“Looks like Pork is back on the menu, boys!”


Senate Narrowly Passes $1.9 Trillion COVID Stimulus Bill

The Senate voted 50-49 to pass Democrats’ $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package on Saturday, after a marathon session of voting on various amendments.

The bill was passed via budget reconciliation rules, which allow a simple majority to approve legislation in place of a filibuster-proof 60-vote threshold. The Biden administration had been pushing to pass the legislation before the week of March 14, when pandemic-related federal unemployment assistance is scheduled to expire.

Continue reading “”

Kansas House passes bill to lower concealed carry age to 18

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — A bill to lower the legal age to carry concealed firearms in Kansas from 21 to 18 won final passage Thursday in the Kansas House.

The state House approved the bill on a 85-38 vote, sending it to the Senate. The bill’s support came mostly from Republicans, who say that those under 21 are eligible to vote and serve in the military. Opponents say those under 21 are less mature and more prone to risk-taking.

People as young as 18 can already carry firearms in the open in Kansas. The legislation would require those under 21 to complete a background check and undergo safety training to carry concealed firearms, which is currently required for those 21 and older.

Continue reading “”

NSSF: ‘Charleston Loophole’ Gun Control Could Come Next Week

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) warns that gun control targeting the so-called “Charleston Loophole” could be before Congress for a vote as early as next week.

The NSSF told Breitbart News the bill, the Enhanced Background Check Act of 2021, is sponsored by House Whip Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) and “could be on the floor as early as next week, bypassing House Judiciary altogether.”


Bill Would Allow The Government To Shut Down Gun Sales Nationwide At Any Time

This Bill Would Permit The FBI To Shutdown Gun Sales Anytime They Wish

To understand how this would be possible you first have to understand the current system.  When you go to buy a firearm, the law requires a background check.  The check normally takes about 30 minutes, often less.  In a tiny number of cases, more time is required.  The law currently gives the FBI three days to get it done.  If they cannot clear the buyer in three days, they can deny the sale.  The buyer then can appeal.  Most appeals are indeed successful.  However, if the FBI doesn’t give any answer in three days, the gun dealer MAY release the firearm to the buyer.  Sadly, there have been cases where the FBI has screwed up, not given an answer, the dealer released the firearm, and the person was indeed prohibited.  In one horrible case, the FBI screwed up and there was a mass shooting in a church.  This has been called the “Charleston Loophole” by gun control groups.

Why Is There A Three Day Limit?

When the current background check bill was drafted, the NRA insisted on a time limit because without one, the president could simply order the FBI to stop processing background checks.  Without a yes or no decision, the buyers could not appeal.  Gun rights groups surely would appeal to the courts, but meanwhile gun sales would stop nationwide.  To eliminate this abuse of the background check system, both sides agreed on a three day limit.

What This Bill Would Do

This bill extends the time the FBI has to complete the background check and issue a decision to “at least 10 business days”.  This sounds reasonable – and if it was indeed a simple expansion of the time allowed to 10 days this would be something we could have a reasonable discussion about.  The problem is that the bill says “at least 10 days” not “no more than 10 days”.  In fact, the FBI could simply take the position that they have an unlimited amount of time to complete the background checks.  This would likely result in both long delays for the average person and the ability to simply stop processing checks – stopping all gun sales nationwide.

Continue reading “”

demoncrap for brains and stupid besides


Majority of House Democrats vote in favor of lowering voting age to 16

Progressive Democrats in the House of Representatives unsuccessfully pushed an amendment lowering the federal voting age to 16 as part of the H.R. 1 voting rights package on Wednesday.

The vote was 125-302 in the House with the majority of Democrats voting in favor, 125-93, according to C-SPAN.

“A sixteen-year-old in 2021 possesses a wisdom and a maturity that comes from 2021 challenges, 2021 hardships, and 2021 threats,” Rep. Ayanna Pressley, one of the members of Congress behind the amendment, said in a statement on Monday. “Now is the time for us to demonstrate the courage that matches the challenges of the modern-day sixteen- and seventeen-year-old.”

Pressley, Rep. Grace Meng, D-N.Y., and Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., reintroduced the amendment on Monday.

