Well, you could give him credit for trying his hardest to act like the former Prime Minister of England, Neville Chamberlain.


Mr. President, This Does Not Constitute ‘Standing Up to Putin’

If reports are accurate that the Biden administration “will press Ukraine to formally cede a measure of autonomy to eastern Ukrainian lands now controlled by Russia-backed separatists who rose up against Kyiv in 2014” and declare that Ukraine is not going to join NATO for the next decade, in order to avoid a war with Russia, it will be another terrific example of how I should never give the Biden administration any credit for anything.

In yesterday’s Morning Jolt, I wrote, “let us pause and credit the administration for spending a good portion of yesterday attempting to send a clear message to Vladimir Putin and galvanize U.S. allies in order to deter further Russian aggression against Ukraine.” After a long stretch of the Biden administration seeming to ignore Russia, Biden and his national-security adviser Jake Sullivan publicly said they had communicated to Putin, “things we did not do in 2014 [when Russia invaded Crimea] we are prepared to do now.”

Apparently… nevermind. If the recent report from the AP is accurate, Biden is willing to reward Putin with Ukrainian territory in order to avoid a conflict, ignoring the fact that he’s just set up an incentive system for further aggression.

In yesterday’s Morning Jolt, I also wrote, “for most of Biden’s presidency so far, he and his top officials have talked a good game about standing up to Vladimir Putin and then inched away from any actual conflict.” It looks like old habits die hard.

Joe Biden Discusses His Meeting With Putin — and He Really Shouldn’t Have

Yesterday, Joe Biden held a meeting with Vladamir Putin in which the former tried to convince the latter not to invade Ukraine. For months, the Russians have been building up forces on the border, threatening to move into the Eastern European country as they did with Crimea back in 2014.

Today, we got a little more detail from the President of the United States as he spoke to the press for about two minutes. Biden began his comments by laughing for some reason, after which he launched into his typical tough guy act that absolutely no one buys.

For the love of all that is holy, keep this man in the basement. I mean that seriously and not at all as a compliment to Putin. Biden is uniquely unequipped for this moment. A president needs to be sharp and project strength. Biden projects senility, and when he attempts to sound tough, it just comes off as cringey and forced. The Russians have to be laughing at this performance.

In that sense, letting Biden rant about “serious consequences,” while at the same time giving up the leverage of possibly using force, is dangerous. It would be better to have some mystery afoot about what the US president is going to do. Instead, Biden rushes to rattle his saber about…economic sanctions?

I can assure you if there’s one thing Putin doesn’t care about, it’s economic sanctions. Not only have those been tried in the past to little or no effect, but Putin’s financial hand has only gotten stronger now that the Nordstream 2 pipeline has been greenlit by the Biden administration. If we wanted to put the brakes on Russia’s ambitions, the time to do that was almost a year ago. Now, there is no real chance Germany will go along with holding up the pipeline since they have placed so much of their future energy prospects in its completion.

In summary, there’s a difference between sounding tough and having the credibility to be tough. Biden is a legend in his own mind, but that’s where the tale ends. No one on the world stage actually sees him as an authoritative figure not to be messed with. And when he goes in front of cameras and fumbles around as he did today, it only emboldens our enemies to keep lashing out. Biden actually projects more strength when he’s in hiding than when he speaks. That’s not great, Bob.

‘Ve Haff Vays Of Making You Get Vaxxed.’

As you know, I am vaccinated against Covid, and recently got the booster. I am a middle-aged man with immune system problems, so I judged it important to get vaxxed. I think most people should get vaxxed, but I oppose vaccine mandates. My God, what is being done to the unvaxxed in Europe is terrifying. Take a look:

 

Later in the thread, some respondents say that this does not look like Germany. This is obviously happening somewhere, though. For example:

Continue reading “”

‘Common Good’ is an canard of the left as they try to make tyranny palatable.


BLUF:
Gun control isn’t for the public good. The outcome of gun control policies does nothing to benefit the public. The only people it benefits are those who would use their strength against the rest of us, be they criminals or would-be tyrants.

Don’t bring that “public good” argument here, because what you’re hoping for is the exact opposite of being good for the public.

