the new media platforms of Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are similarly influencing the world’s opinion on matters of antisemitism, the church, the arts, and even healthcare. And, like Goebbels, one of their most useful techniques is censoring any message that doesn’t agree with their common objectives.
If you’ve been tracking the news at all over the past five months, you know there’s a group of people downplaying every treatment that emerges for treating Covid-19, saying instead that the infection can be cured only with a vaccine. I personally refer to this group as the global medical establishment, but let’s call it GME for short. Generally speaking, the GME consists of organizations and agencies that wield great influence over public health information. Think Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Think the National Institutes for Health (NIH). Think the World Health Organization (W.H.O.). Think the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). And we can’t leave out companies such as GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Merck, and Novartis, collectively (and not-so-affectionately) referred to as “Big Pharma.”
For those that don’t know, my 30 years of experience as a management / leadership coach kicks in whenever I look at an organization’s leadership: “What’s their motivation?” is a fundamental question. Why do I bring that up? You should know that the World Economic Forum has partnered with GME organizations in response to the coronavirus outbreak. To start connecting dots and understanding motivations, check out the World Economic Forum’s one hour and 20 minute movie about The Great Reset. I’ll give you a hint – there’s not a lot of selfless altruism.
You should also know that Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are giving GME organizations the final word in all things medical, and no second opinions are allowed. As proof of this, consider YouTube’s CEO Susan Wojcicki saying this past April that any content on YouTube that goes “against the World Heath Organization recommendations” will be removed.
WebMD says you should get a second opinion whenever a treatment is experimental or there is no established consensus on a treatment, but the tech giants aren’t letting you have that. Especially if it has anything having to do with Covid-19. Their organization’s leaders don’t like President Trump (remember that motivation thing), so they can’t allow any hope, and they certainly can’t allow any low-cost, easy access treatments for Covid. They need Americans to be devoid of hope. Two things you can observe:
- An ‘expert,’ Anthony Fauci, is being used to downplay all hope and keep people confused
- A state of fear is being maintained so they can pin all unease on President Trump
Fauci, you may recall, is famous for countering President Trump on live TV after Trump heard from Dr. Vladimir Zelenko who said Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was effective in fighting Covid. Despite a 2005 Virology Journal article published by Fauci’s own NIH (titled “Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread”), Fauci downplayed HCQ’s effectiveness.
Traditional media outlets friendly to the GME did their best to paint HCQ as dangerous, but both The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine, two highly respected medical journals, had to issue retractions and apologies after the “studies” they published damning HCQ turned out to be erroneous.
The truth about HCQ is finally emerging thanks to the efforts of people like Dr. Harvey Risch, an epidemiologist at Yale. The author of more that 300 peer reviewed papers, Risch recently announced that HCQ is “highly effective” in treating Covid, and recommended that we “start treating people with HCQ immediately.”
For whatever reason (remember that “motivation” question), Fauci continues to squelch any sense of hope that using HCQ will help fight Covid.
Social media is complicit
Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are also squelching any sense of hope. Let me use a personal example to explain.
Earlier this month I wrote a column titled, “A scientific look at the mask fallacy – and why we’re told to wear them.” In this widely read article I cited and linked to research by Dr. Zelenko on the efficacy of his highly effective HCQ / zinc / azithromycin treatment (known as the Zelenko Protocol). I also cited and linked to research on what I call Bartlett’s Nebulizer Protocol, developed by Dr. Richard Bartlett in Texas. His highly effective treatment uses a nebulizer to successfully treat Covid patients using Budesonide and zinc.
I also cited and linked to peer-reviewed research over the past 15 years on all the randomized controlled trials studying mask efficacy for preventing viral transmission.
Plain and simple, this is censorship. It’s like Soviet Russia in the 1960’s or the Chinese Communist Party today. They want only one story to be told – no second opinions allowed.
Coincidentally, the same day Facebook tagged my column, a group of medical professionals called America’s Frontline Doctors were broadcasting a press conference in Washington DC. These doctors said:
- Kids don’t spread the virus to adults
- HCQ/zinc/azithromycin works to cure Covid
- HCQ is available over the counter overseas but governments are restricting it in the USA
- Case numbers are irrelevant because of inaccuracies in testing
Before the social media giants realized this message was getting out, more than 17,000,000 people saw the video. Obviously, the information these doctors presented didn’t align with the GME’s narrative, so Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube began pulling down the video wherever they found it. At the same time, their partners in traditional and left-wing media embarked on a character assassination campaign for everyone involved in America’s Frontline Doctors.
Again, censorship. There can be only one narrative! No second opinions allowed. Not even from Board-Certified doctors.
Bias in social media ‘fact-checkers’
Have you noticed that left-wingers and Marxists rarely get censored? They post lie after lie and fill our feeds with false information, yet the social media giants turn a blind eye.
Conversely, Donald Trump, Jr. was blocked by Twitter for 12 hours for “sharing misinformation on Covid-19.” What information did he share? He linked to the doctors holding their conference in Washington, DC.
I invite readers to review the Project Veritas undercover report and watch Facebook’s “independent” fact checkers state for themselves on undercover camera how their political bias drives their decisions. Also watch the video showing Facebook “fact checkers” bragging about blocking and/or deleting whatever they want because they personally don’t agree with the content.
This should be alarming to every American.
In my opinion, Fauci is lying about HCQ. His own NIH researched it back in 2005, finding zero danger and positive results in treating coronaviruses. And Facebook is lying about my column. I didn’t present false information. I presented different information from what the Global Medical Establishment wants you to believe.
The problem? People are dying because of these lies. But, like Goebbels, Fauci and Facebook don’t really care. They’re too focused on their organization’s objectives.
Goebbels would be proud.
Daniel Bobinski, M.Ed. is a certified behavioral analyst, best-selling author, corporate trainer, executive coach, and columnist. He’s also a veteran and a self-described Christian Libertarian who believes in the principles of free market capitalism – while standing firmly against crony capitalism.
Source: Undercover DC
Social Media and Big Tech is LYING TO YOU and costing lives They are complicit in the deaths of Americans AND in the toxic culture we are seeing across this country!
They ARE brainwashing people and inciting violence! “Nazis” is not only an ACCURATE definition of them and their tactics, but that is who they ARE EMULATING!!!
PLEASE SHARE THIS INFORMATION!
