Category: Enemies Foreign and Domestic

This Was the Most Infuriating Part of Biden’s State of the Union Speech

Well, that was painful.

The word is Joe Biden had to rewrite his State of the Union Dumpster Fire speech because of the Russia/Ukraine conflict, and you could tell. It was an awkward, choppy speech that made me cringe at times.

But, perhaps the worst and most infuriating thing about the speech, aside from the blatant lies about his record, was what was missing.

Joe Biden was so desperate for a 9/11 anniversary photo op that he set an arbitrary date for withdrawing from Afghanistan, without any conditions for the Taliban, causing a disastrous evacuation that resulted thousands of Americans left behind and 13 U.S. service members dead.

Yet, not a single word about the withdrawal. Not a single word to honor those who died because of his incompetence.

“Biden should have paid tribute to the 13 fallen HEROES in Afghanistan that lost their lives,” former Trump press secretary Kayleigh McEnany tweeted.

Afghanistan was mentioned only twice during his speech, each time providing him with the opportunity to discuss the withdrawal and honor those who paid the ultimate price while trying to evacuate civilians at Kabul’s airport.

But he didn’t.

He did, however, mention his late son Beau Biden… because that’s what he does. He did so more than once after his botched withdrawal last year. In fact, the family of fallen Marine Rylee McCollum, who was killed at Kabul airport, said that when they met with Biden “he kept checking his watch and bringing up Beau.”

Joe Biden may not care about those who died because of his incompetence, but America does. He’ll say his son Beau’s name over and over and over, but won’t say the names of those who died because of his recklessness. Well, let’s not forget who they are. Here are their names:

  • Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Darin T. Hoover
  • Marine Corps Sgt. Johanny Rosariopichardo
  • Marine Corps Sgt. Nicole L. Gee
  • Marine Corps Cpl. Hunter Lopez
  • Marine Corps Cpl. Daegan W. Page
  • Marine Corps Cpl. Humberto A. Sanchez
  • Marine Corps Lance Cpl. David L. Espinoza
  • Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Jared M. Schmitz
  • Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Rylee J. McCollum
  • Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Dylan R. Merola
  • Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Kareem M. Nikoui
  • Navy Hospitalman Maxton W. Soviak
  • Army Staff Sgt. Ryan C. Knauss

Biden’s failure to honor these heroes is inexcusable.

Trudeau’s Dictatorial Crackdown on Protesters Is Popular Among One Group of US Voters

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s descent into dictatorship to rein in the Freedom Convoy protest has support from a majority of likely Democratic voters in America.

According to a survey conducted by Trafalgar Group and Convention of States Action, 55 percent of likely voters disapproved of Trudeau’s handling of the demonstration, while 35 percent approved.

When broken down by party affiliation, 65 percent of Democrats backed Trudeau’s heavy-handed response compared to 17 percent who disapproved, while 87 percent of likely Republican voters opposed the prime minister’s crackdown and 8 percent approved.

One hundred percent of young voters, meanwhile, (those 25 to 35-years-old), disapproved of Trudeau’s response.

On Feb. 14, the Canadian prime minister invoked the Emergencies Act to crack down on demonstrators who had been in Ottawa since late last month protesting the country’s vaccine mandates and other Covid-19 restrictions.

The government announced they would freeze bank accounts of those even loosely attached to the protest, while Ontario’s premier threatened to revoke driver’s licenses. Protesters’ pets weren’t even off-limits.

Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland also said the government would be broadening its “Terrorist Financing” rules to include cryptocurrencies and crowdfunding platforms as part of the Act.

The Canadian Parliament voted on Monday night to extend its emergency powers for another 30 days despite the blockade being over.

The survey of 1080 likely general election voters was conducted Feb. 18-20 and was provided exclusively to The Daily Wire.

Yes, I also think such could happen (anything’s possible), but 1, We’re not Canada and 2, I think that if SloJoe, or anyone else for that matter, tried to enact the sort of ’emergency measures’ martial law as Trudeau did in Canada, for anything short of global thermonuclear war, what would result is exactly what TPTB are scared to death of.

