Category: Enemies Domestic

Two Minutes Hate: Biden Rails Against His Fellow Americans in Dark, Threatening Prime-Time Speech

Joe Biden harangued and threatened the nation for 20 minutes on national TV on Thursday in a speech that will be remembered for its vicious rhetoric and blood-red lighting.

In the highly partisan speech, Biden railed against MAGA America like there was no tomorrow—he used the words “MAGA Republicans” 11 times in the first 12 minutes. Some of the most-used words in the speech were: violence, darkness, threat, and politics. The most-used word was “democracy,” the Marxist-leaning crowd’s favorite term of derision for our republic.

But that’s all Joe Biden’s got right now. By nearly every metric, America is worse off than it was during the Trump years, so Biden can only resort to fearmongering and demagoguery.

For most politicians, Independence Hall in Philadelphia would be the perfect backdrop for a patriotic speech. But Biden’s handlers apparently thought it would be better to stage the boss’s dark rhetoric with blood-red lighting and shadowy Marines standing at attention, suggesting a cross between the 6th circle of Hell and a Fidel Castro rally.

 

Even with the pink-washing, the speech was a bridge too far for CNN’s Brianna Keilar:

 

NCLA Suit Uncovers Army of Federal Bureaucrats Coercing Social-Media Companies to Censor Speech

Washington, DC (September 1, 2022) – The New Civil Liberties Alliance, the Attorney General of Missouri, and the Attorney General of Louisiana, have filed a lawsuit that blows the lid off a sprawling federal censorship regime that will shock the conscience of Americans. The joint statement on discovery disputes in the lawsuit, State of Missouri ex rel. Schmitt, et al. v. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., et al., reveals scores of federal officials across at least eleven federal agencies have secretly communicated with social-media platforms to censor and suppress private speech federal officials disfavor. This unlawful enterprise has been wildly successful.

Under the First Amendment, the federal government may not police private speech nor pick winners and losers in the marketplace of ideas. But that is precisely what the government has done—and is still doing—on a massive scale not previously divulged. Multiple agencies’ communications demonstrate that the federal government has exerted tremendous pressure on social-media companies—pressure to which companies have repeatedly bowed.

Discovery has unveiled an army of federal censorship bureaucrats, including officials arrayed at the White House, HHS, DHS, CISA, the CDC, NIAID, the Office of the Surgeon General, the Census Bureau, the FDA, the FBI, the State Department, the Treasury Department, and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. Communications show these federal officials are fully aware that the pressure they exert is an effective and necessary way to induce social-media platforms to increase censorship. The head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency even griped about the need to overcome social-media companies’ “hesitation” to work with the government.

These actions have precipitated an unprecedented rise in censorship and suppression of free speech—including core political speech—on social-media platforms. Many viewpoints and speakers have been unlawfully and unconstitutionally silenced or suppressed in the modern public square. This unlawful government interference violates the fundamental right of free speech for all Americans, whether or not they are on social media. More discovery is needed to uncover the full extent of this regime—i.e., the identities of other White House and agency officials involved and the nature and content of their communications with social-media companies.

The government has been uncooperative and has resisted complying with the discovery order every step of the way—especially with regard to Anthony Fauci’s communications. Defendants claim, for example, that White House communications are privileged, even though such privilege does not apply to external communications. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana should overrule the government defendants’ objections and order them to supply this highly relevant, responsive, and probative information immediately.

NCLA released the following statements:

“If there was ever any doubt the federal government was behind censorship of Americans who dared to dissent from official Covid messaging, that doubt has been erased. The shocking extent of the government’s involvement in silencing Americans, through coercing social-media companies, has now been revealed. These bureaucrats continue to resist efforts to expose the degree of their unconstitutional actions every step of the way.”
— Jenin Younes, Litigation Counsel, NCLA

 “The incredible extent of government interference with the speech rights of Americans must be seen to be believed. Yet, even with all that this case has revealed, the government defendants are still resisting their obligation to disclose the names of all the public servants who were involved in this unlawful scheme.”
— John J. Vecchione, Senior Litigation Counsel, NCLA

 For more information visit the case page here.

 

I will reiterate:
The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life liberty and property to free speech a free press freedom of worship and assembly and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote they depend on the outcome of no elections.
― Robert H. Jackson

A New Kind of Threat to 2nd Amendment & Free Speech Rights

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- In the wake of another Supreme Court ruling that strengthens and more clearly defines Second Amendment protections, anti-gun politicians have developed another way to threaten those rights, and rights protected by the First Amendment all in an effort to silence gun owners and penalize them for fighting back.

