Biden’s soulless screed a smokescreen for what really ails the nation.

Last night[Thursday], the same president who almost exactly a year ago disgracefully abandoned 14,000 Americans and tens of thousands of our allies to the Taliban decided to lecture the US on “the continued battle for the soul of the nation.”

Let that sink in for a moment or two.

In that speech, Joe Biden tried to take the high ground for democracy against authoritarianism — just a week or so after eviscerating the constitutional check on the presidency by claiming the executive branch has the authority to print and appropriate between $600 billion and one trillion dollars to transfer debt from Biden’s base voters to the rest of the taxpayers.

Let that one sink in for another moment or two. Especially after Biden described “the work of my presidency” as returning the US to the founding documents of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

Joe Biden isn’t the solution for what ails the American soul. He’s not even really the main disease of what ails the American soul. Joe Biden is a demagogue who floated to the top of a morass that has been building for decades, and who only sees the problem to the extent that it benefits or harms Biden’s interests.

To wit — here’s how Biden framed the problem in this prime-time speech from Independence Hall [corrected]:

And here, in my view, is what is true: MAGA Republicans do not respect the Constitution. They do not believe in the rule of law. They do not recognize the will of the people.

They refuse to accept the results of a free election. And they’re working right now, as I speak, in state after state to give power to decide elections in America to partisans and cronies, empowering election deniers to undermine democracy itself.

Ahem. One can certainly believe this to be true of “MAGA Republicans.” What about the Democrats and progressives that rioted in the streets of Washington on January 20, 2017, in an attempt to disrupt the inauguration of Trump? How about the way that Democrats — even mainstream Democrats — labeled themselves “The Resistance” almost immediately after the 2016 election, which preceded that Inauguration Day riot and helped fuel it? And for that matter, what about the pointless two years of “Russian collusion” allegations that turned out to be based on Hillary Clinton’s oppo research?

Continue reading “”

New York prosecutor promises discretion in enforcing new “gun-free zones”

While New York’s new carry restrictions are now in effect, it looks like enforcement of the laws is going to vary wildly across the state. Gov. Kathy Hochul, for example, has proclaimed that anyone not issued a permit by September 1st is going to have to apply under the new laws, while at least one county clerk (and I suspect there are many more) say they’ll continue to process all permits received before the 1st under the old rules (minus the “good cause” requirement struck down by the Supreme Court a couple of months ago).

The same confusion reigns when it comes to the state’s nearly endless number of new “gun-free zones” mandated by recently enacted gun control measures. Under the statute signed by Hochul it’s a felony offense to carry in a “sensitive place”, and even accidentally setting foot inside a prohibited place while carrying could result in a four-year prison sentence.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams has already promised that the new laws will be strictly enforced, but the prosecutor and police chief in Syracuse say they have no plans on putting concealed carry holders behind bars, at least if their only “crime” is carrying where it’s not allowed.

Violators will have their weapons confiscated while prosecutors investigate any other criminal activity, District Attorney William Fitzpatrick said. Their cases will be referred to the judge who granted them concealed-carry licenses in the first place, possibly leading to the revocation of their carry privileges.

… The DA noted there’s bound to be widespread confusion over which places are off-limits. Technically, walking on the sidewalk in front of a school with a gun is considered a felony. So is walking through downtown Syracuse’s Clinton Square or Columbus Circle, both public parks where guns are always banned.

In addition, a Syracuse-based federal judge on Wednesday wrote an opinion suggesting that the state’s new law — including the long list of prohibited locations — was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. That ruling, however, was not binding and so the law is in effect as written.

Still, Fitzpatrick suggested, that ruling had an impact on how law enforcement will handle the new restrictions.

Law enforcement won’t be proactively enforcing the new law by trying to catch legal gun-owners in prohibited locations, Syracuse Police Chief Joseph Cecile said.

“It will be complaint-driven,” the chief said.