BARR: A Canadian-Style ‘Emergency’ Could Easily Happen Here

On Feb. 14, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau gave Canadians a Valentine’s Day present, invoking the draconian “Emergencies Act” and suspending a wide range of civil liberties otherwise enjoyed by his countrymen.
Lest Americans conclude that our constitutional republic is safe from such facially dictatorial actions, they should know that under existing federal laws and the laws of every state, the president or a governor could take similar “emergency” action at any time they decide an “emergency” presents itself. COVID has demonstrated this is spades.
Regardless of whether a real emergency exists prior to a president or governor invoking such powers, and regardless of whether such declaration is for a statutorily limited time, consequential damage to the fabric of a free society results. At a minimum, declaring an “emergency” and suspending individual liberties serves as a “warning” to citizens that they had best be careful what they say and do in the future.
Trudeau’s actions in declaring a “national emergency” because of an irksome, but peaceful, trucker’s strike should cause Americans to pay far closer attention to “emergency powers” laws here at home. Doing so might force some of our countrymen to question the abject fear that has undergirded much of public policy in the United States since the terror attacks of 9/11 — made far worse by the manner in which governments at all levels have responded to the COVID pandemic in the past biennium.
From a practical standpoint, as we see in Canada, it matters little whether the declaration of the “emergency” fits clearly within the four corners of the emergency law that is invoked. What matters is the presence of circumstances in which an elected leader is able to stoke the flames of fear and anger in a sufficiently large segment of the electorate, so that the invocation of the law seems to constitute a reasonable response.
Once an “emergency” law is on the books of the sovereign entity, whether of a state or the federal government, all it takes is a “stroke of the pen, law of the land” (to quote former Bill Clinton adviser Paul Begala) to unleash the awesome powers at that sovereign’s disposal. Just watch the videos emerging from Ottawa to see how quickly the nightmare unfolds once the document is signed.
The actual form of the government declaring the emergency is of little consequence. Abuse of emergency powers can happen in a representative democracy such as ours just as easily as in a Canadian parliamentary system. Moreover, Republicans often are just as likely to play the “emergency powers” card as are their Democrat counterparts. It was, after all, Republican President Donald Trump who, in March 2020, invoked the powers of at least three federal “national emergency” laws to meet a perceived COVID emergency threat.
Granted, many emergency declarations by state and federal officials are focused toward and limited to natural disasters, such as hurricanes or floods, and used primarily to free up government assistance. However,  the actual powers nestled within those laws are frighteningly expansive. For example, a U.S. president arguably could, among other actions upon declaring a “national emergency “ (not expressly defined in federal laws), seize control of the internet pursuant to a 1930s era communications law or freeze individuals’ financial accounts in reliance on 1970s era laws.
At the state level, Second Amendment supporters will recall law enforcement officers in New Orleans seizing, at times forcibly, over 1,000 lawfully owned private firearms in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Even though subsequent legal action undertaken by the NRA and other gun-rights groups successfully challenged the seizures, many firearms never were returned to their owners.
Even today, with medical and scientific evidence clearly demonstrating that lingering COVID hazards are not dire and are manageable, many government agencies, including public schools in jurisdictions across the country, are refusing to hand back all the “emergency” powers they grabbed in early 2020.
Founding Father James Madison had it right when he wrote in Federalist 57 that placing the powers of all three branches of government in the hands of one entity (whether a prime minister, a governor or a president) is “the very definition of tyranny.”
Today, 234 years later, tyranny is still tyranny, even if it is only “temporary.”
Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.

Putin: First Person Spoken Word

If you are only reading commentary about Russian President Putin’s speech of 21 Feb 2022 or watching short clips, you are doing yourself a disservice.

While some reporting is good, there is a lot of spin, narrative shaping, and just plain lazy reporting.