In California, where such strategies are typically developed and then spread across the map, this plan of attack is already in progress.

A federal court case known as Junior Sports Magazines, Inc. et.al. v. Bonta cuts to the heart of the problem. Several plaintiffs, including gun rights organizations, are challenging changes in state law created by the passage of Assembly Bill 2571, which makes it unlawful for any firearm industry members to advertise, market, or arrange for placement of an advertising or marketing communication concerning any firearm-related product in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors. The plaintiffs are asking for a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the law.

The second prong of this anti-gun strategy is legislation enacted to thwart such challenges by financially penalizing anyone, including an attorney or an entire law firm if they seek declaratory or injunctive relief from any firearms-related California state statute or local ordinance or even a rule or regulation by making them liable to pay attorney’s fees and costs of the prevailing party. Simply put, anybody seeking to enjoin a California gun restriction faces the prospect of liability for the state’s attorneys’ fees if the plaintiff does not win on all aspects of the case, even if their case prevails on the merits, settles a claim without a waiver or voluntarily dismisses any portion of the case for any reason.

In essence, California politicians are effectively silencing debate on issues directly affecting rights secured by the Second Amendment by legislating against those who would challenge their laws.

What began as an attack on one constitutional right has now become an attack on another right, yet civil libertarians are silent.

Democrats led by Gov. Gavin Newsom are saying, “You have freedom of speech only if you agree with us.” That is not how the Founders perceived this country, and it is why they included the First Amendment in our Bill of Rights.

If this were about any issue other than guns, the media would be going crazy. Where are the editorials in the New York Times and Washington Post? Why aren’t there reports about this in every newspaper? Are stories being spiked, or is the situation simply being ignored?

One might expect this sort of censorship in Putin’s Russia, but it is here, now in Joe Biden’s America. When anti-rights fanatics take their fight to this level, it’s really an attack on all Americans, not just 100 million gun owners.

Today, they’re coming after gun rights. Tomorrow, perhaps they’ll be coming after a right you cherish or your right to protest, publish or provide an alternate viewpoint.

That’s not the country where our parents and grandparents grew up, and it shouldn’t be the country our children and grandchildren are forced to accept.

With RINO-Republicans Like Ohio’s Matt Dolan, Who Needs Democrats?

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Ohio GOP lawmaker introduces gun safety bill; includes red flag law, enhanced background checks,” ABC affiliate News 5 Cleveland video reports. “Cleveland-area state Sen. Matt Dolan proposed bill with mental health in mind.”

That this obvious advocacy piece masked as news relies on assumptions right out of the starting gate is evidenced by repeating the term “gun safety” in the headline, the lede, the body of the “report,” and twice in the crusading reporter’s embedded self-publicizing tweet (embedded below). And curiously, since “red flag” laws are also promoted, you’d think the term “due process” would appear at least once in an unbiased report?

You’d think.

Also of note, no real opposing viewpoints are presented. The single gun owner quoted who appears marginally uncomfortable with what he’s being told isn’t totally against the idea; he just isn’t sure what it would actually do. He said that “most gun owners don’t want to cause issues.”

I suppose asking someone from Buckeye Firearms Association what they thought about it would be too much of an investigative reporting stretch. Besides, they’d probably just throw a wrench in the predetermined narrative and give the video editor much more work to futz around with context. And that’s assuming anyone at WEWS even bothered to look for “Ohio gun rights groups” to see what might turn up first on Google.

For his part, that Republican Matt Dolan is following a time-worn gun-grabber script could not be more apparent, especially when he declares, “[The bill] protects the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while also…”

Grabbers always sound that way when they feign “I support the Second Amendment” right before showing everyone their big “but.” Remembering that it ends in “shall not be infringed,” what other tyrannical usurpations besides disarming citizens who have not been convicted, let alone even charged, does Dolan intend to “protect” us with?

“If someone aged 18 to 21 wants to buy a gun, they would only be able to buy a rifle or shotgun that holds only a single round of ammunition if they buy the gun by themselves,” the report notes. So evidently double-barrel Fudd guns are out.

Why would he invent such a ludicrous Constitutionally and historically unsupportable and offensive restriction?

Continue reading “”

Attorney General Merrick Garland Threatens DOJ Employees About Contacting Congress – In the Current Environment He Appears to be Breaking the Law

According to attorney Mike Davis, Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland just ordered that no members of the DOJ can contact Congress. That’s against the law.