Pressley said in February she was “shocked” that lowering the legal voting age to 16 is a “polarizing” subject of debate.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
Blumenthal commented on the legislation, saying, “The American people are responding to a political movement that has resulted from Parkland, Sandy Hook, Las Vegas — the shorthand of tragedies that have caused this political movement to be a force that has met this moment of reckoning.”

Ironically, universal background checks would not have stopped any of the three mass shootings mentioned by Blumenthal. That is because in two of them–Parkland and Las Vegas–the attackers passed background checks for guns. In the third, Sandy Hook, the attacker stole his gun, so no amount of point-of-sale background checks would have mattered.


OK, so Blumenthal merely reconfirms he’s a stupid liar.
Nothing unusual for a demoncrap.


Democrat Chris Murphy Introduces Universal Background Check Bill

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) introduced universal background check legislation to expand retail point-of-sale background checks to private sales as well.

On February 14, 2021, Biden urged legislators to put forward universal background check legislation and on February 18, 2021, Breitbart News noted Murphy was expected to do it.

Continue reading “”

Below The Radar – LEAD Act

Attacks on our right to keep and bear arms don’t just take the form of gun bans or universal background checks. If anything, anti-Second Amendment extremists have always been scheming to find ways to make it harder to exercise our rights, and some of them are quite diabolical in the way many Second Amendment supporters do not see them coming.

One such bill is HR 405, the LEAD Act, introduced by Ted Lieu, a congressman from California (no surprise, a Democrat). In this case LEAD stands for Lead Endangers Animals Daily, and it bans the use of traditional ammunition on lands that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service has jurisdiction over. For a first offense, there is a $500 fine, with additional offenses leading to fines from $1,000 to $5,000.

Continue reading “”

We Now Know the First Gun Control Move Congressional Democrats Are Making

Democrats have had a few legislative priorities since they took control of both Congress and the White House. Their number one focus has been on the “American Rescue Plan,” President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID relief bill. But their next policy focus is shifting towards imposing stricter gun control laws.

According to the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), Democrats are planning to pursue “enhanced background checks” as early as next week.

Continue reading “”

New House Bill Would Expand List of ‘Prohibited Persons’

Not all gun control attempts are as blatant as Democrat Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s manifold (and yearly) insanity.

Indeed, most look positively reasonable — at least if you only read the title.

Such is H.R. 882, the “Keeping Guns from High-Risk Individuals Act” introduced by Rep. Robin L. Kelly, (D-Illinois).

Introduced in early February, text of the bill was just released, and is hair-raising, particularly if one digs a bit deeper, than the simple language.

In short, Kelly’s bill is a huge expansion of the criteria used to prohibit persons from legally owning a firearm under federal law, which right now includes those convicted of a felony or a domestic violence misdemeanor, and those adjudicated as mentally ill.

H.R. 882 would amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to include anyone who:

… in the most recent 10-year period, has been convicted in any court (emphasis added) of a crime of violence (as defined in section 16);

“(11) has not attained 25 years of age, (emphasis added) and has been adjudicated by any court as having committed an offense that would have been a crime of violence (as defined in section 16) if committed by an adult;

“(12) in any period of 3 consecutive years in the most recent 10-year period, has been convicted in any court, on 2 separate occasions, of an offense that has, as an element, the possession or distribution of, or the intent to possess or distribute, alcohol or a controlled substance (as so defined); or

“(13) has been convicted in any court (emphasis added) of stalking.”

Now 18 U.S. Code section 16 is disturbingly vague, and simply defines a “crime of violence” as:

(a)an offense that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or prop­erty of another(emphasis added) or

(b)any other offense that is a felony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.

Clearly, no one could argue against keeping guns out of the hands of violent criminals right?

Much will be dependent — should this pass — on how Section 16 is interpreted, and on the relevant case law, but as written if you got in a bar fight when you were 21, and were charged with simple battery (generally a misdemeanor) or even threatened violence (assault in many jurisdictions, also a misdemeanor) — or were a young idiot and did a little vandalism —  you would suddenly be ineligible to own a firearm for the rest of your life.

Note too, this says “any court,” not just federal court.

Kelly’s legislation would create an entirely new class of federally-prohibited persons — those who have been “convicted of a crime of violence,” even if no violence actually took place.

Look, no one wants firearms in the hands of violent felons, but this bill doesn’t prevent that. Anyone convicted of a felony is already a prohibited person.