If you want to try to understand if not what is in Putin’s head, but what he wants the Russian people to think is in his head, you need to read and watch the speech yourself.

When someone tells you what they’re thinking, listen to them.

Putin isn’t trying to bring back the Soviet Union, he’s focused on something much deeper and meaningful, the Russian Empire…build back better, as it were.

You can clearly see that he is playing a very long game. Just like he did in Georgia and Crimea last decade. He will take a bite, let the short term outrage burn itself out, let the rest of Europe and the international community regress to the mean, and then take another bite…etc…etc.

As long as this process works, why change it?

If you don’t have time for a full read but want to get a boildown of foundation of the argument for all that follows, here is what got my attention.

Continue reading “”

Western Authoritarianism

The original question was: “What lies at the root of the authoritarianism that seems to be asserting itself in free societies in today’s West?”

Here’s my answer:

The same root that causes irritating busybodies to take over Home Owner Associations. Some people have a lust for power. Government is the ultimate well of power. Author Frank Herbert expressed it well:

“All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible.”

Also:

“When religion and politics travel in the same cart, the riders believe nothing can stand in their way. Their movements become headlong – faster and faster and faster.”

Leftism is itself a religion, complete with an Eden (Earth), an original sin (Capitalism), and a god (government – aka “power over others.”) Another quote I’m fond of by a gentleman by the name of Glenn Wishard:

“The rise and fall of the Marxist ideal is rather neatly contained in the Twentieth Century, and comprises its central political phenomenon. Fascism and democratic defeatism are its sun-dogs.
The common theme is politics as a theology of salvation, with a heroic transformation of the human condition (nothing less) promised to those who will agitate for it.
Political activity becomes the highest human vocation.
The various socialisms are only the most prominent manifestation of this delusion, which our future historian calls “politicism”.
In all its forms, it defines human beings as exclusively political animals, based on characteristics which are largely or entirely beyond human control: ethnicity, nationality, gender, and social class.
It claims universal relevance, and so divides the entire human race into heroes and enemies.
To be on the correct side of this equation is considered full moral justification in and of itself, while no courtesy or concession can be afforded to those on the other.
Therefore, politicism has no conscience whatsoever, no charity, and no mercy.”

When your quest is to drag the rest of the world, kicking and screaming, into your utopia, authoritarianism is the way to get there. Never mind that you’re enabling the most greedy, rapacious and psychopathic to grab the levers of power.

In short, it’s human nature.

When Boring People Turn Dangerous: Canada’s Insane Power Grab

On Christmas Eve, 2018, New York Times writer Andrew Ross Sorkin published, “How Banks Unwittingly Finance Mass Shootings.” Chronicling the credit card history of the man who killed 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida Sorkin noted Omar Mateen had not merely spent $26,532 on weapons and ammo in the eight months before the 2016 attack, but had wondered if his doing so had raised red flags:

Two days before Omar Mateen killed 49 people and wounded 53 more at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, he went on Google and typed “Credit card unusual spending…” His web browsing history chronicled his anxiety: “Credit card reports all three bureaus,” “FBI,” and “Why banks stop your purchases.”

He needn’t have worried. None of the banks, credit-card network operators or payment processors alerted law enforcement officials about the purchases he thought were so suspicious.

Sorkin’s piece ended up being an argument in favor of credit-card companies, payment processors, banks, and others working together to bring about a Minority Report-style panacea in which society’s dangerous folk could be cyber-identified and stopped before they commit horrific acts. At one point he quoted George Brauchler, the District Attorney who prosecuted the Century 16 movie shooter in Aurora Colorado, James Holmes:

“Do I wish someone from law enforcement had been able to go to his door and knock on his door and figure out a way to talk their way into it or to freak him out?” he said of Mr. Holmes. “Yeah, absolutely.”

I’ve never owned a gun and have been sympathetic to gun control ideas for as long as I can remember. Sorkin, however, was not talking about gun control. He was theorizing a quasi-privatized vision of social control that would bypass laws by merging surveillance capitalism and law enforcement.