America is under attack by the NEW Nazi Party
Censorship is their weapon of choice……… So far anyway
Democrats around the country tell Police to “Stand Down” as rioters assault, maim, and kill their constituents and loot and burn those constituents property!
Personally, I don’t see how one could argue that telling police to stand down as rioters destroy the property of American taxpayers is anything other than a “subversive act” and a violation of their oaths of office!
Donald Trump and AG Barr simply need to ENFORCE THE LAW! It’s not rocket science folks! I’m listing the statutes here. All that needs to happen to end this chaos is for the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to actually DO THEIR JOBS!!!
Should Trump and AG William Barr choose to ignore these crimes against the country, then THEY are just as guilty of subversion! PERIOD
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§1, 2 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, §§1, 2, 35 Stat. 1088).
Section consolidates sections 1 and 2 of title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed.
The language referring to collection of the fine was omitted as obsolete and repugnant to the more humane policy of modern law which does not impose criminal consequences on the innocent.
The words “every person so convicted of treason” were omitted as redundant.
Minor change was made in phraseology.
1994—Pub. L. 103–322 inserted “under this title but” before “not less than $10,000”.
§2382. Misprision of treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §3 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, §3, 35 Stat. 1088).
Mandatory punishment provision was rephrased in the alternative.
1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted “fined under this title” for “fined not more than $1,000”.
§2383. Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §4 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, §4, 35 Stat. 1088).
Word “moreover” was deleted as surplusage and minor changes were made in phraseology.
1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted “fined under this title” for “fined not more than $10,000”.
§2384. Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §6 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, §6, 35 Stat. 1089).
1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted “fined under this title” for “fined not more than $20,000”.
1956—Act July 24, 1956, substituted “$20,000” for “$5,000”, and “twenty years” for “six years”.
Effective Date of 1956 Amendment
Act July 24, 1956, ch. 678, §3, 70 Stat. 624, provided that: “The foregoing amendments [amending this section and section 2385 of this title] shall apply only with respect to offenses committed on and after the date of the enactment of this Act [July 24, 1956].”
§2385. Advocating overthrow of Government
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, §2, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 87–486, June 19, 1962, 76 Stat. 103; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§10, 11, 13 (June 28, 1940, ch. 439, title I, §§2, 3, 5, 54 Stat. 670, 671).
Section consolidates sections 10, 11, and 13 of title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed. Section 13 of title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., which contained the punishment provisions applicable to sections 10 and 11 of title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., was combined with section 11 of title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., and added to this section.
In first paragraph, words “the Government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein” were substituted for “any government in the United States”.
In second and third paragraphs, word “such” was inserted after “any” and before “government”, and words “in the United States” which followed “government” were omitted.
In view of these changes, the provisions of subsection (b) of section 10 of title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., which defined the term “government in the United States” were omitted as unnecessary.
Reference to conspiracy to commit any of the prohibited acts was omitted as covered by the general conspiracy provision, incorporated in section 371 of this title. (See reviser’s note under that section.)
Words “upon conviction thereof” which preceded “be fined” were omitted as surplusage, as punishment cannot be imposed until a conviction is secured.
The phraseology was considerably changed to effect consolidation but without any change of substance.
1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted “fined under this title” for “fined not more than $20,000” in fourth and fifth pars.
1962—Pub. L. 87–486 defined the terms “organizes” and “organize”.
1956—Act July 24, 1956, substituted “$20,000” for “$10,000”, and “twenty years” for “ten years” in the paragraph prescribing penalties applicable to advocating overthrow of government and inserted provisions relating to conspiracy to commit any offense named in this section.
Effective Date of 1956 Amendment
Amendment by act July 24, 1956, as applicable only with respect to offenses committed on and after July 24, 1956, see section 3 of act July 24, 1956, set out as a note under section 2384 of this title.
I watched an episode of Tucker Carlson on FOX News the other day that I wanted to share with everyone. I’m not big on watching “News” no matter who puts it out. All of the news channels have agendas these days so you can’t really just get the “News”.
So what you end up watching an “opinion piece”. I guess this would technically be an opinion piece too….. But I’m not representing it as “News” like they do.
When Trump was running for office I was not one of his supporters by any means. His long history of voting Democrat combined with campaign donations he had made to far left players in the Democratic Party convinced me that he was quite possibly going to turn out to be “Hillary Clinton by Proxy”. I didn’t trust him, and felt he was more of an “infiltrator” in the Republican Party.
A lot of water has passed under the bridge since then. And so far Trump has done a pretty good job, and has pretty much done what he said he’d do. So I’ll admit I was wrong about the guy. He has my full support these days. There is only a couple of things I’d really like to see him do that he has not done.
One of which is to put Hillary Clinton behind bars, along with Obama and Eric Holder. Wouldn’t it be nice if while Democrats investigate Trump for no reason at all, if Trump were to counter by charging his Justice Department with gathering evidence and prosecuting the corrupt administration which came before him???
The others were talked about on the January 09, 2019 edition of Tucker Carlson. Today’s thoughts comes from this episode, which I enjoyed and agreed with a good portion of it. Trump has done a great job standing up for the wall. But there is a couple of issues discussed in this video that he also needs to address. The abuse of Trump supporters is one, and the censoring of Conservatives by Tech companies is another. Trump should go after those who would harass his base, as well as go after tech giants who discriminate against them as well!!! If he does this I believe 2020 will be his. If not…. Someone else will promise to and quite possibly win.
I suggest that you watch the whole episode. Tucker talks about Democrats and how EVERY Liberal “News” channel marches in lock-step with Democratic talking points. The first part of the video shows numerous examples of Democrats pounding the phrase “Manufactured Crisis” into the heads of Americans. It’s sad. They resemble puppets.
At approximately 13:45 in the video Carlson brings Jonathon Harris (A Democratic Commentator) onto the show to discuss the #Wall. One thing is for sure, this guy wants to blame Trump for the government shutdown. He only does it 25 times or so. He is a professional double-talker and a liar, that is his job. He appeared to struggle keeping his talking points on track. And his attempt at claiming 5 Billion dollars for a wall was a “Waste of Money” didn’t seem to fly either. 5 billion only solves 1/3 of our #Immigration problem according to him. SOLD!!! I’ll take that.