The idea here seems to be that if the concealed carry holder in question has a history of wandering into “gun-free zones” while carrying, or there are other criminal offenses that took place at the same time, charges might be warranted. An inadvertent incident or innocent mistake, on the other hand, wouldn’t be punished by prison time, though it could still lead to someone losing their ability to lawfully carry altogether. It’s unclear from the news story just how quickly someone will have their firearm returned to them once that investigation into other criminal activity has concluded, however, and that’s a big concern. I’m glad that Fitzpatrick says he won’t be charging accidental violations of the law, but if there are no charges then there should be no gun confiscation either.

The U.S. District Court judge in Syracuse who ended up allowing the new laws to take effect because he determined that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue acknowledged in his ruling that, if the plaintiffs did have standing, he would have ruled in their favor on many of the challenges they brought forward… including the “sensitive places” language.

Given that the judge maintains that the Supreme Court has “effectively barred” any location beyond schools, government buildings, legislative assemblies, and courthouses from being labeled a “sensitive place” off-limits to legal carry; it would have been nice if Fitzpatrick and Cecile had announced that those would be only locations where they would enforce the “sensitive places” statute, but we may see other District Attorneys around the state come to that conclusion on their own. New York’s latest gun control laws have not only created chaos and confusion, but I suspect some civic (and civil) disobedience as well.

Leaked memo states that in NYC anyone carrying a firearm, legally, is now presumed guilty until proven innocent

NEW YORK CITY, NY – Leaked documents from the New York Police Department (NYPD) indicate that anyone carrying a firearm is now presumed guilty until proven innocent.

The new guidance highlighted in the leaked memo proves that almost anywhere in New York City — public or private — is a gun-free zone.

It basically states that unless someone is a police officer or a former cop, no one can bring their legal firearm out of their house for protection, like on public transportation.

The memo, titled New York State Restrictions on Carrying Concealed Firearms, states very clearly in its “key points”:

“Anyone carrying a firearm is presumed to be carrying unlawfully until proven otherwise.”

The other “key points” are listed below:

Possessing a firearm in New York City requires a special license issued by the New York City Police Department;

Carrying a firearm in New York City requires a concealed carry license issued by the New York City Police Department;

License holders are required to carry their license when carrying a firearm and must provide their license to law enforcement upon request; and

Recent changes in law do not impact the way officers conduct investigative encounters. Officers may stop an individual when the officer has reasonable suspicion that an individual is carrying a firearm (Level 3) and may frisk that individual since the officer has reasonable suspicion that the individual is armed and dangerous.

The memo also describes what are to be considered “sensitive” and “restricted” locations throughout the city. According to the memo:

“Even though a person may be licensed to carry a firearm, they may not bring a firearm to a ‘sensitive’ location … All private property (residential and commercial) that is not on the sensitive location list is considered ‘restricted.’ People who are licensed to possess firearms may not bring firearms to a restricted location unless they get permission from the property owner.”

Expect Silicon Valley Censorship To Ramp Up with ‘Civic Integrity Policy’

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- With the news that Twitter is bringing back its “Civic Integrity Policy,” Second Amendment supporters need to be ready for censorship to ramp up. This is something that has been building up for a long time.

Of course, this is just one possible avenue of attack. There have been other revelations about censorship – at least on Twitter’s part – that Second Amendment supporters should take note of. If anything, these revelations, at a bare minimum, will need some serious oversight by Congress, and some serious corrective actions will be needed.

Those actions will require substantial Congressional majorities and, alongside efforts to halt financial de-platforming, are probably the most important battles for Second Amendment supporters to win – more important than constitutional carry or other legislative fights. Don’t take my word for it – look at what Google did with regard to crisis pregnancy centers after a push from Letitia James.

Yes, the same Letitia James who sought the NRA’s dissolution. Regardless of how you feel about abortion, this is a bad sign.

Silicon Valley’s actions will force many Second Amendment activists to confront a very hard question:

How do we reconcile using the power of government when we ourselves have expressed suspicion – if not opposition – to increasing the size and scope of government? Because at this point, it looks increasingly likely that we will need to use government power to protect our First Amendment rights on at least a short-term basis, and it probably may be for the long haul.