“The Public Good” And Gun Rights

Opinion writers always seem to think they know better than everyone else on every subject imaginable. As an opinion writer myself, I’m aware I’m talking about myself as well, but there is a difference. I’ve had to make myself knowledgeable about the Second Amendment simply because I cover it so much.

But many opinion writers talk on a wide variety of topics, most of which they only know their side’s talking points on.

However, I recently came across an opinion piece where the author thinks he’s found a “gotcha,” the reason why everything from forgiveness for college loans to gun control can and should be passed. (I’m obviously only going to focus on the gun stuff, but much of this will apply across the board.)

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
As this author has previously pointed out in The Federalist, there is no greater long-term danger to the country than the politicization of the military. For that reason, the military has a culture of not publicly wading into partisan disagreements.

The regrettable direction of the NDU article by the Cyber Center authors creates an unfortunate appearance that this nonpartisan culture may be at risk. These authors have shown little hesitation about wading into partisan thickets. Let us hope that this is an outlier, not a trend.

Military Officers: To Combat ‘Disinformation,’ The Government And Its Big Tech Buddies Should Tell You What To Think

Four military officers who describe themselves as “researchers” at the Army’s highly respected Cyber Institute have published an article that adds to the growing concern about the ongoing politicization of the military. Published by the military’s National Defense University (NDU), their article purports to analyze the dangers of misinformation and disinformation and to advise the Biden administration about how to counter it.

The article’s authors all are military officers and at least two are professors at West Point. They say their article “is written in response to the Capitol insurrection.”

Ironically, the article is itself misinformation. That this misinformation is published by military officers associated with two highly prestigious institutions, the NDU and the Cyber Institute, makes it all the more inappropriate and dangerous.

Continue reading “”

Anthony Fauci and the Creation of the Bio-Security State.

A new populist spirit, represented by Donald Trump, among others, has led to a reshuffling of seemingly settled ideological alliances.

The reshuffling is ongoing.

I know this because I find myself approving of at least parts of “The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health,” the new bestseller book by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

It is odd indeed that I find myself in nodding agreement with an anti-vax, climate warrior named Kennedy, but there you are—or, rather, here we are.

Towards the end of a long and riveting interview with Tucker Carlson about his book, Kennedy reflects on the extraordinary—indeed, “totalitarian” is not too strong a word—government impositions upon individual liberty in the name of battling the COVID pandemic and issues a critical admonition that we forget at our peril.

“We have to love our freedom,” he said, “more than we fear a germ.”

Can we pause for a round of applause?

The risks of COVID to the general population were and are wildly exaggerated.

Everyone knows that now, though not everyone is yet ready to admit it.

‘Safetyism’

But even if the disease was as dangerous as some alarmists at first predicted, Kennedy’s point still stands.

“Even if this was the deadly disease that they say it is,” he told Carlson, “there are worse things than death.”

Indeed, he continued, “We’re lucky that there was a whole generation of Americans in 1776 that said ‘it would be better to die than not have these rights written down.’”

Noting the extraordinary assault on our Constitutional liberties—a phenomenon that has echoes in other democracies around the world—Kennedy asks us to remember the smallpox epidemic that ravaged Washington’s army during the Revolution and the “malaria contagion that culled the Army of Virginia.”

The Founders were well acquainted with “the deadly and disruptive potential of infectious disease epidemics.”

Nevertheless, they included no references to pandemics in the Constitution.

Over the last couple of years, however, “public health” is wheeled out to rationalize “a string of new exceptions to our Constitution. We are given just one rationale to explain everything that is happening: COVID.”

In other words, Kennedy opposes the spirit of “safetyism” that pervades our culture and gives license to the many corporate and government actors who are only too happy to exploit our abhorrence of risk in order to control us.

Kennedy’s book is full of alarming things.

Continue reading “”

Third Worldizing America
Our elites, like the Third World rich, have mastered ignoring—and navigating around—the misery of others in their midst.

In a recent online exchange, the YouTuber Casey Neistat posted his fury after his car was broken into and the contents stolen. Los Angeles, he railed, was turning into a “3rd-world s—hole of a city.”

The multimillionaire actor Seth Rogen chastised Neistat for his anger.