In a rhetorical trick that’s since become common, he described how the failure of companies like Visa to block Mateen’s purchases made them “enablers of carnage.” Clearly, someone made the mistake of letting Sorkin see Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man, and Cliff Robertson now whispers from the beyond to him too. If those with power to act don’t stop wrongdoing, aren’t they just shirking their great responsibility?

By the way, this same Sorkin once suggested he wouldn’t stop at arresting Edward Snowden, but go after the reporter who broke his story, too. “I would arrest him and now I’d almost arrest Glenn Greenwald, the journalist… he wants to help him get to Ecuador,” he said, on CNBC’s Squawk Box. It’s amazing how selective one can be in one’s authoritarian leanings. After Goldman, Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein appeared to commit perjury in 2011 when he told the Senate, “We didn’t bet against our clients,” Sorkin rushed an apologia into print saying “Mr. Blankfein wasn’t lying,” failing to remind audiences that his Dealbook blog at the Times was sponsored by… Goldman, Sachs.

Sorkin’s Visa piece is suddenly relevant again, after fellow former finance reporter Chrystia Freeland — someone I’ve known since we were both expat journalists in Russia in the nineties — announced last week that her native Canada would be making Sorkin’s vision a reality. Freeland arouses strong feelings among old Russia hands. Before the Yeltsin era collapsed, she had consistent, remarkable access to gangster-oligarchs like Boris Berezovsky, who appeared in her Financial Times articles described as aw-shucks humans just doing their best to make sure “big capital” maintained its “necessary role” in Russia’s political life. “Berezovsky was one of several financiers who came together in a last-ditch attempt to keep the Communists out of the Kremlin” was typical Freeland fare in, say, 1998.

Continue reading “”

The Constitution may impede them, to an extent, but they still are trying.
It takes what Patrick Henry advised:
“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.”

WaPo Writer Actually Declares Individual Freedom ‘a Key Component of White Supremacy’

George Orwell’s “1984” or “Animal Farm”? Nope. Ray Bradbury’s “Fahrenheit 451”? Uh-huh. Some other dystopian novel about life in a future totalitarian America? No way. Straight from the pages of the Washington Post. You know, the “Democracy Dies in Darkness” guys?

More like “Individual Freedom and Liberty Dies in the Darkness of the Radical Left.”

In a WaPo “Made by History” op-ed titled The Ottawa Trucker Convoy Is Rooted in Canada’s Settler Colonial History, Taylor Dysart, a Ph.D. candidate in the department of history and sociology of science at the University of Pennsylvania, awkwardly argues that “one’s entitlement to freedom is a key component of White supremacy.” After carefully dissecting the garble, I was able to get to the root cause.

Before we begin, unlike the 187,594,632 (and counting) articles about the Freedom Convoy, totalitarian Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, or anything else to do with Ottawa, my focus will be on “none of above.” Instead, it will be about the crux of the lunacy of Ms. Dysart and other lunatics who believe as she does, and the unfortunate publishing of said lunacy by a once-proud American institution.

You’re welcome. Now, on with the show.

Continue reading “”

Bought and paid for….as she’s always been.
I wonder if her husband’s name is Hosea?

Psaki Pushes Chinese Propaganda From White House Podium.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Tuesday claimed that the spike in violence against Asians in the United States was due to “hate-filled rhetoric” about the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, a baseless claim that has been promoted by the Chinese Communist Party.

“We’ve seen this rise, unfortunately, because of hate-filled rhetoric and language around the origins of the pandemic,” Psaki said from the briefing room in response to a question on the 339 percent increase in anti-Asian hate crimes since President Joe Biden took office last January.