Some of it will be using Congress to check the executive branch – in essence, invoking Constitutional powers – to rein in efforts by various agencies to get social media companies to censor based on such pretexts as “medical misinformation” or even just “misinformation” in general. That is not going to be the big issue.

The big issue will be addressing the fact that these companies also act independently, and their censorship decisions didn’t just come from the government. How much was government influence? That is currently unknown, but perhaps the litigation by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana will change that.

As private entities, they have the same freedom to associate – or not associate – as we do, to a large extent. How much of the censorship is their own doing? We don’t really know. Could the Elon Musk saga change things on Twitter? That is an unknown, as well.

That will require answers. Some will come from the litigation, some from the Congressional hearings. Some, we may not know for sure. How much will the litigation reduce the censorship (we shouldn’t presume it will end all of it)? Again, we don’t – in fact, we can’t – know.

One thing is certain: Second Amendment supporters will have a lot of work to do to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists via the ballot box at the federal, state, and local levels this coming November and the November two years from now. Get out the vote!

The one who knocks: Mayor Adams vows door-to-door checks on gun permits

He’s certainly no criminal like Walter White, but Mayor Eric Adams is vowing to take up the “Breaking Bad” character’s mantle as the “one who knocks” — at least when it comes to gun permits in New York City.

“It is really about using the good, old-fashioned methods of doing investigation,” Adams said in an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Thursday morning.

“When I became a police officer, people knocked on my neighbor’s doors and interviewed them and asked what type of person am I.”

Police officers will employ those “good old-fashioned” methods of investigation like knocking on neighbors’ doors as part of the background check requirements on potential gun permit holders included in New York’s new gun safety law.

State officials added extra requirements for individuals seeking concealed carry weapons permits that take effect today, Sept. 1, in the wake of the US Supreme Court’s decision that overturned a 1913 state law mandating individuals to show “proper cause” for packing heat.

“And I think those are the same skills that’s going to be used to look at not only social media but also knocking our neighbors’ doors, speaking to people, finding out who this individual is that we are about to allow to carry a firearm in our city,” said Adams, a former police captain.

Background checks will now require applicants to sit down for an in-person interview, submit four character references, a list of former and current social media accounts spanning the prior three years and disclose the names of their spouse or any other adults living in their home.Permit renewals will also now be required every three years, instead of five years under the former law.

NYPD Commissioner Keechant Sewell said the department has tracked a 54% increase in carrying license applications ahead of the Thursday deadline, accounting for 1,579 applications filed since June 1 — compared to 1,024 filed during the same period in 2021.

Officials also said the NYPD won’t add additional officers to enforce the new rules in newly created gun-free zones like Times Square right off the bat, but Adams said he predicts the changes will stress the department’s current resources.

“We’re not going to take police officers from those areas where we need police protection because of violence, upticks, but at the same time, it is going to really stretch out our law enforcement capabilities,” said Adams on MSNBC.

Adams has vowed to redeploy officers working desk jobs in an effort to get more cops on the streets and help get the city’s crime problem under control.

The Post exclusively revealed that the NYPD will soon require uniformed plant managers working in bureaus to go back on patrol

Joe Biden, Lout, Liar, And Lunatic

When candidate Joe Biden promised that if elected president he would unite the country, did he think he could do it alienating roughly half the population? Or did he mean he would unite the Democrats and independents against the “MAGA Republicans”? Thursday’s speech clearly indicates what he had in mind was the latter.

Last week, Biden smeared Donald Trump supporters, calling them semi-fascists who practice “burn-it-all-down politics” and face “​​backwards full of anger, violence, hate and division.”

One of the most appropriate and fitting responses we saw to this was Libby Emmons’ Biden Is The Semi-Fascist He’s Looking For in Human Events.

Biden followed up his “semi-fascist” rant with Thursday’s prime-time “soul of a nation” speech, in which he spoke of the 74.2 million who voted for Donald Trump in 2020 as white supremacists, extremists, rearward-looking deplorables, and wild-haired bogeymen who pose an existential threat to the country.

Which shows he’s a liar. Less than a week after the 2020 election, Biden swore before the country he would “​be a president who seeks not to divide, but to unify; who doesn’t see red states and blue states, only sees the United States.”