Rogen claimed that a car’s contents were minor things to lose. He added that while living in West Hollywood he had his own car broken into 15 times—but thought little of it.

Online bloggers ridiculed Rogen. No wonder—the actor lives in multimillion-dollar homes in the Los Angeles area, guarded by sophisticated security systems and fencing.

Yet both Neistat and Rogen accurately defined Third Worldization: the utter breakdown of the law and the ability of the rich within such a feudal society to find ways to avoid the violent chaos.

After traveling the last 45 years in the Middle East, southern Europe, Mexico, and Asia Minor, I observed some common characteristics of a so-called Third-World society. And all of them might feel increasingly familiar to contemporary Americans.

Whether in Cairo or Naples, theft was commonplace. Yet property crimes were almost never seriously prosecuted.

In a medieval-type society of two rather than three classes, the rich in walled estates rarely worry that much about thievery. Crime is written off as an intramural problem of the poor, especially when the middle class is in decline or nonexistent.

Violent crime is now soaring in America. But two things are different about America’s new criminality.

One is the virtual impunity of it. Thieves now brazenly swarm a store, ransack, steal, and flee with the content without worry of arrest.

Second, the Left often justifies crime as a sort of righteous payback against a supposedly exploitative system.

So, the architect of the so-called 1619 Project, Nikole Hannah-Jones, preened of the summer 2020 riotous destruction of property: “Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence.”

Third Worldization reflects the asymmetry of law enforcement. Ideology and money, not the law, adjudicate who gets arrested and tried, and who does not.

There were 120 days of continuous looting, arson, and lethal violence in summer 2020. The riots were variously characterized by the burning of courthouses, police precincts, and an iconic church.

And there was also a frightening riot on January 6, where a mob entered the Capitol and damaged federal property.

Among those arrested in the latter Washington, D.C. violence many are often held in solitary confinement or under harsh jail conditions. That one-day riot is currently the subject of a congressional investigation.

Some of those arrested are still, 10 months later, awaiting trial. The convicted are facing long prison sentences.

In contrast, some 14,000 were arrested in the longer and more violent rioting of 2020. Most were released without bail. The majority had their charges dropped. Very few are still being held awaiting capital charges.

A common denominator to recent controversies at the Justice Department, CIA, FBI, and Pentagon is that all these agencies under dubious pretexts have investigated American citizens with little or no justification—after demonizing their targets as “treasonous,” “domestic terrorists,” “white supremacists,” or “racists.”

In the Third World, basic services—power, fuel, transportation, water—are characteristically unreliable: In other words, much like a frequent California brownout.

I’ve been on five flights in my life where it was announced there was not enough fuel to continue to the scheduled destination—requiring either turning around or landing somewhere on the way. One such aborted flight took off from Cairo, another from southern Mexico. The other three were this spring and summer inside the United States.

One of the most memorable scenes that I remember of Ankara, Old Cairo, or Algiers of the early 1970s were legions of beggars and the impoverished sleeping on sidewalks.

But such impoverishment pales in comparison to the encampments of present-day Fresno, Los Angeles, Sacramento, or San Francisco. Tens of thousands live on sidewalks and in open view use them to defecate, urinate, inject drugs, and dispose of refuse.

In the old Third World, extreme wealth and poverty existed in close proximity. It was common to see peasants on horse-drawn wagons a few miles from coastal villas.

But there is now far more contiguous wealth and poverty in Silicon Valley. In Redwood City and East Palo Alto, multiple families cram into tiny bungalows and garages—often a few blocks from tony Atherton.

On the main streets outside of Stanford University and the Google campus, the helot classes sleep in decrepit trailers and buses parked on the streets.

Neistat was right in identifying a pandemic of crime in Los Angeles as Third Worldization.

But so was Rogen, though unknowingly so. The actor played the predictable role of the smug, indifferent Third World rich who master ignoring—and navigating around—the misery of others in their midst.

Comment O’ The Day
I’m not actually sure that a nation of people who own nothing will be as easy to control as the powers that be seem to believe.


Own Nothing and Love It
An unholy alliance of planners, financiers, and leftists wants everyone to live in mass social housing developments.