Moving on to my main point. Democrats have been discriminating against Conservatives for some time now. Since Conservatives are Trumps base, he needs to go after these people with a VENGEANCE! Because like the video says, conservatives have been targeted by the previous administration, as well as by the tech companies for some time now. Alex Jones was essentially silenced and thrown off of social media. Even PayPal dropped him, so he can no longer accept money the way he always has. Where does this end? They claimed he was a Racist, yet they proved nothing. They just shut him down.
Corporate America is now discriminating against white people when hiring. They even admit to doing so! Religious Freedom is under attack by the left too.
Left wing lunatics are attacking people because they are Trump supporters. People are getting punched in the face, having their skulls bashed in with bike locks, getting fired from their jobs etc…. And nothing is being done about it. The guy who hit multiple people with a bike lock (which is felony assault with a deadly weapon) initially got charged with the crime, but it was later dropped!!! How do you justify dropping charges against a guy who assaulted multiple people using a deadly weapon??? Why has nobody been charged with finding out who is responsible for this??? Why is that person not in jail too???
These are the things Trump needs to address. And he needs to address them NOW!!!
Like Tucker Carlson says in the video, if any of this stuff would have happened to Obama supporters the FBI would have been in their house before they got home. Democrats are trying to keep Trump “back on his heels” by launching 1000 investigations into him.
Trump needs to take control of his own Justice Department and start countering their legal attacks on him with legal attacks on Democrats!!! You have Maxine Waters calling for violence against Trump and his staff……. That must be illegal! You have leftist lunatics attacking people for wearing a Trump hat….. I KNOW that’s illegal!
You have public companies discriminating against people for their political views, shadow banning and censoring conservatives on Facebook, Twitter, and Google. Not to mention those who have their accounts deleted or silenced for a period of time because the liberal owners of these companies don’t like what they are saying.
It’s time that Trump starts looking out for his base!!!
He needs to prosecute those in government who protect these thugs. And he needs to file lawsuits on every tech company out there. And anyone who attacks a Trump supporter out of the blue for wearing a hat or a t-shirt needs to be prosecuted for a hate crime!
It’s time that we stop the madness. Trump has been doing a pretty good job, and I’m not knocking the guy……… But it is past time he addresses these issues. Not only is it the right thing to do, but I feel he’d wrap up his re-election by doing so. Because voters care about THEIR RIGHTS, and right now Conservative voters’ right are being trampled on over and over again…. and without consequence.
That’s unacceptable. It’s time to regain some form of order in this country. Because one thing is for sure, it’s NOT going to get any better!!! It’s going to get worse and worse. The more these people are allowed to get away with the more they’ll try to get away with. Allowing violence without consequences against ANY American citizen is unacceptable.
But allowing violence against your supporters when you are the President??? That’s just crazy!!! I know he has had his plate full. I know Democrats have been badgering him with unsubstantiated investigations and lawsuits and personal attacks.
But it’s time for President Trump to reign them in. Direct the #DOJ to put an end to this, NOW!!!
Because otherwise….. Trump is giving anyone running against him in 2020 ammunition.
Jihadis among the migrant caravan is not as ridiculous as CNN would have you believe.
CNN on Monday once again posed as the intrepid and impartial fact checker, correcting the falsehoods spread by our ridiculous and hateful President, with the headline: “Trump seizes on right-wing media reports to suggest migrant caravan has been infiltrated by ‘unknown Middle Easterners.’” And as usual, the President is in reality far closer to the mark than CNN ever is. CNN has once again proven itself to be, as Trump has so aptly and indelibly put it, very fake news.
After that bit of legerdemain, CNN informs the Leftist marks who still take it seriously that Trump is, as expected, all wrong and going off half-cocked yet again: “The President did not support his claim with any evidence. Sarah Sanders, the White House press secretary, told reporters on Monday afternoon that Trump ‘absolutely’ had evidence to indicate there are Middle Easterners in the caravan. Sanders, however, did not provide specific information on the matter and it was still not clear what evidence Trump had to indicate the presence of such individuals in the caravan.”
The evidence is actually abundantly clear; CNN just doesn’t want you to know it exists. The Daily Caller reported Monday that Univision correspondent Francisco Santa Anna stated: “Yesterday when we were traveling through Guatemala, we noticed people from El Salvador and even people from Bangladesh. Can you imagine what they had to do to get here? They infiltrated themselves in this caravan and tried to cross with the crowd. That would have benefited them greatly.”
What’s more, Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales stated last Thursday that his security forces had caught “close to 100 people completely linked to terrorist issues, with ISIS and that not only have we arrested them within our territory, but they have been deported to their countries of origin.” Guatemala’s Secretary of Strategic Intelligence, Mario Duarte, confirmed that “the individuals intercepted, detained, prosecuted or returned to their country of origin, is close to 100.” He referred to “several citizens of Syrian origin who were detained with false documents were detained, for which they were prosecuted and subjected to criminal proceedings,” and then deported in 2016.
The establishment media has made a great deal of the fact that Morales did not say that Guatemalan authorities had caught 100 Islamic State jihadis among the throngs approaching the U.S. border now. However, this is a distinction without a difference. If Islamic State jihadis could enter Guatemala previously, they can do it again, and they may have joined this caravan.
Denis Omar Contreras, a leader of this latest march to the border, summarily dismissed this possibility: “There isn’t a single terrorist here.” Claiming that everyone on the way to the United States was from Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua, he added: “As far as I know there are no terrorists in these four countries, at least beyond the corrupt governments.”
As far as he knows. But how can Denis Omar Contreras be sure? Is there something that would make it impossible for jihadis to infiltrate this migrant group? We do know that jihadis have many times attempted to enter the United States by way of the Southern border. Here are just a few news stories from the last few years, related to such efforts:
But CNN and Denis Omar Contreras would have you believe that jihadists could not, simply could not possibly, have infiltrated this latest migrant caravan. Donald Trump is just being racist again to say so.
If some of those on their way to the U.S. get into the country and commit an act of jihad violence, will CNN and Contreras and all the others who are sneering at Trump today apologize? Don’t bet on it. But the best-case scenario will be that no one from this caravan will get in at all, and CNN and the rest can go back to calling Trump “racist” for keeping them out.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.
The left doesn’t want to secede. It wants to rule.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.
A civil war has begun.