Sure, he said Thursday that not every Republican is a “MAGA Republican.” But his handlers were not going to let him make the mistake that New York Gov. Kathy Hochul did when she told that state’s Republicans they needed to leave and go to Florida. He needed to show some restraint in what amounted to a campaign speech.

Biden is also a lunatic. To have listened to him since he took office, it’s hard to conclude that he’s not trying to provoke a cold if not hot civil war, or at least a major political conflagration. He did tone things down a bit Thursday from his previous fever speech, but that was likely in part to make room for all the meaningless bromides he spouted as if they were the most unique and profound words ever stitched together.

Naturally Biden resorted to our “democracy” over and again as if it were a convention that should be worshipped. He said it well beyond the point of where it became sickening. And it’s another lie. The U.S. is not a democracy. Never has been. Why do the Democrats and their media cheerleaders continue to identify our style of government in the same terms a grade-schooler would?

The U.S. is a representative republic, or democratic republic. (And Biden and his party are its biggest internal threat.) Democracy is mob rule, which is exactly what the Democrats want – as long as it’s their mob ruling. Think of the George Floyd riots, Antifa violence, destruction, looting – they support anything that wrecks order and helps set them up to take on more political power.

Even the ancients understood the dangers of democracy. A Greek historian who lived more than 2,000 years ago noted that Democracy, “by its violence and contempt of law becomes sheer mob rule.”

As always, Biden was a lout, projecting, as Democrats do, the sins of his party – flouting the Constitution, disregard for the rule of law, a naked lust for political power, and contempt for our system of government – onto the only major party in this country that has, too often with minimal success, tried to protect liberties and limit freedom-killing government expansion.

But none are surprised. Biden has always been a sleazy character who has plagiarized the work of others, bullied anyone not in a position to challenge him, smeared GOP judicial nominees, vilified a man whose offense is that he was driving the truck that Biden’s first wife drove into the path of, killing herself and infant daughter, and likely used his office for personal monetary gain. The man is a wreck who is taking a country down with him.

Never Forget. SloJoe may be a senile dolt, but that speech was precisely what the demoncraps think about you.
As Joe Huffman says ‘Prepare Accordingly’

BLUF
So he just wants us to pretend he didn’t say it and ignore everything he said last night? What kind of ridiculous administration is this? They can’t even do evil oppressive government right, they’re that messed up.

But you know what a failure this all was when he immediately has to backtrack from it the next morning.

You Know It Backfired Badly: Biden Now Desperately Trying to Backpedal His Despicable Speech

Joe Biden is getting all kinds of backlash from the despicable speech he delivered last night at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, attacking millions of Americans who want to “Make America Great Again” and supporting President Donald Trump.

We covered some of the hot takes, with many people comparing his unprecedented attacks to Communist or Nazi-like tactics, Biden acting like the fascist he was accusing others of being. They also hit on the visuals with the improper use of the Marines and the evil blood-red backdrop.

Among the hot take was Trump who chastised Biden for essentially threatening Americans and saying if Biden doesn’t want to make America great again he shouldn’t be representing America. Trump also called going after Americans like that insane.

Even CNN bashed Biden for the use of the Marines in such a speech. On the other hand, CNN also reportedly softened the look of the visuals so it didn’t look as bad.

But now Biden seems to be trying to walk it back a bit. Or maybe he just can’t even remember what he said the night before. Now he’s trying to say he was only talking about people who called for “violence.” That of course was a lie, that is not what he said during the speech or the whole prior week. It means he knows now that he screwed up and went too far.

“I don’t consider any Trump supporter to be a threat,” Biden said to Fox’s Peter Doocy. “I do think anyone who calls for the use of violence and fails to condemn violence when its used, refuse to acknowledge an election when it’s been won… That is a threat to democracy.” Oh, so you mean like the Democratic reaction to when Trump won in 2016, when they tried to suborn electors, boycotted his inaugural, when Democrats refused to accept he won, and leftists rioted in the streets on Jan. 20, 2017? When have the Democrats ever called out any of that? Biden didn’t condemn any of that, indeed, he encouraged the perception that Trump was not a legitimate president.