From the ancient world to modern times, the class of small property owners have constituted the sine qua non of democratic self-government. But today this class is under attack by what Aristotle described as an oligarchia, an unelected power elite that controls the political economy for its own purposes. In contrast, the rise of small holders were critical to the re-emergence and growth of democracy first in the Netherlands, followed by North America, Australia, and much of Europe.

Today the current class of small holders face a threat from two powerful hegemonies, tech and financial interests, and increasingly intrusive bureaucracies. Both favor policies that would force higher population densities, which would likely raise housing costs and lead to lifetime renting for middle income households who would otherwise own their own homes. These forces—one long associated with the right, and the other the left—share a common agenda, though for different reasons.

Financial interests would reap a steady profit stream by creating a “rentership society,” where potential owners are transformed into tenants, guaranteeing the benefits of increasing land values. Today pension funds and Wall Street firms are buying up single family homes, often at prices too high for the average buyer. For their part, the planning clerisy believes that dense urbanism is socially, economically, and environmentally superior; some even favor a return to public housing, which not long ago lost was rejected as a massively failed experiment.

Continue reading “”

Refugees from Communist Countries Are The Canaries In The Coal Mine

What we learn from history is that we do not learn from history.” — Hegel

In the classic movie Alien, the crew of a spaceship accidentally brings a small specimen inside their ship when they land on an uncharted planet. As they resume their voyage, the alien transmogrifies into a bigger and deadlier form and begins to kill the crew one by one. At wit’s end, the few remaining crew members ask their android how to kill it. In a tone of incredulity, the android answers back, “You still don’t know what you’re dealing with, do you?”

People such as myself who have lived in countries controlled by Communist totalitarian regimes are thoroughly acquainted with their characteristics: censorship, divide-and-conquer tactics, fraudulent elections, mutilation of the arts and science, forbidding books, sadistic repressions, absence of comedy, snitching to authorities by friends and family members, constant propaganda, rewriting history books, toppling statues, relentless fanaticism, the rule of law jettisoned, political prisoners, self-censorship, propaganda posing as news, ruining the country’s economy, distorting the meaning of words. We can smell the stench of Communism, the plague of the 20th century, a mile away.

Except we can smell it here. Now.

We are the canaries in the coal mine.

I can give hundreds of instances of the above characteristics being carried out in America, which have been increasing in frequency and intensity. However, most people are unaware of them because the major propaganda outlets (CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The Washington Post, etc.) ignore them and, on the other hand, conservatives are notorious for only preaching to the choir and stubbornly and stupidly not reaching out to the general public because they are so lazy.

Equally affected by the news blackout of the propaganda outlets are the frantic warnings from immigrants from Communist countries. On several other occasions in various conservative outlets, I have expressed my alarm at what is happening and I could repeat myself here. Instead of writing yet another article sounding the alarm that the barbarians are not at the gates, but inside the gates, I will cite other refugees and dissidents if for no other reason that their voices deserve to be heard by more people, contrary to the efforts of the media hivemind to suppress them. Some may object to my merely listing their voices and that it is a long list. Well, the point is that it is a long list. So, you should pay attention.

Continue reading “”

1, Behar has the intellectual capacity of an amoeba.

2, This was already addressed by SCOTUS in Heller. to wit:
Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.
We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First
Amendment protects modern forms of communications,…….
., and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern
forms of search……….., the Second Amendment extends, prima
facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms,
even those that were not in existence at the time of the
founding


Joy Behar: It’s Time To ‘Tweak’ 1st And 2nd Amendments Because Founding Fathers Didn’t Have AR-15s And Twitter

“The View” co-host Joy Behar said Tuesday that the 1st and 2nd Amendments to the U.S. Constitution needed to be “tweaked a little bit” because the Founding Fathers did not have things like AR-15s and Twitter.

Co-host Whoopi Goldberg began the discussion with the news that Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey had stepped down a day earlier and noted that he had been proactive in policing hate speech — namely because Twitter was first to eject former President Donald Trump from its platform.

Continue reading “”

It’s actually quite fun to watch demoncraps fight among themselves


Centrist Dems sink Biden’s nominee for top bank regulator.

Five Democratic senators have told the White House they won’t support Saule Omarova to head the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, effectively killing her nomination for the powerful bank-regulator position.