This civil war is very different than the last one. There are no cannons or cavalry charges. The left doesn’t want to secede. It wants to rule. Political conflicts become civil wars when one side refuses to accept the existing authority. The left has rejected all forms of authority that it doesn’t control.
The left has rejected the outcome of the last two presidential elections won by Republicans. It has rejected the judicial authority of the Supreme Court when it decisions don’t accord with its agenda. It rejects the legislative authority of Congress when it is not dominated by the left.
It rejected the Constitution so long ago that it hardly bears mentioning.
It was for total unilateral executive authority under Obama. And now it’s for states unilaterally deciding what laws they will follow. (As long as that involves defying immigration laws under Trump, not following them under Obama.) It was for the sacrosanct authority of the Senate when it held the majority. Then it decried the Senate as an outmoded institution when the Republicans took it over.
It was for Obama defying the orders of Federal judges, no matter how well grounded in existing law, and it is for Federal judges overriding any order by Trump on any grounds whatsoever. It was for Obama penalizing whistleblowers, but now undermining the government from within has become “patriotic”.
There is no form of legal authority that the left accepts as a permanent institution. It only utilizes forms of authority selectively when it controls them. But when government officials refuse the orders of the duly elected government because their allegiance is to an ideology whose agenda is in conflict with the President and Congress, that’s not activism, protest, politics or civil disobedience; it’s treason.
After losing Congress, the left consolidated its authority in the White House. After losing the White House, the left shifted its center of authority to Federal judges and unelected government officials. Each defeat led the radicalized Democrats to relocate from more democratic to less democratic institutions.
This isn’t just hypocrisy. That’s a common political sin. Hypocrites maneuver within the system. The left has no allegiance to the system. It accepts no laws other than those dictated by its ideology.
Democrats have become radicalized by the left. This doesn’t just mean that they pursue all sorts of bad policies. It means that their first and foremost allegiance is to an ideology, not the Constitution, not our country or our system of government. All of those are only to be used as vehicles for their ideology.
That’s why compromise has become impossible.
Our system of government was designed to allow different groups to negotiate their differences. But those differences were supposed to be based around finding shared interests. The most profound of these shared interests was that of a common country based around certain civilizational values. The left has replaced these Founding ideas with radically different notions and principles. It has rejected the primary importance of the country. As a result it shares little in the way of interests or values.
Instead it has retreated to cultural urban and suburban enclaves where it has centralized tremendous amounts of power while disregarding the interests and values of most of the country. If it considers them at all, it is convinced that they will shortly disappear to be replaced by compliant immigrants and college indoctrinated leftists who will form a permanent demographic majority for its agenda.
But it couldn’t wait that long because it is animated by the conviction that enforcing its ideas is urgent and inevitable. And so it turned what had been a hidden transition into an open break.
In the hidden transition, its authority figures had hijacked the law and every political office they held to pursue their ideological agenda. The left had used its vast cultural power to manufacture a consensus that was slowly transitioning the country from American values to its values and agendas. The right had proven largely impotent in the face of a program which corrupted and subverted from within.
The left was enormously successful in this regard. It was so successful that it lost all sense of proportion and decided to be open about its views and to launch a political power struggle after losing an election.
The Democrats were no longer being slowly injected with leftist ideology. Instead the left openly took over and demanded allegiance to open borders, identity politics and environmental fanaticism. The exodus of voters wiped out the Democrats across much of what the left deemed flyover country.
The left responded to democratic defeats by retreating deeper into undemocratic institutions, whether it was the bureaucracy or the corporate media, while doubling down on its political radicalism. It is now openly defying the outcome of a national election using a coalition of bureaucrats, corporations, unelected officials, celebrities and reporters that are based out of its cultural and political enclaves.
It has responded to a lost election by constructing sanctuary cities and states thereby turning a cultural and ideological secession into a legal secession. But while secessionists want to be left alone authoritarians want everyone to follow their laws. The left is an authoritarian movement that wants total compliance with its dictates with severe punishments for those who disobey.
The left describes its actions as principled. But more accurately they are ideological. Officials at various levels of government have rejected the authority of the President of the United States, of Congress and of the Constitution because those are at odds with their radical ideology. Judges have cloaked this rejection in law. Mayors and governors are not even pretending that their actions are lawful.
The choices of this civil war are painfully clear.
We can have a system of government based around the Constitution with democratically elected representatives. Or we can have one based on the ideological principles of the left in which all laws and processes, including elections and the Constitution, are fig leaves for enforcing social justice.
But we cannot have both.
Some civil wars happen when a political conflict can’t be resolved at the political level. The really bad ones happen when an irresolvable political conflict combines with an irresolvable cultural conflict.
That is what we have now.
The left has made it clear that it will not accept the lawful authority of our system of government. It will not accept the outcome of elections. It will not accept these things because they are at odds with its ideology and because they represent the will of large portions of the country whom they despise.
The question is what comes next.
The last time around growing tensions began to explode in violent confrontations between extremists on both sides. These extremists were lauded by moderates who mainstreamed their views. The first Republican president was elected and rejected. The political tensions led to conflict and then civil war.
The left doesn’t believe in secession. It’s an authoritarian political movement that has lost democratic authority. There is now a political power struggle underway between the democratically elected officials and the undemocratic machinery of government aided by a handful of judges and local elected officials.
What this really means is that there are two competing governments; the legal government and a treasonous anti-government of the left. If this political conflict progresses, agencies and individuals at every level of government will be asked to demonstrate their allegiance to these two competing governments. And that can swiftly and explosively transform into an actual civil war.
There is no sign that the left understands or is troubled by the implications of the conflict it has initiated. And there are few signs that Democrats properly understand the dangerous road that the radical left is drawing them toward. The left assumes that the winners of a democratic election will back down rather than stand on their authority. It is unprepared for the possibility that democracy won’t die in darkness.
Civil wars end when one side is forced to accept the authority of the other. The left expects everyone to accept its ideological authority. Conservatives expect the left to accept Constitutional authority. The conflict is still political and cultural. It’s being fought in the media and within the government. But if neither side backs down, then it will go beyond words as both sides give contradictory orders.
The left is a treasonous movement. The Democrats became a treasonous organization when they fell under the sway of a movement that rejects our system of government, its laws and its elections. Now their treason is coming to a head. They are engaged in a struggle for power against the government. That’s not protest. It’s not activism. The old treason of the sixties has come of age. A civil war has begun.