Psaki is not the first to push the unsubstantiated link between speculation about how the coronavirus emerged in Wuhan, China, and violence toward Asians. Allegations of that unfounded link grew to a fever pitch last spring and were trumpeted during #StopAsianHate rallies across the country. A Wall Street Journal investigation found, however, that the driving force behind the rallying call was a network of fake social media accounts driven by the Chinese government as it pushed to undermine the plausible “lab-leak” theory.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
Fascism is an overused and elastic term that in our politics mostly is used against Republicans for anything liberals don’t like. Donald Trump calling people names on Twitter is not fascism.  Justin Trudeau commanding private businesses unilaterally and without legal consequence to freeze the assets of his political opposition and their supporters is fascism…….

It’s already happening here, though not with the brazenness of Trudeau. The Biden administration gives cover to and encourages every one of the actions listed in the preceding paragraph by declaring political opposition domestic terrorists (even parents at school boards), and by broadly blurring the distinction between political dissent and terrorism. Social media platforms openly are solicited by the Biden administration to crack down on dissent.

The situation here is not yet as dire as in Canada. And I still believe our courts and collective national will would not allow what is happening in Canada to happen here. But I also never thought the government would be empowered as it was, with scant judicial interference, in locking down the country for Covid, or that private citizens would become the government’s enforcers.

When Fascism Comes To America, It Will Look Like Justin Trudeau’s Canada.

If Justin Trudeau had merely removed trucks from blocking a bridge in protest of vaccine mandates, it would be no big deal. Protesters for various causes routinely get removed from blocking traffic.

But that’s not all Justin Trudeau did. He suspended civil liberties in Canada, targeting peaceful protesters and anyone who supports them. Not because those supporters committed a crime, but because they supported the political opposition to Trudeau’s government.

Trudeau ordered all financial institutions to freeze the assets of his political opposition without court order and with full immunity from liability, and no financial asset was spared.

“The names of both individuals and entities as well as crypto wallets have been shared by the RCMP with financial institutions and accounts have been frozen and more accounts will be frozen.”

Trudeau has weaponized and commanded the private sector to do the government’s bidding in crushing political dissent. The Toronto Sun reported (emphasis in original):

Continue reading “”

I can remember when all you needed to do to receive universal condemnation by the American media was to wear a MAGA hat and stand next to an American Indian and a drum circle.

It’s a Good Thing Quintez Brown Wasn’t Wearing a MAGA Hat.

Imagine for a moment that a young man wearing a MAGA hat walked into the campaign headquarters of a mayoral candidate in an American city, pulled out a gun, and started shooting. Imagine that he came so close to assassinating the candidate that a bullet grazed the man’s sweater. And now imagine that the shooter’s bail was set at only $100,000, and a group of white supremacists raised his bail and put him back on the street within a couple of days.

Would that be national news? Would you be able to turn on CNN or MSNBC at any hour of the day without hearing about it? Would it be presented as further evidence of what’s really wrong with America?

Well, forget all that, because when this exact scenario played out in Louisville, KY this week, the shooter was fighting for a cause that’s favored by our moral, ethical, and intellectual betters in the press.

On Monday, a young man named Quintez Brown tried to murder Craig Greenberg, who’s running for mayor of Louisville. Yet Brown is already out on bail, which was raised by… Black Lives Matter.

Continue reading “”

Comment O’ The Day in reference to the previous:

Among the lessons learned: The federal government, and the society around it, is now so mammoth that one literally has to become a famous billionaire to break in from the outside as a regular citizen. And even that is not enough to succeed once in office.

Round Two will have to combine famous billionaire citizens with F-you money at the top, and the US equivalent of the Canadian trucker protest from us at the bottom, simultaneously.

We sent in one man alone, thinking we had a system where that could make a difference. We don’t, it didn’t.

But now we know.

This author also makes a small mistake.
‘pro-government extremists’ should be ‘pro-authoritarian statists’
but whatever.

Our Greatest Domestic Threat: Pro-Government Extremists
Republican leaders should vow to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and commence a clean sweep of the swamp’s pro-government extremists.
By Thaddeus G. McCotter

Though alarming and depressing, we can no longer avoid recognizing that America’s greatest domestic threat is from pro-government extremists.