Why it matters: The defiant opposition from a broad coalition of senators reflects the real policy concerns they had with Omarova, a Cornell University law professor who’s attracted controversy for her academic writings about hemming in big banks.

  • Their opposition also hints at a willingness of some Democratic senators to buck the White House on an important nomination, even if it hands Republicans a political — and symbolic — victory.
  • Republicans have attacked the Kazakh-born scholar in remarkably personal terms, and turned her nomination into a proxy battle over how banks should be regulated.

Driving the news: In phone call on Wednesday, Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), all members of the Senate Banking Committee, told Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) — the panel’s chairman — of their opposition.

  • They’re joined in opposing her by Sens. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.).
  • The five senators’ offices either declined to comment or did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Go deeper: Biden officials also have heard directly from the senators. They’re aware of their deep opposition and know Omarova faces nearly impossible odds for confirmation.

  • Still, they continue to back her publicly.
  • “The White House continues to strongly support her historic nomination,” a White House official told Axios.
  • “Saule Omarova is eminently qualified for this position,” the official said. “She has been treated unfairly since her nomination with unacceptable red-baiting from Republicans like it’s the McCarthy era.”

Omarova tried to salvage her candidacy during a hearing last week, where Republicans savaged her for her previous academic writings about how community banks should be regulated.

  • Her nomination, reflected in an ugly hearing in which Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) questioned whether he should call the native of the former Soviet Union “professor” or “comrade,” became a proxy battle.
  • It split between the banking industry and progressives eager to impose more regulation on it.
  • “The OCC charters, regulates and supervises all national banks and federal savings associations, as well as federal branches and agencies of foreign banks,” it says on its website.

The big picture: Now that the president has stared down progressives by renominating Jerome Powell for another term as chairman of the Federal Reserve, ideological fights between centrists and progressives about economic appointments are going to become more pronounced.

  • Progressives like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) have already indicated they’ll work to oppose Powell.
  • Warren does support another Biden move, elevating Fed governor Lael Brainard to the vice-chair position.
  • With centrists like Tester getting their preferred Fed candidate nominated for a second term, they may feel more emboldened to challenge the White House on lower-level nominations.

Celebrity crap-for-brains on display once more.

Quote O’ The Day
As you look at the insane reaction to the Rittenhouse verdict, it’s important to understand why we’re here and what kind of people we’ve dealing with.
-Jesse Kelly

The Sky is Green Theory.

We’re at a place now in America like no other time in this nation’s history. A very dangerous place. You see, cultures are held up by pillars. Government, religion, sports, education, entertainment, etc..

Our pillars are all rotted with same sickness: Cultural Marxism

The wacko leftist on the street corner you used to mock as you drove by, he now brings you the news. He runs your FBI. He plays in the NBA. He pastors your church.

And because all the pillars believe the same thing, you no longer have a check and balance cultural system. If the government lies, the media should be there to expose it. A huge Hollywood star should expose it. The pillars check each other in a healthy society.

But we don’t have that. And because we don’t have that, they don’t feel the need to shade the truth or manipulate a story. They now can simply invent something out of thin air and they know no other pillar will check them on it.

The Kyle Rittenhouse case red-pilled a few more million:

Half this country believes Kyle Rittenhouse illegally crossed state lines with a weapon and murdered two people. Half of those people think the ones “murdered” were black.

Some will believe anything to get ahead:

Which brings us to the Sky is Green theory. It sounds crazy, but The System could wake up tomorrow and convince half this country that the sky is green.

News program after news program would have “experts” on to discuss the newly green sky. Professors would teach about it. Our entertainers would all have a video up on Instagram about it in short order.

Our brain dead athletes would repeat it. Nike would be running commercials showing a green sky by the end of the week. Every Hollywood movie would have a green sky.

And the shaming would begin. Oh the shaming. Anyone talking about a blue sky would be treated like some deranged conspiracy theorist. Families would divide over it. Facebook would ban you for discussing “blue skies”.

You get the idea. Because there are no longer cultural checks outside of a few people with balls on the Right, we now live in a time when a huge percentage of your countrymen occupy a world of make believe.