This is a primal conflict between a totalitarian system and a democratic system. Its outcome will determine whether we will be a free nation or a nation of slaves.
Source : FRONTPAGE MAG
America at War
I just don’t know about America these days. We have Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump running for President. Hillary has been manipulating our political system for her own gain for years. And on the other hand, America is full of people who say “It’s time we get rich people out of politics!” Yet one of the richest in America, “The Donald” gets the Republican nomination!
I feel as if Americans are yet again forced to choose “The lesser of the two evils”. Don’t get me wrong, I am in agreement with what Trump says. My only issue with him is his past ACTIONS.
The fact that Trump has been a registered Democrat for the better part of his life doesn’t sit well with me, neither does the fact that he has been one of the biggest financial supporters of politicians who stand diametrically opposed to my way of thinking.
People such as Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel, and Harry Reid. Politicians who ALL received financial support from Donald Trump in recent years. How can you square that with the Conservative views he now claims to hold??? America seems to have the attention span of a 3rd grader with ADHT in a room full of toys and 30 kids, with 3 children’s movies playing at one time!
America at War just don’t know anymore!!!
With that being said, here’s the story.
There are some very dubious awards out there that you just don’t want to win. Being one of the top recipients of Islamic money in politics certainly tops that list. Hillary Clinton likes to complain about dark money. This is as dark as money gets. As the Middle East Forum’s research shows.
Hillary Clinton tops the list, raking in $41,165 from prominent Islamists. This includes $19,249 from senior officials of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates on November 15, 2014.
For example, Mrs. Clinton has accepted $3,900 from former CAIR vice-chairman Ahmad Al-Akhras, who has defended numerous Islamists in Ohio indicted – and later convicted – on terrorism charges.
Among other current presidential candidates, Jill Stein has accepted $250. Donald Trump and Gary Johnson have not received any Islamist money.
Other top recent recipients of money from the enemy include Rep. Keith Ellison ($17,370) and Rep. Andre Carson ($13,225).
The top ten list includes nine Democrats, one independent (Sen. Bernie Sanders accepted $9,285), and no Republicans.
I don’t think that’s too surprising to anyone. Though you have to feel sorry for Jill Stein. She hates Israel and announced she wouldn’t have killed Osama bin Laden. What’s a girl gotta do to get ahead on Jihad Street anyway?
Source : FRONTPAGE MAG
Before you read the story I want to point out that Ted Cruz has promised to abolish the IRS and get America on a much more sensible Flat tax system.
Guest Post by Robin Koerner
I have just paid my biggest bill of the year. The invoice was for a cool 9% of my entire annual income – or my “Adjusted Gross Income” (AGI) as it appears on my tax returns, which have just been filed. And that invoice was from my accountant who just filed them for me.
I have a pretty modest income – so modest, in fact, that my AGI is of the order of a half of the median household income across the United States – the kind of income that triggers significant subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. Even the “top line” of my income falls short of that median: so it’s not as if I’m earning loads and deducting huge amounts.
My financial life last year was pretty simple: my earnings derived from a modest real estate portfolio and some freelance/consulting work. My income is earned through my small business, which, for those who know about these things, is an S-corporation. I have no employees. I do no payroll.
Yet, I have just paid my accountant more than a month’s worth of income to complete my tax returns.
How many pages of tax returns do you think that I, a single individual, and my S-corporation (a small business) had to file, bearing in mind the small amount of income in question?
Frankly, there’s no good reason the answer is not one or two. But you already know the answer is more than that, don’t you?
Ten? Try again.
Twenty? Keep going.
Surely not 50?
You’re still not close.
Did I hear you say 100 – you’re going for three digits now? Wow.
Still not there.
The answer, my fellow American tax victims, is 149.
Just take a moment to absorb that. A sub median-earning American taxpayer, engaged in simple business activities, has a 149 page tax return. And if he doesn’t get it right, his error is punishable. Of that 149, about 100 go to the Feds.
Completing 149 pages of tax forms/schedules/supporting statements is a lot of work. And I know exactly how much it is, because of that big invoice from the accountant that I already mentioned.
It’s $2000 of work – my aforementioned largest bill of the year. And it’s $2000 of work I in no way could have done myself.
I’m no high school drop-out. I have a first class degree in physics from one of the best universities in the world. I like numbers. I like logic. I like intellectual rigor. I even have a nerdy love of spreadsheets (which tells me, for example, exactly how much I spent on groceries this month five years ago ($173.41, as it happens. I’m low-maintenance)).
But I could not reverse engineer those 149 pages of tax returns if my life depended on it. And I would defy anyone without a CPA qualification to be able to do so.
I have no complaint about my accountant, who provided very good service this year, but even he couldn’t get it right first time. As I type this article, I am awaiting “corrected” state returns (which are no shorter).
Moreover, as any small businessman knows, my accountant can only generate those 149 pages of returns after I have compiled all the necessary numbers and data in neat spreadsheets, nicely itemized and comprehensively annotated (two or three days’ work, right there, perhaps?). I know for sure that most tax payers are not as proficient with Excel as I am – so my accountants have an easy time of it with me. (He even told me so.)
Here’s the reality of the American tax system for modestly earning individuals who run small businesses:
My government has put me in a position where I must either pay 9% of my income to a professional just to enable me to avoid punishment, asset garnishment and even imprisonment. Supposedly, I can “do my own taxes”, but that is a joke. No one who has not gone to school for it could accurately complete those 149 pages with any honest degree of confidence – and I don’t care what software he’s using. Moreover, even if it were do-able, the time taken to learn how to do it and then do it properly would be measured in weeks, not hours. And we don’t get to invoice the IRS for our time.
Look in wonder, America, at the most regressive aspect of any taxation system in the world – its utter complexity to the point of Kafkaesque absurdity. And if you think it must be like that, literally a few days ago, the British chancellor announced the abolition of the annual tax return in the United Kingdom.
Can anyone, conservative or progressive, justify the need for self-employed individual to spend 9 percent of his income just to remain a free citizen in good standing or, should he not have the money to spare, to go to school to navigate his way through whichever of the 74,000 pages of the tax code apply to him?