Continue reading “”

I Am a ‘Clear and Present Danger’ to the Biden Regime (And So Are You)

“Clear and present danger” aren’t words any president should use lightly because that’s when the big guns used to come out against the First Amendment — and might again.

Set aside for a few minutes the vaguely Nurembergesque optics of Thursday night’s historically divisive speech by Presidentish Joe Biden so we can concentrate on the content.

“MAGA Republicans have made their choice. They embrace anger,” Biden angrily declared. “They thrive on chaos. They live not in the light of truth but in the shadow lies together.”

“That’s why respected conservatives, like Federal Circuit Court Judge Michael Luttig, has called Trump and the extreme MAGA Republicans, quote, a ‘clear and present danger’ to our democracy.”

Ben Shapiro called it “the most demagogic, outrageous, and divisive speech” he’s ever seen from an American president because Biden “essentially declared all those who oppose him and his agenda enemies of the republic.”

Biden’s speech came just two days after he not-so-implicitly threatened [VIP link] millions of law-abiding Americans with military action. “For those brave right-wing Americans,” he sneered, “if you want to fight against the country, you need an F-15. You need something little more than a gun.”

Ricochet’s Jon Gabriel said that Biden’s word choice was as “deliberate as it was divisive,” reminding readers that the C&PD doctrine was “created by the Woodrow Wilson-era Supreme Court to curtail the free speech of Americans.”

Biden, warned Gabriel, “floated a legal pretext to silence Republicans heading into the midterm elections.”

Already, social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have been revealed as willing stooges for government end-runs around the First Amendment, as our own Stacey Lennox noted just today:

On the heels of shocking comments by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg about the FBI’s role in censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story, initial e-mails related to a lawsuit filed by Schmitt and Landry show even more evidence that the Biden administration is using Big Tech to do what it is not, allowed to do according to the Constitution.

Lennox wrote that “Further disclosures could demonstrate that Big Tech and the government are conspiring to censor information related to any number of issues.”

But back to Thursday night’s demagoguery.

MSNBC’s Eugene Robinson approvingly described Biden’s speech as an “urgent, wartime address.”

Well, with whom is Biden at war? Biden has met the enemy, and he is us.

Many on the Right, including my friend and colleague Stephen Kruiser, believe that Biden’s speech was a display of weakness, “the panic and flop sweat of every Washington power player inside the Beltway.” I don’t necessarily disagree, but let’s at least consider that it might have been something else: A display of dangerously hubristic overconfidence in the administration’s own power.

Their power not to govern but to rule.

What else is there to call it when the Biden regime goes from surreptitiously silencing critics via social media back channels to openly floating a Wilson-era pretext for jailing us?

If this scheming mediocrity believes he can use his signature to transfer up to a trillion dollars from blue-collar Americans into the wallets of lawyers, doctors, and Trans Deconstructive Lit Theory majors and call it “debt relief,” why wouldn’t he think he can use the coercive power of the state to silence his critics?

I’ve been writing for PJ Media for over 15 years, but this is the first time I ever felt like the company, all of these voices, might not be here tomorrow.

I don’t know if the Swamp cabal running the White House will get away with it, but I’m sure as hell not going to be quiet about it ….

Forget “democracy” — our republic might depend upon it.

California gun control law stays unenforceable after Democrat lawmakers fail key vote

Democratic lawmakers in California failed to replace an existing gun control bill that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional Thursday, leaving the state’s concealed carry regulations unenforceable.

The legislation failed to pass the California Assembly by a single vote early Thursday morning. California Attorney General Rob Bonta lamented that Californians currently have nearly unfettered access to concealed carry permits following the failed vote.

“There would be a huge influx of applicants now that the ‘just cause’ component has been struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, and not enough safety precautions for the individuals who are seeking that,” Bonta said.

“If this bill doesn’t pass, people who haven’t had a comprehensive safety evaluation can get a concealed weapon and bring it into [sensitive] places,” he added prior to the vote.