I don’t know the solution for this. I genuinely don’t. But I do know we won’t last much longer this way. This nation does not exist in its current form 100 years from now unless this is fixed.

In Eastern Europe under communist rule, ordinary people had only contempt for the dwindling minority of the population who listened to the state propaganda and appeared to believe it. No checks and balances there either.

And how did that end? The communist fantasies grew too divorced from reality, until one glorious day in 1989 the even people who profited from the communist system realized they were being left behind by the West — and communism ended.

Thanksgiving: The Left Desperately Wants to Cancel the Great American Holiday.

I’ll publish a tribute to the pilgrims on Thursday in honor of Thanksgiving, but today, let’s check the polar opposite of the honesty, humility, and gratefulness we should celebrate this week.

Thanksgiving, of course, is a uniquely American holiday celebrating how English settlers and Native Americans overcame cultural and linguistic barriers to share a meal and initiate a worldwide model for tolerance and cooperation. Oversimplified? Maybe, but it’s mainly correct.

And it is surely more accurate than proclaiming Thanksgiving to be about murder, greed, and bigotry.

Yet in a weekend segment for — you guessed it — what MSNBC called “The Thanksgiving history you’ve never heard,” a person called Gyasi Ross shouts from a pre-written, Howard Zinn-influenced screed:

“The truth is that pilgrims did not bring turkey, sweet potato pie or cranberries to Thanksgiving. They could not. They were broke! They were broken! Their hands were out! They were begging! They brought nothing of value. But they got fed! They got schooled! Instead of bringing stuffing and biscuits, those settlers brought genocide and violence. That genocide and violence is still on the menu! And state sponsored violence against Native and black Americans is commonplace!”

I’ve heard this before. It’s not original.

I am sure Ross knows all this information because he — a rapper and storyteller from Seattle — was in the arena 400 years ago for a first-person account.

Ross’ hateful rant reminds us that not only is dangerous revisionist history alive and well in left-wing cable news, but also, no matter the topic, progressives and their media allies will always change the subject back to their favorites: race and hating America’s founding.

The Washington Post, for example, recently informed us, “Just as Native American activists have demanded the removal of Christopher Columbus statues, they have long objected to the popular portrayal of Thanksgiving.”

This crazed essay was written by their traffic reporter, I kid you not!

And yet with 2,500 words, she didn’t tell the paper’s self-loathing readers that Native Americans themselves abhor Thanksgiving or admire political correctness (recall how 9 in 10 weren’t offended by the Washington Redskins’ name before white progressives forced a change two years ago), but rather “Native American activists” are angry about Thanksgiving. Activists, by definition, are regularly irate.

People are free to hate since we do not live in the left’s beloved socialist regimes where they can be jailed for unpopular views.

But the rest of us should not pay attention to whatever cancel culture crusade the banal wokesters are onto this week. They’re brainwashed, deranged, and unhappy. We Americans prefer gratitude in the face of adversity.

Quote O’ The Day:
“One of the great advantages of the totalitarian elites of the twenties and thirties was to turn any statement of fact into a question of motive.”
–Daniel Patrick Moynihan


Journos and Other Libs Can’t Defend Darrell Brooks, So They Attack Andy Ngo.

For the past 15 months, our moral, ethical, and intellectual betters in the press have screamed that Kyle Rittenhouse is a “white supremacist” for shooting three white men who were attacking him. Now those same journos are trying to suppress information about a black supremacist who ran over dozens of people at a Christmas parade in Wisconsin. The journos and other libs can’t use this mass murder for their own political purposes, so they’re blaming Andy Ngo for revealing facts about the killer’s past that they’d rather you didn’t know.

Ngo and a few others confirmed the identity of Darrell Brooks, the Waukesha mass-murderer, almost a full day before the mainstream media got around to it:

Twitter avatar for @MrAndyNgoAndy Ngô 🏳️‍🌈 @MrAndyNgo

That would be this individual from a prior arrest. (He has a very long criminal record.) #Waukesha

Image

Karol Markowicz @karol

Darrell E. Brooks, black male, late 30s is the suspect in custody in Waukesha.