This expands the list of “prohibited persons” to include those convicted of misdemeanors, not just felonies.

It’s clear that the goal of Kelly’s legislation isn’t about reducing gun violence (not that any of these proposed bills are), it’s all about reducing the number of people who can legally own a firearm.

Sound like he got a ‘tune up’


Mitt Romney knocked unconscious, suffers black eye during fall

Sen. Mitt Romney was knocked unconscious when he fell in Boston over the weekend, leaving him with “a lot of stitches” and a black eye.

“I took a fall. Knocked me unconscious. But I’m doing better,” Romney told reporters on Capitol Hill Monday night.

The Utah Republican said he was visiting his grandchildren when he got injured.

With noticeable bruising under his right eye, Romney infused some humor into the situation.

“I went to CPAC, that was a problem,” the Republican lawmaker joked, referring to the Conservative Political Action Conference that ended Sunday.

Romney was not invited to the marquee event after receiving backlash over his vote to impeach ex-President Donald Trump.

Asked how many stitches he received, Romney claimed he was not sure.

“A lot of stitches. I don’t know how many. I asked the doctor how many stitches and she said, I don’t know, but it’s all through my eyebrow and my lip.”

Iowa Permitless Carry Self Defense Package Bill Introduced

House Study Bill 254 allows a law-abiding adult to carry a concealed firearm, without first needing to obtain government permission. This ensures that citizens have their right to self-defense without government red tape or delays. In addition, it also adds the option for law-abiding citizens to pass a federal background check to acquire a handgun without obtaining a Permit to Acquire, ensures that public housing cannot deny Second Amendment rights to tenants, ensures that local governments cannot restrict lawful carrying of firearms, expands the types of training accepted for a Permit to Carry Weapons, and other Second Amendment provisions.

Joe Biden Is Our Worst Nightmare

DINESH D’SOUZA—
Joe Biden just gave a talk, perhaps his most detailed and, one might have to say coherent, presentation of how his foreign policy is likely to go over the next four years. This was at the Munich virtual security conference, and I read the talk carefully because Biden focuses on the issue of democracy. Biden basically says that the United States is going to stand for democratic values around the world and stand against the autocracies that are anti-democratic.

Now, right away, the question becomes, are you really going to stand against the largest autocracy in the world, the one that governs over a billion people? That is far more tyrannical than any other we can think of in the world today, namely China? And to this, Biden gives a few “eh hems”… “Well, I’ve gotten a lot of money from those guys over the last several years, guys. Don’t expect me to be too hard on them.” So right away, the sincerity of this project is somewhat called into question. Biden has made very favorable noises toward China, which raised the question of whether even this rhetoric of democracy is going to be honestly applied.

Now, I think Biden intends to apply it in all kinds of places, but the places he wants to apply it to, he’s not likely to be successful, for the simple reason that the United States has very little of any leverage in those places. For example, there was recently a coup in Myanmar, an attempt to overthrow the government, anti-democratic actions and movements in that country. But let’s think about it, what is the United States’ security interest in Myanmar? Zero.

What is our trade leverage over Myanmar? Pretty much zero.

So, what is the point of Biden jumping up and down on his podium and going, “There needs to be democracy in Myanmar! There must be democracy in Myanmar!” Well, the people in Myanmar don’t care. Why? Because what is Biden have to do with them? Biden’s not going to invade Myanmar, even if some neoconservatives’ eyes are lighting up, “Oh, another war! What a great idea!”

When you don’t have leverage over a country, your rhetoric doesn’t really matter. Now, the Biden administration is playing footsie with a very autocratic regime right now, and that’s Iran. And very interestingly, there have been some news reports in the last couple of weeks that key people who are now in the Biden administration, including John Kerry, have maintained an ongoing relationship with Iran. Kerry, for example, has had repeated contacts and meetings with the Iranian foreign minister, this guy named Javad Zarif.

Now, why? Very interestingly, this is motivated not even directly with anything to do with Iran. It’s motivated by the idea of let’s work with our enemies, Iran, to undermine Trump. And what that means is that from John Kerry’s point of view, and the point of view of some of these Biden people, there is a near enemy, Trump, and there’s a far enemy, Iran. But the far enemy is far away and a distant threat, so let’s not worry about it right now. In fact, let’s work with the far enemy to politically undermine the near enemy at home. This is a real departure in American foreign policy.