If the tax code were sufficiently sensible that I could do my own taxes (which, as someone who likes money, spreadsheets and math, I’d be very happy to do), I could have paid the Feds double my actual tax bill – and still have been a thousand dollars better off on the money I’d have saved on tax preparation. Relative to the current situation, both I and the country would have been significantly better off.
It is established Constitutional Law (by Supreme Court precedent), basic morality and simple common sense that the government may not place an undue burden on a fundamental right – such as the right to stay out of prison even if one doesn’t have an accounting degree and the right not be forced to expend one’s property on anything other than actual taxes owed.
To quantify the absurdity, here’s a comparison I’ve never seen made before.
In the course of a year, my assets and non-business activities generate nine times as much tax (in the form chiefly of property taxes and sales taxes), as my end-of-year check to the IRS. The cost to me of compliance on that first nine-tenths of my tax burden is zero, while the cost to me of compliance with the other one tenth is about double the amount I actually owe.
You really can’t make it up.
Let me offer these thoughts, then, not as an article, but as an open letter to our government, the IRS and any Constitutional attorneys out there.
To the government, I am notifying you of the undue burden that you are placing on law-abiding citizens whose income, it happens, is deemed by recent legislation to be sufficiently modest that it wishes to subsidize my healthcare: the cost of this undue burden more than cancels out all such subsidies.
To the IRS, I ask this question. What will you do if I save my $2000 in preparation fees, pay you 50% more than I did this year, and I don’t complete those forms? A bonus to me of doing this would be that I don’t have to lie any more. Because we all know that you are forcing me to lie when I sign that paper saying “I declare that I have examined a copy of my electronic individual income tax return and accompanying schedules and statements for the tax year ending December 31, 2014, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, it is true, correct, and complete.”
… The real truth is that, “to the best of my knowledge and belief”, no person who is not trained, certified and engaged in daily work in the business of tax preparation, could possibly expect that he could generate a correct 149 pages of this stuff – regardless of how well he tried. And, moreover, the fact that he cannot is exactly why he can’t be expected to vouch for the work of the accountants whom he’d not have to hire if he did understand what on earth was going on in the first place.
Finally, and most importantly – to any Constitutional attorney: I can’t pay you (see above), but I have a tax return that will make your eyes bleed. Get me in front of a jury or, better yet, the Supreme Court, and let us ask 12 or nine reasonable people if the burden of completing this particular tax return – a requirement I must meet to retain my liberty and my property – is reasonable or not. And if just one of the jury or bench believes that a reasonably educated person could accurately complete my tax return in a reasonable period, I’ll be happily defeated – as long as he shows me how.
Otherwise, use me as a legal guinea pig to pull down this entire rotten structure that turns good people into unwilling law breakers or liars of both, reserving its very worst for those of us on modest means who wish to rise in the spirit of the American Dream, which our government and its agents seem all too willing to crush.
Our tax code is so complex that people our government deems too poor to buy their own health insurance must fork over nearly a tenth of their income just to comply with it. I cannot be the only one.
If I could reasonably compute my own tax – and it’s a matter of common law, surely, that a typical citizen must reasonably be able to meet all impositions of the state by his own means – I’d willingly pay double my current income tax because of all the money I’d save on compliance: I’d save enough to visit my family in England twice in a year; I’d save almost my entire year’s grocery bill; I’d save the cost of the roof over my head for two months.
I can afford my tax bill. I just cannot afford to calculate it. And as you can see from my short list, the complexity of this calculation has a very real impact on my life.
This complexity of our Federal tax system is crushingly regressive; it is impoverishing, and it is morally indefensible.
Simplifying the tax code would be simply the most immediately effective, progressive and moral low-hanging fruit Congress could pick. More importantly, the Constitutional requirement of not attaching undue burdens to our fundamental rights – whose protection, according to our Declaration of Independence, is the very justification of the existence of the state – legally and morally demands it.
Robin Koerner is a political and economic commentator for the Huffington Post, Ben Swann, the Daily Paul, and other sites. He is best known for coining the term “Blue Republican” to refer to liberals and independents who joined the GOP to support Ron Paul’s bid for the presidency in 2012. His article launched the biggest coalition for Ron Paul and a movement that outlived his candidacy, which now focuses on winning supporters for liberty (rather than just arguments), by finding common ground among Americans of various political persuasions. He is also the founder of WatchingAmerica.com, where 300 volunteers translate opinion about the US from all over the world.
Source : KrisAnneHall.com
I want to urge everyone to vote for Ted Cruz in the Primary and for President. He is the only non-establishment Republican in the race. He has the Constitution memorized, he also stands strong for religious freedom, the 2nd amendment, and abolishing the IRS.
Donald Trump is running as a Republican, when all available evidence says he is a liberal. Don’t let America fall under the control of another liberal America!
Vote Ted Cruz!!!
Feb. 22, 2016 10:09am
Dear Donald Trump Fan,
I’m going to tell you the truth, friend.
You say you want the truth. You say you want someone who speaks boldly and brashly and bluntly and “tells it like it is” and so on. According to exit polls in South Carolina, voters who want a president who “tells it like it is” are an essential demographic for Trump, just as they’re an essential demographic for Judge Judy and Dr. Phil. You say you want abrupt and matter-of-fact honesty, and you want it so much, you’ll make a man president for it regardless of whether he defies every principle and value you claim to hold.
Personally, I think you’re lying, and I’m going to test my theory. In fact, I believe I’ve already proven my theory because you’re now offended that I called you a liar. But Trump has called half of the Earth’s population a liar at some point over the past seven months, and you loved every second of it. You said you loved it not out of cruelty or spite, but out of admiration for a man who’s willing to call people liars — even if he’s lying when he does it.
Yet here I am employing the same tactic — accurately, I might add — and you recoil indignantly. Over the course of this campaign season I’ve said many harsh words about you and your leader, all of which I stand by, but you’ve never respected my harsh words, or the harsh words of any Trump critic. Indeed, you insist that our tough criticism of you only vindicates your support of Trump, while Trump’s vulgar and dishonest criticism of everyone else also vindicates your support of Trump. You’re tired of people being critical, but you love Trump because he’s critical. You say you like Trump for his style, but you hate his style when it’s directed at him or you.
You say you like Trump for his style, but you hate his style when it’s directed at him or you.