Then Ngo immediately got to work, collecting evidence from Brooks’ social media accounts:

Continue reading “”

Comment O’ The Day
“…what is needed is a change in the behavior of gun owners.”
No, what is needed is a change in the behavior of criminals who commit 90%+ of the non-suicide shootings in the U.S. Law-abiding gun owners are just that, law-abiding. We are not the ones responsible for the cost of “gun violence”.


Miss Bland thinks: ‘Let’s use high taxes to make it harder to exercise a right’.
Taking notes, right?
And I don’t think she remembers that there was a rebellion over depriving rights through high taxes that ended up being a revolution. Of course, modern education seems to be purposefully lacking in U.S. History and Civics


The Second Amendment, Taxes, And Gun Control

Americans may be divided over the necessity and efficacy of gun control, but it is hard for anyone to deny that the healthcare costs for victims of gun violence are substantial.

State and local governments must spend a significant amount of tax dollars for law enforcement, ambulance services, and more, which can cut deeply into the budget and leave less money for other important government services.

When a state or locality proposes a new tax on firearms and ammunition to recoup some of the costs resulting from gun violence, the opposition argues the measure constitutes a violation of the Second Amendment. The question is whether that is true.

Continue reading “”

The Rittenhouse Trial Underscores the Left’s Determination to Eliminate the Natural Right of Self-Defense

The American left’s determination to conduct a media-inspired political trial of Kyle Rittenhouse had as its objective the ultimate disarming of Americans and the elimination of the Second Amendment.  While Kyle Rittenhouse was listed as the defendant, it was the right of self-defense that was on trial.

To what extent does man have a natural or God-given right to self-defense and protection of himself and his property?  This question has been bandied about for thousands of years and that issue, not guns (which are an instrument of self-defense), is at the heart of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The United States is the only nation in the annals of mankind to be established on the basis of a political and social philosophy centered on natural, or God-given, rights.
Among these are self-defense and property.  Property rights are the bedrock of the American political system; without that foundation, there is no freedom.

The Founders held that property rights encompass not just physical property but also one’s life, labor, speech, and livelihood, as individuals own their own lives; therefore, they must own the products of that life which can be traded in free exchange with others.  Further, as there is a natural right of self-preservation, man has the right and duty to defend himself against transgressors, including the state, that would deny, abrogate, or unlawfully seize his property.

Continue reading “”

Tools in the service of tyranny

What do a virus, a Marxist movement, and bans on firearms have in common?  Nothing, superficially.  Delving deeper, they are tools of federal oppression.

An obvious common element of the three tools is the fear they engender: of infectious death, of unchecked rioting and looting, and of gun violence.  These dangers are in fact greatly exaggerated or fabricated altogether.

Stanford economist Paul Romer is credited with first saying, “a crisis is a terrible thing to waste.”  Washington has taken this idea to heart.

In 2019, when no crisis existed, the Washington establishment created the perception of existential threat from COVID that would kill 2.2 million Americans without drastic federal intervention.  In fact, COVID carried a risk for the general, healthy population similar to seasonal flu and was dangerous only to elderly, immuno-compromised individuals with pre-existing conditions.  Biden, Fauci, and the media made it seem as if we all would die if we did not follow Washington’s draconian orders for lockdowns, social distancing, and vaccine mandates.

Fauci commanded Americans to put aside concerns about “personal liberties” for the greater public welfare.  We had to accept federal suppression of constitutionally guaranteed rights such as free speech, religious liberty, right to assemble, and even right to work to defeat the “common enemy.”

The “swamp” used fear of COVID as a tool to impose pseudo-martial law.

Biden COVID mandates exceeded federal authority.  They are unconstitutional, as the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals recently reminded Washington.  Public health measures are state, not federal, responsibility.

BLM (Black Lives Matter) is a proudly Marxist, domestic organization hiding behind the obvious slogan that the lives of black people matter — just as the lives of all people matter.  Yet the Biden administration has tolerated the violencearsonlooting, and even murder by armed BLM agitators in all-black garb and ski mask anonymity.

Washington and Biden’s DoJ tacitly condone BLM’s domestic terrorism for one reason: it promotes an atmosphere of fear and insecurity.  This led to cries to the federal government: do something, anything!  In response, they changed or suspended rules, laws, and constitutional rights using violence in the name of social justice as an excuse.  Washington encouraged defunding local police departments while offering federal “policing” for local communities.