Lawmakers say they will bring the bill back up for a vote during a December session.

California’s concealed carry laws were struck down after the Supreme Court ruled in June that states cannot require Americans to demonstrate the particular need for a firearm in order to receive a concealed carry license.

While the ruling related specifically to a New York law, California’s legislation mirrored the requirement and was struck down.

“California was made less safe tonight by not passing the bill to make us consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision,” said Democratic state Sen. Anthony Portantino, one of the California bill’s central supporters. “It’s unfortunate, it’s sad, it’s surprising.”

Don’t Believe Anti-Gun Lies About Armed Self-Defense

Most America’s 1st Freedom readers are well aware that anti-gun politicians, gun-ban advocates, and the so-called “mainstream” media tend to play fast and loose with the facts. One specific area where they tend to flat out lie is in the frequency of armed self-defense episodes by law-abiding Americans.

“People very rarely use guns successfully to defend themselves from crimes—both in their homes and in public,” Laura Cutilletta, managing director for the anti-gun Giffords Law Center, wrote in a recent op-ed titled “Debunking the ‘Good Guy with a Gun’ Myth.”

Cutilletta further pontificated: “Having access to a gun doesn’t better protect people from being injured during a crime compared to other protective actions like calling law enforcement or fleeing the scene.”

Of course, she’s completely wrong, as we’ve detailed before. Back in 2013, even the Centers for Disease Control wrote: “Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

Four Southern gun owners became living proof of that fact during a five-day period in late August.

On Aug. 28, in League City, Texas, a couple was at their home in a trailer park at about 10 p.m. when a man broke into the trailer and threatened them with a knife. Fearing for their lives, one of them fired a shot, hitting the intruder.

Officers responding to the shooting found the home invader dead inside of the trailer. The incident is being investigated as an act of self-defense.

A day earlier, in Loganville, Ga., a 23-year-old man had gone to attend a family event when another man approached him and started an argument. The man told police officers that he retreated and attempted to get away, but the other man pursued. Believing the aggressor to be armed and fearing for his life, the first man shot him.

The attacker was taken to a nearby hospital where he was pronounced dead. While it has been reported that “(e)vidence at the scene corroborated” the claims of the man who said he acted in self-defense, police continue to investigate the case. No charges have been filed.

Three days before that, a Boones Mill, Va., homeowner used his legally owned firearm to defend himself and his family. According to media reports, a man unknown to the homeowner came to the house and an altercation ensued. The homeowner shot 26-year-old Christopher Hill, who died at the scene. Police are still investigating the incident.

That same day, in Hialeah, Fla., a man used his firearm to protect himself during an alleged road rage incident. Police say one man blocked in another man’s car with his own, got out of the vehicle, approached the other car in an aggressive manner, and confronted the other driver.

Fearing for his life, the second man shot the aggressor in the chest, killing him. Police are still investigating the incident and treating it as a case of armed self-defense.

“This case is still open and active but appears to be an act of stand your ground,” the Hialeah Police Department told Local 10 News via email. “The shooter is fully cooperating in the incident and is facing no charges as of this writing.”

The truth of the matter is, armed citizens across the country save their own lives and the lives of others many times every day. The anti-gun narrative that says otherwise is clearly fake news.

When Turnips Attack!.
Joe Biden is the most dangerous threat to the US since the Civil War

Good morning to the other 74,999,999 semi-fascists trying to destroy our democracy by insisting the FBI, the DOJ, the Intel community, the military, the IRS, and congressional Democrats apply laws equally — and that the Executive branch not use private Big Tech companies to censor speech at the Administration’s direction.

Apparently, you need be an *actual* fascist to battle the “MAGA extremists” that comprise half — or maybe more —of the voting population.

Remember the instructive, sober words of communication luminary, Karine Jean-Pierre: you’re considered an extremist if you disagree with the progressive political consensus. Opposition to the ruling party is an act of insurrection.

— Meanwhile, you are most certainly in the camp of non-extremists if you back President Turnip and his 38% approval rating, because in progressive math, 38% approval is approval enough. So shut up, you 62% of the population who are racist fascist transphobic xenophobes!