You say you want someone who’s politically incorrect. You’re so desperate for political incorrectness — a supremely ridiculous reason to vote a guy into the Oval Office, but never mind — that your esteem for him only grows when he belittles the disabled, mocks American prisoners of war, calls women dogs, calls his opponents p*ssies, calls for the assassination of women and children, says he’d like to have sex with his daughter, brags about his adultery, etc.
You’re excited by the most vile statements and most cretinous behavior imaginable — not remotely deterred by any of it, no matter how many times he gloats over infidelity, curses his opponents, and publicly ogles his own children — because, you say, it’s politically incorrect. That is how unfathomably desperate you are for someone to come along and just say what’s on their mind, you claim. You’re so fed up with political correctness that you celebrate political incorrectness without distinguishing between the healthy sort and the “LOL I slept with married women and I’m not sorry” sort. It doesn’t matter if you don’t personally agree, you say, you just respect the hell out of someone who’s willing to shoot straight, even when ”shooting straight” means comparing Ben Carson to a child molester, calling the entire electorate of Iowa stupid, and referring to women as “pieces of ass.”
Trump won South Carolina on the support of Evangelical Christians who were so impressed with his alleged straight talk that they overlooked the fact that he’s a crass, cruel, unrepentant philanderer who says he does not need God’s forgiveness, and who praises Planned Parenthood as “wonderful” and his radically pro-abortion sister as a “phenomenal” candidate for the Supreme Court. That’s how much you pretend to admire bluntness in a man. So much that it overrides literally everything else.
By your logic, then, you should be filled with an immense and irresistible affection for me when I call Donald Trump a crooked, underhanded con artist and you a reckless, ignorant dupe. You should fall madly in love with me when I accuse Donald Trump of being a spoiled, overgrown brat and you of being a cultish groupie enamored with fame. You should well up with pride and salute me as I mentioned that Donald Trump is a stuffed and soiled diaper sagging in the pants of American politics and you’re the poor, pitiful sap trying to elect it president. You don’t have to agree, but man, isn’t it refreshing that I’m willing to tell you what’s on my mind? Shouldn’t you leave a thousand comments under this article praising me for being politically incorrect, willing to attack not only Donald Trump but his blue collar supporters? In fact, if you’re sincere in your alleged regard for the bold and audacious approach, I expect you’ll have launched a nationwide write-in campaign for me by tomorrow morning.
But that’s not how this works, is it? You’ve already melted into a boiling puddle of rage and self-pity, haven’t you? You’re incensed and offended that I could be so “judgmental” and “dismissive” and “critical,” and 100 other qualities you find so orgasmically satisfying when they’re displayed by The Great Trump. You say you want some straight-shooting, honest, politically incorrect tough talk, but that’s simply a lie. If it were true, my inbox would not be filled to capacity with cartoonishly shocked and outraged Trump fans every time I utter a word of criticism in his direction. It shouldn’t matter that my criticisms are sharp and severe; you ought to revere me all the more for it. I thought you were tired of people walking on egg shells?
It turns out you don’t want Donald Trump to walk on egg shells, but you have fortified your own perimeter with a thick layer of egg shells and you expect anyone who comes near it to tip toe with extreme caution. It turns out you want to be coddled and cuddled and pandered to and excused. You’re in favor of whatever Trump says because Trump said it, but when it comes to how people talk about you and him, you expect to be treated like a soft and delicate flower.
You flock eagerly to a flamboyant, authoritarian billionaire fascist, and you feel you ought to be completely insulated from criticism while you do so. Everyone else ought to be subject to relentless and profane invective from an elderly Manhattan real estate heir, but you and he should be above reproach.
Tell it like it is? I’ll tell you like it is: In my life I’ve never encountered a group of people more averse to being told how it is. Of course, you believe you’re entitled to this attitude because you’re “angry.” Your “anger” indulges you with the moral authority to take leave of your reason and your common sense. Your anger, you believe, places you beyond judgment, even as you attempt to drag this country into a future of (more) tyranny and cultism. You believe the rest of us ought to take your supposedly righteous rage into account while you refuse to take anything but your own infatuation with spectacle and celebrity into account. Whatever concerns we raise, including the ones I’m raising now, can be written off in an instant. “WE’RE TIRED OF POLITICS AS USUAL! WE’RE ANGRY!” And that’s supposed to be some kind of rhetorical hall pass, permitting you to do and say what you please unchallenged.
Well let me be the first and perhaps the only to say this out loud, although millions of people share this sentiment quietly: I don’t care about your anger. There’s some more truth for you, friend. There’s some more “tellin’ it like it is.” Two can play at this game, you know. And the only difference is that I’m right.
I couldn’t take your anger seriously even if I wanted to. After all, you say you’re angry that people are too afraid to speak their minds, but, as we’ve established, you don’t really want anyone but Donald Trump to speak his mind.
You say you’re angry about the corruption in Washington, but you support a slimy swindler and fraudster who boasts of his bribery schemes and makes no apologies for shamelessly exploiting political corruption for personal gain.
You say you’re angry about illegal immigration, but you rally around a guy who supported amnesty as recently as 2013, employed illegal immigrants, and donated millions of dollars to open borders politicians like Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and Hillary Clinton.
You say you’re angry about the establishment, but you worship a candidate who said only a few weeks ago that “you got to be a little establishment” in order to get things done, and who admits he “was the establishment” right until he ran for president.
You say you’re angry that Republicans won’t fight, but you hail as a warrior the same guy who says he’ll happily “work with the Democrats,” which probably explains why Sen. Harry Reid praised him and Jimmy Carter called him “malleable.” It is not uncommon for me to hear from Trump fans that they’re angry at “GOPe” Republicans for “cutting deals” and “compromising” in one breath, and in the very next that they want Trump because he’s really good at cutting deals and compromising.
Right down the list, you are blithely embracing every single thing you say you’re so angry about. Trump is the very embodiment of corruption, deception, cowardice, and elitism. He is precisely the sort of man you supposedly detest. Trump is exploiting America’s frustration with men like Trump. Trump is running against Trump. You are voting for Trump because you hate Trump. You are angry at politicians because they act like Trump and make deals like Trump and go to cocktail parties with men like Trump and look down on the little guy like Trump and possess the integrity of Trump, and so you’re solution is to elect Trump. Your anger at Trump leads you to Trump. Perhaps this explains why you’re so worried about politicians who are “controlled by donors,” but you aren’t at all concerned about a politicians who is the very donor you didn’t want controlling the political process. “I’m sick of these donors influencing the government! I have an idea: let’s make one president!”