We rue that pro-government extremists caused immense destruction during their less-than-“peaceful protests” in 2020; and we witness the continuing damage caused by their neurotic, totalitarian response to a plethora of problems, such as the COVID-19 pandemic..

Indeed, what makes the pro-government extremists so dangerous is their far greater numbers than their anti-government extremist counterparts. Their noxious ideology that the citizen is subordinate to the omnipotent state is incessantly “normalized” and propagandized by their corporate media comrades. 

Worse, their pro-government extremism is being indoctrinated throughout American public and private institutions, including K-12 education, higher education, and the military. In fact, pro-government extremists have infiltrated the American government, and are weaponizing the powers of the state to wage war on dissenting citizens’ liberty and livelihoods.
In a nation that constitutionally recognizes and respects an individual citizen’s God-given rights, including free speech and the power to peaceably assemble to petition the government for the redress of grievances, only the infiltration of the Department of Homeland Security by pro-government extremists could explain Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’ February 7 National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin, which included the following “Summary of Terrorism Threat to the U.S. Homeland”:

Continue reading “”

Well, if the left – including demoncraps – didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all. And since they’re noted for vote fraud, which photo IDs make much more difficult to get by with, they’re simply maintaining form.

The left’s double standard on photo IDs

Both the right to vote and the right to keep and bear arms are preserved in the United States Constitution. Few dispute this and no one who has actually read the constitution does.

However, there’s a curious double standard coming from the left when it comes to things like photo IDs.

First, let’s talk about them with regard to voting.

In a number of states, there’s a requirement that voters show a photo ID to prove they’re actually the person registered to vote.

These measures are surprisingly controversial, however.

Why? Because many on the left argue that poorer folks, particularly minorities, have a difficult time obtaining photo IDs. They any number of reasons such as travel difficulties getting to whoever issues IDs, time off from work to get one, and a number of other factors.

Regardless, though, they don’t think you should have to show a photo ID in order to exercise your right vote.

Yet find me the opponents of voter ID requirements who oppose having to show an ID to purchase a firearm. I’d really like to meet those folks. After all, even if I disagree with them, I respect consistency.

Meanwhile, gun rights supporters might be annoyed at having to show an ID to buy a gun, we kind of shrug at it and don’t lose much sleep over the requirement.

But these same people who are so concerned about poor folks not being able to get an ID–despite needing one for a thousand other things and actually being able to provide it for those other things–think nothing of not just photo ID requirements for guns but also adding more and more costs to the equation if you want to actually bear your arms.

In Illinois, a carry permit costs an additional $150 plus a credit card transaction fee. That’s in addition to the fees for the 16-hour training course required.

So that’s two full days sitting in a course in order to exercise your right.

In other states, the challenges are greater. For example, in Nebraska, you don’t just run down to the local state police barracks and get fingerprinted. There are only a handful of places authorized to conduct those kinds of fingerprinting, and they’re spread out.

And training? While it’s only 8 hours, you may have to travel hours just to get to a class.

So in addition to the cost of the permit and the training, you also have lost time from work money spent on gas.

My question is why is all of this acceptable to require before exercising a constitutionally protected right while asking for a simple state-issued ID that they’ll give for free isn’t?

The reason is that none of these people view the Second Amendment as a right. They may pay lip service to the idea that it is, but they don’t really believe it. If they really saw it as a right, they’d treat it like a right and try to remove barriers to exercising it, not erect more of them.

If voting is so important that we should allow anyone to do it based on nothing but their word they are who they say they are, why should we have to jump through so many hoops just to carry a gun?

And I didn’t even get into all the requirements in places that require a permit to purchase a firearm, which is actually worse than carry permit requirements.

Then again, I don’t really expect ideological consistency from the same people who scream about multiculturalism and how important it is to appreciate other cultures while also screaming about cultural appropriation.