President Turnip has F-15s. Do you? President Turnip directs a military armed with non-gendered pronouns and led by a thick-bodied, bag-eyed yes man in touch with his privilege and aware of his own white rage. Do you? President Turnip has the unwavering support of Max Boot and Jen Rubin — two of this country’s most beautiful minds. Do you?

“Dark Brandon,” flanked by Marines and backed by Hellish lighting, mumbled, shouted, and emoted his way through a Hitleresque scapegoating of large swaths of the population. And his call to arms has energized all the woke and virtuous defenders of democracy, who are now demanding a one-party system and the shunning of Republicans as lesser humans. Because, in the same way you sometimes have to destroy villages to save them, sometimes you have to become an unelected Administrative dictatorship to save democracy from the benighted and filthy MAGAts who so frustratingly vote incorrectly.

President Turnip’s speech — presented with the full backing of the Executive branch and its law enforcement and justice arms — was perhaps the most egregious speech ever given by a US president. It was more than simply divisive. It was tacit permission to treat those who don’t favor progressive governance as enemies of the State. It’s the summer of 2020 with presidential approval. It’s dangerous. It’s unconscionable.

And we know this didn’t land with all the sanctimonious anti-MAGA crowd, because even slovenly token CNN Republican and Dispatch co-founder Jonah Goldberg — while agreeing with “nearly all” of what Biden said on the substance — still called the speech “a mistake.”

And though the author of Liberal Fascism has morphed into the kind of lazy compromised shill who now uses his own book as an instruction manual rather than the political jeremiad it once was, it remains true that when you’ve even semi-lost Goldberg, you risk losing those legions of putative Republicans heretofore willing to elect progressive Democrats in order to conserve conservatism.

— Because while nothing is more crucial to conserving conservatism than protecting those hallowed norms that translate into politicizing the DOJ, the FBI, the Intel community, the IRS, et al., while simultaneously using executive orders to destroy energy independence, import millions of unvetted illegals, and wage lawfare against your political opponents, confrontational speech may just be a bridge too far!

It’s time to revisit Ayers’ et al., Prairie Fire manifesto, which laid out a blueprint for the violent socialist takeover of the US. It involved imprisoning political dissidents. Re-education camps. And even worse, for the intransigent.

Since we know that Barack Obama was a protégé of Ayers, and since we know that the Biden Administration is really the third Obama administration with a corrupt, incontinent, and addled figurehead who can barely read a teleprompter, it’s worth passing around the word: Cloward-Piven will mark the end of the middle class and create new dependents. Political opposition to this Great Reset will be criminalized. And then?

Utopia!

That’s the plan.

It can happen here. Biden’s speech last night shows that the more desperate the socialist authoritarians become to finish their project, the more latitude they’re willing to give themselves to allow the ends to justify the means.

We are here. Time is running out. What are we prepared to do about it?

Just to point out for those who may not know.

DoD Instruction 1334.1, “Wearing of the Uniform,”

1.2. POLICY.
a. The wearing of the uniform by Service members of Active and Reserve Components, retired Service members, cadets, midshipmen, auxiliary members, and members of organizations authorized to wear a military uniform by the respective service, is prohibited under any of the following circumstances:

(2) During or in connection with furthering political activities, private employment, or commercial interests, when an inference of official sponsorship by DoD or the Military Service concerned for the activity or interest may be drawn.

Now, the Marines in attendance at that political activity were almost assuredly under direct orders to attend that ‘speech’, but that doesn’t excuse them, or their commanders, from what they did (for they should know better), nor the politicians who abused the public trust, and the non-politization of the military, by inferring that the military would, or will ‘back up’ Biden’s rant by having them on stage. The only time uniformed military service members are permitted to attend a political activity is  as a member of a joint Armed Forces color guard at the opening ceremonies of the national conventions of the Republican, Democratic, or other political parties
(DOD Directive 1344.10 -§ 4.1.2.15)

What Biden and his handlers have done is make a direct threat to his political opposition by showing that he feels he has the power to use the military for partisan political purposes.

Banana Republic, we have arrived.