In a Twitter thread this evening, attorney Mike Davis shared that AG Merrick Garland ordered all members of his corrupt DOJ to not contact Congress.

Image

 

Biden Is the Semi-Fascist He Is Looking For

JOE BIDEN IS THE FASCIST IN THE WHITE HOUSE

Biden and his administration are framing out an ideological war which puts Democrats in possession of the “soul of the nation,” and paints conservatives as fascists, bigots and any other insult they can come up with. The goal is to try to seize the moral high ground, only they are doing it on behalf of butchers disguised as doctors, groomers disguised as academics, and racists disguised as equity professionals.

When Biden spoke to Democrats last week and proclaimed that conservatives and Trump supporters are semi-fascist, his handlers knew exactly what they were doing. When Biden was asked what he meant with the comment, he said “you know exactly what I mean,” leaving explanations to flow from the podium in the White House briefing room.

“We have seen MAGA republicans take away our rights, make threats of violence, including this weekend,” Karine Jean-Pierre said when asked about Louisiana Senator Lindsey Graham’s caution against prosecuting former President Donald Trump, “and that is what the president was referring to when you all asked me last week about the ‘semi-fascism’ comment.”

Congress is held by Democrats, the White House has a Democrat in the Oval Office. The approval rating for the president and his administration is trash. Yet somehow, they continuously blame the opposition party for their own failures. Democrats could not, in 50 years, pass a bill federally legalizing abortion. In recent years, their efforts to obstruct states from enacting their own voting laws were met with realizations that Delaware, Biden’s home state, as well as bastion of liberal thought New York, each have voting laws more “restrictive” than Georgia and Texas.

Using the term “fascist” is a language game designed to paint the opposition as something they are not, and obfuscate the fact that it has been Democrats in power that have repeatedly and consistently limited the rights of Americans. Charlie Kirk rightfully noted that Joe Biden is a fascist.

Continue reading “”

A New Kind of Threat to 2nd Amendment & Free Speech Rights

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- In the wake of another Supreme Court ruling that strengthens and more clearly defines Second Amendment protections, anti-gun politicians have developed another way to threaten those rights, and rights protected by the First Amendment all in an effort to silence gun owners and penalize them for fighting back.

In California, where such strategies are typically developed and then spread across the map, this plan of attack is already in progress.

A federal court case known as Junior Sports Magazines, Inc. et.al. v. Bonta cuts to the heart of the problem. Several plaintiffs, including gun rights organizations, are challenging changes in state law created by the passage of Assembly Bill 2571, which makes it unlawful for any firearm industry members to advertise, market, or arrange for placement of an advertising or marketing communication concerning any firearm-related product in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors. The plaintiffs are asking for a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the law.

The second prong of this anti-gun strategy is legislation enacted to thwart such challenges by financially penalizing anyone, including an attorney or an entire law firm if they seek declaratory or injunctive relief from any firearms-related California state statute or local ordinance or even a rule or regulation by making them liable to pay attorney’s fees and costs of the prevailing party. Simply put, anybody seeking to enjoin a California gun restriction faces the prospect of liability for the state’s attorneys’ fees if the plaintiff does not win on all aspects of the case, even if their case prevails on the merits, settles a claim without a waiver or voluntarily dismisses any portion of the case for any reason.

In essence, California politicians are effectively silencing debate on issues directly affecting rights secured by the Second Amendment by legislating against those who would challenge their laws.

What began as an attack on one constitutional right has now become an attack on another right, yet civil libertarians are silent.

Democrats led by Gov. Gavin Newsom are saying, “You have freedom of speech only if you agree with us.” That is not how the Founders perceived this country, and it is why they included the First Amendment in our Bill of Rights.

If this were about any issue other than guns, the media would be going crazy. Where are the editorials in the New York Times and Washington Post? Why aren’t there reports about this in every newspaper? Are stories being spiked, or is the situation simply being ignored?

One might expect this sort of censorship in Putin’s Russia, but it is here, now in Joe Biden’s America. When anti-rights fanatics take their fight to this level, it’s really an attack on all Americans, not just 100 million gun owners.

Today, they’re coming after gun rights. Tomorrow, perhaps they’ll be coming after a right you cherish or your right to protest, publish or provide an alternate viewpoint.

That’s not the country where our parents and grandparents grew up, and it shouldn’t be the country our children and grandchildren are forced to accept.