Continue reading “”

Kamalamania: prepare for President Harris
Ask where Harris stands and the footwork begins

kamalamania

Kamala Harris was always going to be a most prominent Vice President. When Joe Biden’s campaign called a midmorning ‘lid’ — ending his working day before it really began — Harris would stay out on the trail, addressing car rallies in Pontiac, Michigan; going viral on social media by dancing in the Florida rain. She is significantly younger and more energetic — traits the Biden campaign capitalized on in the campaign. Her fanbase considers her to be a political celebrity: when she’s getting bad press, they rally the #KHive on social media — an online community ready and willing to defend the VP — a spin-off of the #BeyHive hashtag used by Beyoncé’s loyal fans worldwide.

The media is overwhelmed by Kamalamania. To them, she is a sensation: so much so the Los Angeles Times has created a new section, ‘Covering Kamala Harris’ — not a report on her moves in the White House, but a retrospective beat ‘dedicated to her historic rise.’ Three days before the inauguration, CBS News used their interview with Harris and Second Husband Doug Emhoff to ask tough questions about her ‘several closets full’ of ‘Chucks’, her Converse basketball shoes.

Meanwhile, the New York Times dedicates its resources to a hard-hitting interview with her stepchildren. We learn that Harris and Emhoff are ‘vomit-inducingly cute and coupley’. Harris has also snagged a coveted Vogue cover, though the photograph became the subject of controversy: some people thought the lighting of the image amounted to ‘whitewashing’. Harris’s team was reportedly distressed by the editor’s pick of a casual photo, so Vogue will be releasing another, more formal one.

It’s important that the press is doing its job. Not only is Harris the first woman (and woman of color) to fill the VP’s office: she also wields immense power. After the Democrats’ double win in Georgia’s January runoff elections, Republican and Democratic representation in the Senate is split right down the middle. If the Senate votes along partisan lines, Harris’s vote will make or break legislation for at least the next two years.

Harris is more than a spare spokesperson for the administration. She’s active in policy formation and delivery. The party’s keyholders only whisper it, but no one is banking on a second Joe Biden term — not even Biden himself. It’s hardly a secret that Harris has presidential ambitions. The question is, what is her vision for the country — and will Americans endorse it?

Ask where Harris stands on an issue and the footwork begins. You’ll have an array of answers to choose from. She opposes and supports fracking. She promotes single-payer healthcare but also advocates for private insurance. She goes tough and light on crime. She implied her new boss’s track record was soft on racism, though since selecting her as Vice President, these accusations have not resurfaced. Harris’s inconsistency cost her in the Democratic primaries: her short-lived candidacy polled in the single digits, despite her being the establishment’s preferred candidate.

Her campaign was as disappointing as it was bitter. As party operators sought to understand why their rising star had burned out so quickly, feuds between Harris’s sister and her campaign manager were aired in New York Times longreads. In truth, the Bernie Sanders lite option didn’t prove so popular with the Democratic base, especially when they had Bernie himself to vote for. But dropping out of the race before she was rejected was smart: Harris’s early departure turned the spotlight on Elizabeth Warren — who then got publicly rejected in the voting booths while Harris waited in the wings.

Continue reading “”

Now you know why McConnell stopped Garland from getting a seat on the Supreme Court.
No matter his education or credentials, Garland is a political hack.


Merrick Garland Vows to Prioritize Prosecuting Capitol Rioters and Their ‘Abettors’

On Monday, Merrick Garland, President Joe Biden’s nominee for attorney general, pledged to prioritize prosecuting those responsible for the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021. Garland, who led the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the 1996 Oklahoma City bombing, said that domestic terrorism in America today is “more dangerous” than at the time of that bombing. He also pledged to continue the investigation wherever it takes him, including “aiders and abettors who were not present on January 6.”


 

Merrick Garland: Portland Riots May Not Be ‘Domestic Terrorism’ Because Courthouse Was Closed

Judge Merrick Garland told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday that Antifa’s attacks on the U.S. courthouse in Portland last year may not have been “domestic terrorism,” because unlike the Capitol riot, they took place at night when the court was not “in operation.”