Trump is the very embodiment of corruption, deception, cowardice, and elitism.
It seems more like schizophrenia than anger. Aside from chronic mental illness, there are only two explanations for a person who avidly supports the continuation of a thing because he’s angry at that thing: either he’s fantastically stupid, or he’s not actually angry at all.
Friend, I should tell you the most popular theory among non-Trump supporters is that you fall into the former category. When we talk to each other in private, almost everyone agrees you’re stupid. Again, you should, by your own words, hold me in the highest esteem for telling you this uncomfortable fact. People think you’re stupid, just as they thought about Barack Obama supporters in 2008.
The parallels between the two groups are indeed profound, as exit polls attest. Once again, people are voting because “they want change,” unconcerned by the fact that the change is ambiguous, non-specific, and, in fact, not really ”change” at all. A lot of people, grasping for an explanation as to how voters might be suckered by the same shtick three times in a row, just chalk it up to stupidity.
By the way, you should doubly love what I’m doing here because it appears very close to apophasis, which is a rhetorical device where the speaker coyly makes an accusation or insult in the context of denying or distancing himself from the unkind remark. “Many people believe my neighbor Jim is a thieving jerk who borrowed my garden hose last July and didn’t return it, but I’m not going to talk about it.” That kind of thing.
It’s a strategy Trump employs all the time, and you always go along with it, like when he called Megyn Kelly a bimbo by saying “I refuse to call Megyn Kelly a bimbo because that would be politically incorrect.” Like clockwork, you insisted that he didn’t call Megyn Kelly a bimbo; he merely brought up the fact that he would call her a bimbo if it weren’t so rude to do so.
Well, in similar fashion, I’m not calling you stupid, I’m just saying that other people call you stupid. You should therefore defend me against any accusation that I’ve called you stupid, just as you would Trump. But the difference is that I’m not being coy here. I really don’t think you’re stupid. I certainly don’t think I’m any smarter than you. I subscribe to the second theory: I don’t believe you’re really all that angry.
Your anger, to whatever extent it exists at all, is surface level. It’s a purely emotional experience, fed by a mob mentality. You’re angry in the way a rioter or looter is angry. Your temper might be flaring and your heart rate jumping and you might be filled with the uncontrollable urge to break a window, but underneath that anger is really something much closer to boredom and apathy. You don’t feel a real, intense, profound, deep and meaningful disgust at the corruption and malfeasance in Washington, because if you did there is simply no way you would support a man like Trump.
Unless, like I said, you’re stupid. But you aren’t stupid, and a non-stupid person, a serious person, who truly, deeply, intensely loathes the current state of affairs, who genuinely desires that his country be revived for the sake of his children, would not be turning to a blustery, boorish reality TV character with a catchphrase and a fake tan for answers.
I’m just telling it like it is here, friend. I’m telling you what’s on my mind. I’m being completely and painfully honest with you. I don’t believe your anger. I think you want a spectacle, not a solution. A celebrity, not a statesman. A circus performer, not a leader. I think you want to be entertained. I think you’re not taking this seriously enough. I think you’re intellectually lazy so you’ve accepted authoritarianism as a stand-in for strength. I think you’re following the trend of the day. I think you’re wrapped up in media hype.
In other words, I think your anger, if it exists, is misplaced. You should be angry at yourself, because if this country falls finally and irrevocably into despotism, it’ll be your fault. You’ll have chosen it. You’ll have elected it and applauded it. That, my friend, is what makes me angry.
And that’s just how it is.
To request Matt for a speaking engagement, email Contact@TheMattWalshBlog.com. For all other comments and death wishes, email MattWalsh@TheMattWalshBlog.com
Source : The Blaze
America at War and Conservative Thinking Americans on Facebook salutes Matt Walsh for this Trumpatoon Truth!!!
I agree with everything Trump SAYS about immigration and Islam and putting political correctness on hold etc…. The problem I have with the man is this : He’s a lifelong #Democrat who just decided to turn #Republican since Obama was elected. Trump voted for Obama, he’ll tell you himself that he was “Obama’s biggest cheerleader”. He’s good friends with Bill and #Hillary #Clinton. He’s one of the largest contributors to the corrupt Clinton Foundation. He has no problem morally with using eminent domain to steal a little old ladies lifetime home to build a parking lot for a casino. The bottom line is that Trump is a spoiler candidate supported by BOTH #Democrats AND #Establishment Republicans, the people we are trying to rid ourselves of!!! A vote for Donald Trump is a vote for #HillaryByProxy !!! WHY would you vote for ANYONE but Ted Cruz??? The one candidate FEARED by Democrats and establishment Republicans!!! Trump is CHEERED by Democrats and establishment Republicans (Even Jimmy Carter) And Ted Cruz is FEARED by these same groups!!! A vote for Trump is a vote for more of the same…..SOS different day. Use your head for more than a hat rack and VOTE TED CRUZ!!!
I don’t think CFP is going to post my comment on their story, so I’m posting it here also. At one time I was a big fan of Canada Free Press, but the blind following of Trump has led me away from their posts.
USE YOUR HEADS PEOPLE!!! The man is a life long #Democrat who says things you want to hear.
But he is supported by EVERYONE we want to throw out of government!!! Does that not tell you something???
This is the story that set me off, found on Canada Free Press which historically has been one of my favorites, but they lost me when they went Trump. Have you ever heard the saying “A Zebra don’t change it’s stripes”??? Well folks the Trumpra has been a Democrat most of his life, and even voted for Obama!!! Do you know why the saying about the zebra and it’s stripes is so popular??? BECAUSE IT’S TRUE!!! THEY DON’T CHANGE!!!
Here is the story (And ones like it) responsible for my ending my subscription to Canada Free Press
A zebra (or Trumpra) just don’t change their stripes. The man was Obama’s BIGGEST CHEERLEADER and EVERY CAREER POLITICIAN BACKS HIM!!! The Democrats back him, the establishment backs him, Jimmy Carter even backs him!!!
Use the sense God gave you, and stop being manipulated by the press (Who ALSO promoted Trump from day 1) and vote for Ted Cruz!!!