Washington’s tolerance and covert encouragement of BLM is another way to justify extending federal power and reach.

When the Bill of Rights was written, there was no real difference in military power of a state militia compared to the Continental Army.  They both had muskets, handguns, bayonets, horses, and even cannon.  The Second Amendment does not use words such as “may” or “should” or “cannot.”  It reads “shall not [italics added] be infringed” — a simple, unambiguous, and unarguable command.

The Founders wanted private citizens to have the military capability to resist central government attempts to reimpose tyranny on its citizens.  Thus, after free speech and religious independence, the next most important “right” was to keep and bear (use) firearms, in armed defense, if necessary, of personal liberty and American freedom.

This is why Democrats seek to circumvent the Second Amendment and take away guns from private citizens.  Gun bans are another tactic of federal oppression.

In progressive hands, COVID, BLM, anti-gun laws, and many others are tools in the service of tyranny…if we allow it.

I think El Presidente better learn to live with disappointment.


Mexican President Threatens U.S. Congressmen to Support Amnesty for 11 Million Migrants

Mexico’s President issued a veiled threat to Republican congressmen who oppose an immigration deal to grant amnesty to 11 million migrants who illegally entered the U.S. Politicians who oppose the forthcoming plan will be singled out and denounced during daily press briefings, he said.

During a morning press briefing this week, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador praised President Joe Biden, claiming no other U.S. counterpart had made a commitment to address 11 million illegal immigrants.

“He had committed to 11 million, to regularize the situation for 11 million immigrants,” Lopez Obrador said toward the end of the conference, adding the plan did not rest on Biden alone and he needed support on Capitol Hill.

“It depends on the Congress–it depends on this initiative being backed up and supported by the Congress,” he said. “By legislators from the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.”

Lopez Obrador said he hoped for unified support of the future initiative, but opponents would be directly attacked.

“We will make it known from here, that one party–their legislators–did not help something that is fair and humanitarian,” Lopez Obrador said.

The Mexican leader said that he would not accept a negative result and opponents would be made famous in his morning conferences.

When Looking at Treasury Nominee Saule Omarova, Do Not Forget Elizabeth Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

One thing CTH does is to look at proposed leftist advancements through the prism of previously blocked moves.  The Joe Biden nomination of avowed communist Saule Omarova to the Treasury Department Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) should be considered in a similar perspective.

There’s a couple of different issues surfacing in the Omarova nomination.  Obviously, she is aligned with the view that controlling money is another way to control the behavior of businesses and people; Omarova’s previous statements {Go Deep} about intentionally bankrupting oil and gas companies is indicative of the former – and the most recent statements are aligned with the latter.  WATCH:

Obviously, Saule Omarova is interested in the concept of an all controlling central bank that would eliminate the need for private banking interests.  As she states, “There will be no more private bank deposit accounts, and all of the deposit accounts will be held directly at the fed.”  The basic premise is that all employers would funnel their payrolls into a centralized federal depository, where they would be then be taxed and re-distributed, electronically, to the workers.

One central bank, owned and operated by the federal government, would replace all the purposes within the private banking system.  Given her upbringing in the former Soviet Union, and considering her education at the University of Moscow, perhaps this outlook shouldn’t be surprising.   However, her nomination alone should be viewed as astonishing.

♦ Big Picture – The COVID Passport concept, now currently deployed in Europe and Australia, then becomes the vector for entry into a digital identification process.  At the end of that digital ID process is a centralized database, which, not coincidentally, directly aligns with the capability of the U.S. federal government to trigger what Omarova is advocating in that video – a centralized system to control all financial deposits and transactions through the digital ID previously created.

It doesn’t take a deep thinker to see how the federal government would eventually respond to having that much power over the financial accounts of Americans.  Cue the visual reference:

Now, pause for a minute before you call me crazy… [although in my defense, CTH has been outlining the goals and aspirations of the specific Chicago headquartered communist ideologues for almost 15 years, while most allies on Team Freedom said we were crazy]…  and consider: ‘through the prism of previously blocked moves’;  because there’s a reference here most are likely to miss.

Continue reading “”