Garland, who is President Joe Biden’s nominee for U.S. Attorney General, was questioned at his confirmation hearing by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO)

Sen. Hawley: Let me ask you about assaults on federal property in places other than Washington, DC — Portland, for instance, Seattle. Do you regard assaults on federal courthouses or other federal property as acts of domestic extremism, domestic terrorism?

Judge Garland: Well, Senator, my own definition, which is about the same as the statutory definition, is the use of violence or threats of violence in attempt to disrupt the democratic processes. So an attack on a courthouse, while in operation, trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases, that plainly is domestic extremism, domestic terrorism.

An attack simply on a government property at night, or any other kind of circumstances, is a clear crime and a serious one, and should be punished. I don’t know enough about the facts of the example you’re talking about. But that’s where I draw the line. One is — both are criminal, but one is a core attack on our democratic institutions.

Last August, then-Attorney General William Barr described the attacks on the courthouse:

Behind the veil of “protests,” highly organized violent operators have carried out direct attacks on federal personnel and property, particularly the federal courthouse in Portland. Shielded by the crowds, which make it difficult for law enforcement to detect or reach them, violent opportunists in Portland have attacked the courthouse and federal officers with explosives, lasers, projectiles, and other dangerous devices.

In some cases, purported “journalists” or “legal observers” have provided cover for the violent offenders; in others, individuals wearing supposed press badges have themselves attacked law enforcement or trespassed on federal property. More than 200 federal officers have been injured in Portland alone.

The riots resulted in the front of the courthouse being boarded up; the destruction of security equipment protecting the courthouse; and the breaking of windows in the offices of federal prosecutors.

Garland cited the domestic terrorism statute, which defines “domestic terrorism” as follows (18 USC § 2331):

(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that— (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended— (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States

Notably, the statute does not confine acts of domestic terrorism to working hours.

Chuck Schumer Flips On Puerto Rican Statehood

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer flipped on his position over Puerto. Rican statehood this week, declaring his opposition to the idea after having endorsed it last year.

During a community Zoom meeting Thursday, Schumer said he now opposes Puerto Rican statehood. “I don’t agree with them, I’m not going to support their statehood bill,” Schumer said of legislation from Democratic Rep. Ritchie Torres that would open the door to Puerto Rico becoming a state.

Flash back to four months ago, however, and Schumer held the opposite position. “Believe me, on D.C. and Puerto Rico, particularly if Puerto Rico votes for it — D.C. already has voted for it and wants it — I’d love to make them states,” Schumer told MSNBC’s Joy Reid in October.

 

States Push Back Against Biden Gun Control Scheme
Studies have long indicated that concealed carry permit holders are the most law-abiding of population segments, even more so than law enforcement

While the Biden administration and the Democrat-controlled legislature are putting forth their gun control agendas, states are passing legislation that provides more choice for gun owners, regardless of what happens federally. These include permitless carry legislation and declarations of sanctuary state and county status.

To be clear, gun control advocacy organizations spent big to help get Biden elected, as well as members of Congress. Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s organization Every Town for Gun Safety spent over $600 million in support of Biden, and other gun control groups spent in the 6 and 7 figures between the presidential race and other federal races. The gun control agenda is not a surprise, as the donors look for payback.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
Talk is cheap in the Biden White House.

Biden’s ethical standards aren’t worth a hill of beans — the ugly truth about ‘Honest Joe.’

Now that the election is over and President Biden is installed in the White House, it’s safe for the truth about his character to dribble out.

And what do you know? Turns out the ethical standards of “Honest Joe” aren’t worth a hill of beans.

Starting with the obvious, Hunter Biden is still in business with the Chinese Communist Party.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki admitted a little over a week ago that the president’s wayward 51-year-old son still owns 10 percent of Chinese equity firm BHR Partners.

So much for Joe’s promise that “no one in my family will . . . have any business relationship with anyone that relates to a foreign corporation or a foreign country. Period. Period. End of story.”

But that was B.E., aka before the election. Everything’s changed now.

Now that the election is over and President Biden is installed in the White House, it’s safe for the truth about his character to dribble out.

And what do you know? Turns out the ethical standards of “Honest Joe” aren’t worth a hill of beans. Continue reading “”

Biden Gun Ban Not The Only Threat In Congress

With President Joe Biden calling on Congress to enact his gun ban along with universal background checks and the repeal of the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, the Second Amendment Foundation’s Alan Gottlieb says that Democrats’ are moving forward with an agenda that puts the right to keep and bear arms at risk. Gottlieb joins me on today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co. to discuss the president’s call to disarm and how the 2A community is responding.