‘own goal’

Andy Ngo Reports: Portland Street Mob Shoots at Elderly Driver, Accidentally Kills One of Their Own

In addition to the elderly man who appeared to be shot, two participants of the takeover were also injured by gunfire, leading to the death of 20-year-old Cameron Taylor.

Shocking video has emerged on social media showing scenes of deadly and fiery chaos at lawless street occupations in Portland, Ore. over the weekend.
At one of the street racing takeovers on Sunday night near the Expo Center attended by hundreds, an elderly man in a van appeared to be caught in the road before being violently attacked by an armed mob. Video posted on social media shows that as he desperately attempted to reverse and drive away while being attacked, he backed into a car.

A man in the crowd then fires at least 18 rounds at his fleeing van. A follow-up video shows the crowd catching up with the elderly man who had stopped on a patch of grass. He appeared to be in shock and was bleeding heavily.

“There were hundreds of people and cars in the area participating in an apparent illegal street takeover event, making it difficult for officers to respond and investigate the shooting,” Portland Police said in a press statement announcing that no arrests were made.

Continue reading “”

IT ALWAYS GOES BACK TO MARX, SOMEHOW…

Leftists will get impatient or roll their eyes when they hear someone like Jordan Peterson describe postmodernist “critical theory,” critical race theory, or any aspect of identity politics (especially the phenomenon of “gender fluidity”) as “cultural Marxism.”  And yet. . .

Michael Anton drew my attention to a passage in the transcript of Leo Strauss’s seminar on Marx that he taught at the University of Chicago in 1960 (emphasis added):

Partly basing himself on Adam Smith, Marx makes this suggestion: the inequality of capacities which is empirically undeniable is the effect rather than the cause of the division of labor. So the inequality of capacities, in other words, is a social product, not a natural datum. Great inequality of capacities is certainly the effect of the division of labor. The division of labor in its turn leads rather to the impoverishment of the activities of the individual. 

All this would seem to lead to the conclusion that with the abolition of the division of labor, eventually there will be equality of capacities. But does not the inequality have natural roots? 

Yet what is the historical process except the conquest of nature, and therefore also to some extent of human nature? But to what extent is the historical process a conquest of human nature and therefore a conquest also of natural inequality? Marx is unable to give a principle here, and that is a revenge for his contempt about the question of the essence of man; because if the essence of man remains so wholly indeterminate, how can you then have any principle here?

Comment: this preceding paragraph expresses exactly the premises behind Kamala Harris’s seemingly incoherent recent statement that demonstrates the Marxist roots of her thought: “So equity, as a concept, says: Recognize that everyone has the same capacity, but in order for them to have equal opportunity to reach that capacity, we must pay attention to this issue of equity if we are to expect and allow people to compete on equal footing.”

To continue with Strauss:

Let us read the clearest passage of Marx on the natural root of the division of labor: “With the development of property the division of labor develops. The division of labor was originally nothing except the division of labor in the sexual act.” Period.

In other words—that is of course an absolutely fantastic assertion, because if you want to be realistic you would have to say that this division of labor is not limited to the sexual act; it has to do with procreation as a whole. You know that men do not become pregnant but women do. 

But this wholly unreasonable limitation to the sexual act instead of taking the whole, procreation, is characteristic of the whole procedure.

 Now if you think this through, what is the conclusion? If the division of labor is rooted ultimately in the bisexuality of man—that is the primary form—and the division of labor is to be overcome, let’s get rid of the bisexuality. Yet don’t laugh. I mean, it is silly but it is a very serious problem, and there is of course—and you know, I’m not speaking of Mr. or Mrs. Jorgensen* in particular [laughter], but I’m concerned with the—people have given some thought throughout the ages to the question of producing human beings in test tubes. You know, the homunculus problem.

Well, that is a practically absurd suggestion; that is clear. But we are concerned now—what is the principle which allows us to say that is absurd and not merely some vague knowledge of what we can do and cannot do?

* NB, from the footnotes: “Christine Jorgenson underwent sex-reassignment surgery in 1951. Jorgenson, previously known as George William Jorgenson, Jr., became a celebrity after a front-page story in the (New York) Daily News in December 1952 told her story (“Ex-GI Becomes Blonde Beauty”).

On other words, Strauss more than 60 years ago anticipates one way in which the wholesale madness of Marxism would go retail in our time, and why sooner or later it had to express itself through direct hostility toward the essentially differences between men and women.

The “Great Reset”: A Blueprint for Destroying Freedom, Innovation, and Prosperity

  • Notice that no nation has managed merely to print money and tax its citizens on the path to prosperity. Real wealth cannot simply be conjured from thin air. There must be recognized value in what a nation and its citizens possess.
  • More than any other source for national wealth, however, one towers above the rest: innovation. The ability of the human mind to create something new and valuable provides society with endless wealth creation…. Innovation is the magic sauce for generating wealth.
  • Humans struggling merely to survive in the world do not waste time, labor, or resources on projects that offer no prospect for future reward. Humans working as servants to the state under centrally controlled economies have no incentive to innovate. Only when private ownership and personal liberty combine can human innovation flourish. Freedom is the secret ingredient to innovation’s magic sauce for increasing wealth.
  • A country whose institutions do not respect property rights or whose customs do not value freedom will remain a barren desert for human innovation. In this way, nations have a great incentive to liberalize over time. Should they not, they quickly become financially and militarily vulnerable to more innovative and wealthier nations. Observing this simple truth, classical liberals have always understood free markets as the gateway to human emancipation. Economic self-interest, in other words, ultimately leads to expansive human rights and liberties across the planet.
  • Nothing about Western politicians’ embrace of the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” or “Build Back Better” paradigms protects property rights or liberty in the slightest. The WEF’s agenda promotes radically anti-liberal programs… [that] will smother human innovation by first depriving Westerners of their freedoms.
  • Wealthy free nations are a threat to the WEF’s New World Order. If censorship must be embraced to control the “narrative,” then so be it. If citizens must be denied freedom of movement under the guise of a “health emergency,” no big deal. If private bank accounts must be seized to intimidate protesters, then such threats are the price for ensuring compliance. In this way, the WEF’s plans for a controlled economy intentionally reverse centuries of liberal progress. Political leaders today are dragging the West into the past.
  • First, individual liberties will continue disappearing. Then, the greatest economic engine of all, innovation, will dry up. Finally, wealth will return solely to the hands of a small “ruling class” minority. This is the future the World Economic Forum hails as “progress.” It is not. It is a recipe for human bondage.
Pictured: WEF founder and executive chairman Klaus Schwab in Davos on May 23, 2022. (Photo by Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)

(It’s nice when they provide a picture for positive ID

Continue reading “”

Joe Biden, How Dare You Compare Me To Hitler.

President Joe Biden lashed out at Republicans who have embraced the MAGA philosophy saying they’re semi-fascists.

I don’t think Biden understands what MAGA means. It’s all about putting America first and making the US the most powerful nation on Earth, both economically and militarily. Some examples include taking control of our southern border, making America energy independent, and building our military so we can take out ISIS or any other threat. It also means reducing business regulations so companies are free to run their enterprises without government interference. The result is American companies that are more competitive internationally and at home, generating more income (more tax dollars) and more jobs.

According to Webster, the definition of Fascists “a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascists) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.” 

MAGA pushes personal freedom and keeps the government out of the lives of Americans. That’s the opposite of Fascism.

One does not have to be a Trump supporter to call for making America great again. Other famous users of the phrase include Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton. I wouldn’t call any of them a Fascist (semi or regular).

Biden’s misunderstanding of MAGA isn’t what angers me. It’s his inappropriate use of Fascist (semi-fascist). If you asked 100 Americans to name a Fascist, I suspect that 90-95 of them would answer either the Nazis or Adolf Hitler.

As someone who believes in the MAGA objectives no matter which candidate I support, my anger comes from the fact that I am a Jew with family who suffered through the Holocaust. Those and other references to Hitler and the Holocaust Biden made cheapen the memory of the actual horrors that millions of people suffered through.

It used to be a basic rule of American politics. Never use the Holocaust or any related terms, such as Fascist, Nazis, or Hitler, for political warfare. The Holocaust is a singular event in world history, not just because of its scale and inhuman horror. There have been, and sadly will be, other genocides of other groups. And there have even been other atrocities against the Jewish people. But generally, genocide is waged to suppress a group, keep them out of a country’s politics,  take their land, or some other economic reason. The Holocaust was different– the Jews were targeted by Hitler, and the Fascist  Nazis had no desire to take over the country’s land and held relatively little power–they were just hated. The Nazis took Jews from all over Europe and killed them.

Continue reading “”

Biden Tries Again to Legalize Illegal Aliens Without Congressional Authorization

The Department of Homeland Security has finalized a rule that would grant legal status to 600,000 children of illegal aliens. The new directive would formalize the rule adapted in 2012 during the Obama administration and transform it into federal regulation. It would prevent deportations and grant work permits to those who came to the United States as children.