Biden’s statement on the third anniversary of the shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida was long on rhetoric and short on facts, billing the gun control battle as a generational fight pitting young Americans against their elders, while ignoring the constitutional and pragmatic objections to his anti-gun agenda.

The Parkland students and so many other young people across the country who have experienced gun violence are carrying forward the history of the American journey. It is a history written by young people in each generation who challenged prevailing dogma to demand a simple truth: we can do better. And we will.

This Administration will not wait for the next mass shooting to heed that call. We will take action to end our epidemic of gun violence and make our schools and communities safer. Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets. We owe it to all those we’ve lost and to all those left behind to grieve to make a change. The time to act is now.

As Gottlieb argues, taken in totality Biden’s gun control agenda amounts to a full-scale attack on the right to keep and bear arms; banning some of the most commonly-owned firearms and magazines in the United States, imposing a background check law that could criminalize ordinary transfers of firearms between family and friends, and giving the green light to junk lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.

But Gottlieb notes that these aren’t the only bad ideas offered by anti-gun Democrats. There’s HB 127, which would impose insurance mandates on all gun owners, establish a publicly searchable database of gun owners, and require gun owners to undergo psychological testing before they could receive permission from the federal government to purchase a firearm.

Additionally, Gottlieb says he believes that the Biden administration will soon unveil executive orders dealing with gun control, including an attempt to force the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to re-define firearms to include unfinished frames and receivers. Not only would that turn existing law on its head, it could open up huge legal risks to any hobbyist who has built their own firearm from scratch.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation is also speaking out about Biden’s call for Congress to start work on his anti-gun agenda. The firearms industry trade group says that Biden’s plan targets legal gun owners instead of dealing with the reality of violent crime.

Continue reading “”

An Uneasy Echo Between ‘Post-Insurrection’ America and the Political ‘Rectifications’ of Communist China.

There are uncanny parallels between what has happened post-Jan. 6 in America and the CCP political campaigns of yesteryears.

In the eyes of establishment media, pundits, and politicians, there is only one acceptable way to view the breach of the United States Capitol building on Jan. 6—a “domestic extremist” insurrection incited by then-President Donald Trump and an assault on American democracy. This view is presented as fact and widely repeated, even though investigations into the incident are still ongoing and do not support such a black-and-white explanation.

The establishment view has not shifted one iota even with the emergence of evidence debunking the narrative. News reports note that the Capitol rioters broke through barricades 20 minutes before Trump finished his speech, where he explicitly called on his supporters to protest “peacefully.” Subsequent FBI work has since shown that the Capitol breach was pre-planned, not spontaneous. Conservative commentators have also condemned talking heads in establishment media for repeating ad nauseum horrifying details about the Capitol attack that new investigations have since overturned, particularly the “murder” of U.S. Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick by rioters with a fire extinguisher (medical autopsy found no evidence of blunt force trauma). Many observers have also wondered why there was a lack of outrage from the establishment over the Black Lives Matter/antifa riots in the summer of 2020 that resulted in at least $1 billion in paid insurance claims, or how an unruly mob at the Capitol counts as an insurrection—particularly when juxtaposed with an actual coup as occurred in Myanmar on Feb. 1……….

The CCP elite uses political campaigns to consolidate power and “normalize” communist rule over China. In most political campaigns, the Party designates a segment of the population as the enemy (“counter-revolutionaries,” “capitalist roader,” etc.), then relies on propaganda organs to set the new political reality and acceptable discourse. Through indoctrination or intimidation, the rest of the population is made to struggle against the demonized segment lest they are struggled against. . . .

There are uncanny parallels between what has happened post-Jan. 6 in America and the CCP political campaigns of yesteryears. The establishment is promoting one accepted way to view the Capitol riots in the face of evidence challenging that view, and is designating as enemies the segment of the American population that supports former President Donald Trump or expresses skepticism about the outcome of the 2020 election.

The current political climate has prompted people to report their family and friends to the authorities—the FBI received more than 100,000 such tips, according to the Washington Post. In China, virtually all the Party’s political campaigns feature the establishment of a political orthodoxy and encourage informants in a bid to turn the masses against each other.