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) has been in legal limbo ever since a Texas judge ruled that the program was illegal in the early months of the Biden administration. The new rule going into effect October 31 would codify most of the eligibility rules: applicants must prove they arrived in the U.S. by age 16 and before June 2007, studied in a U.S. school or served in the military, and lack any serious criminal record.

The Texas case is likely to end up in the Supreme Court, where justices already ruled against Donald Trump’s bid to end the program, largely because of a technicality. But this case is based on far narrower Constitutional grounds; only Congress can declare large swaths of illegal aliens as legal. And that argument has a good chance of winning in the high court as it’s currently constituted.

CBS News:

Congress has long been unable to reach any kind of immigration deal that would garner enough bipartisan support to pass the Senate. Last year, the Senate parliamentarian rejected multiple efforts by Democrats to include immigration changes in their party-line social spending bill. And Republican leaders have expressed little interest in Democrats’ attempts at overhauling immigration policy.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who has long pushed for a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, was quick to applaud the Department of Homeland Security’s issuing the rule. He noted that it provides “some stability to DACA recipients and make[s] it more difficult for a future administration to rescind DACA, which is a lawful exercise of prosecutorial discretion.”

The rule would only apply to DACA renewal requests as the government is blocked from approving any new applications. But the radical immigration advocates want Biden to go long and go big.

Politico:

But some immigrant advocates expressed frustration that the Biden administration did not go further in its final rule, opting to keep the same criteria from when the program was created in 2012.

“This final DACA rule fails to strengthen the program by not expanding it to include the majority of undocumented immigrant youth who are graduating from high school this year and not eligible for the program because of arbitrary cut-off dates,” said Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, deputy director of federal advocacy for United We Dream.

“While Congress must pass permanent protections for all, President Biden cannot hide behind the courts or Congress. He can take bold action now,” she added.

The rule is still going to face challenges in court, so Biden isn’t hiding very well. He can’t. Congress has the authority to end this argument. But even those Republicans — like Donald Trump — who support DACA in one form or another realize what a loaded political issue it is and will never risk voting for it.

Most people agree that young children should not suffer from their parent’s immigration crimes. But a blanket amnesty would be uncalled for and would be hard to do anyway.

BLUF
Doesn’t it tell us all we need to know about “commonsense gun safety laws” that Giffords, and indeed, all the citizen disarmament groups and the politicians they endorse, align themselves with someone who publicly advocates for the military, by force, to rid the Republic of their ideological opponents, but needs their guns first to do it?

Connected Insiders Domestic Enemies Signal Contempt and Lethal Intent for ‘Traditional Americans’

Retired General Michael Hayden

Consummate government insider Michael Hayden has big plans for you. The only thing standing in his way is an armed citizenry.

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “I’ve covered extremism and violent ideologies around the world over my career,” English journalist and the Financial Times chief US commentator Edward Luce tweeted. “Have never come across a political force more nihilistic, dangerous & contemptible than today’s Republicans. Nothing close.”

It’s typical of a snotty attitude by “progressive” Brits, simultaneously enjoying while subverting the freedoms this country still (partially) recognizes. And they can always count on Americans of all political stripes to sacrifice themselves to foreign entanglements if the UK succeeds in poking the Russian bear overmuch or finding too late the “refugees” it took in have their own ways of doing things. That his father is a titled insider who “served” as Lord Chamberlain to the Queen recalls both Thomas Paine’s observation on hereditary qualifications and one of the more popularly resonating Monty Python skits.

Aside from being a “subject of the Queen,” the guy’s a connected insider, through and through. And his sentiment is gaining traction through national media venues, with, case in point, CNN columnist and MSN guest Dean Obeidallah declaring:

“At this point I LITERALLY view people who still support Donald Trump no different than the despicable, vile people who supported Bin Laden after 9/11 … Today’s GOP is no longer a political party, it’s a white nationalist, FASCIST movement that seeks to impose their EXTREME religious beliefs as the law of our land. It must be utterly defeated in order to save our Republic.”

This isn’t about them though. It’s about another guy who’s also a connected insider through and through and who has been for a long time. He’s ostensibly an American of much more importance in higher circles than mere media commentators, and he signaled to the world that he embraces Luce’s characterization of Republicans.

“I agree,” retired Gen. Michael Hayden tweeted. “And I was the CIA Director.”

A general and a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency? Not to mention former National Security Agency director? With four stars, he was the “highest-ranking military intelligence officer in the armed forces.”

Continue reading “”