Terrifying Times Lie Ahead

I’ve been ranting for years about the perfidy of the left. At times I’ve been accused of exaggerating. On rare occasions I feared – or hoped? – that perhaps I was exaggerating. In fact I can now see that these people are worse than I ever imagined. Worse than most of us ever imagined.

Worse, even, than Donald Trump, with all his insight, imagined.

He went into office determined to clean up the swamp. He was tireless. But not tireless enough. No mere mortal could have been tireless enough. Trump had denounced the swamp in apocalyptic terms, but it proved to be even deeper and more extensive than he knew. It reached into the upper echelons of the intelligence community and the military, into cabinet departments and the judiciary.

Not only did the Democrats try to derail his campaign and then his presidency. Even people whom he appointed to White House jobs proved unreliable. Far from being too suspicious, he’d been too trusting. He’d appointed two-faced D.C. insiders. He’d trusted people who turned out to be snakes in the grass.

The news media, with very few exceptions, made it their task to thwart his progress and poison his name with a constant flow of disinformation. They said Trump had told people to drink bleach. They said he’d called neo-Nazis “good people.” They said many other outrageous things that they knew were outright lies. They relentlessly repeated the charge that he did nothing but lie, lie, lie, when in fact it was they, the media, who were constantly feeding us lies.

Trump thought he could rely on Fox News to report on his presidency with at least a degree of fairness. But no. They hired Donna Brazile, for heaven’s sake.

When enemies of Trump, and of freedom, created violence and mayhem in cities around the country, they were whitewashed, protected, and even praised by the media, by Democratic politicians, and by police officials. In a debate with Trump, Biden said Antifa was an idea, not an organization. Congressman Jerrold Nadler called it a myth.

Meanwhile Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey gave BLM $3 million. While the leftist gangsters went unpunished, citizens who tried to protect their homes and businesses from destruction by them were arrested by the police and demonized in the media. If you tried to spread the truth about all this on social media, you were shut down by Silicon Valley bosses who said you were lying.

And then the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. Republican officials in the states affected by the steal sat on their hands. State legislatures, ditto. Even the justices he’d named to the Supreme Court refused to hear Texas v. Pennsylvania, absurdly maintaining that a state didn’t have standing to challenge the conduct of a presidential election in another state.

Trump’s supporters, ever civilized, waited patiently while every possible means of stopping the steal was dutifully exhausted. When it came down to the final vote certification in Congress, an army of MAGA folk gathered peacefully in Washington to show that they had Trump’s back.

Then a tiny percentage of them foolishly entered the Capitol building. And a tiny percentage of that tiny percentage – at least some of whom seem to have been Antifa goons – caused minor damage. Most of them appear to have milled harmlessly around the building, leaving paintings and statues untouched. The contrast with the conduct of Antifa and BLM insurgents during the previous year could hardly have been more striking.

In the 1970s, sit-ins in government buildings were a staple of protests by young leftists, many of them armed. Today’s left now celebrates many of the participants in those sit-ins as heroes. But nobody is cheering the people who walked into the Capitol.

One of those people, an Air Force veteran named Ashli Babbitt, was shot dead by a Capitol Hill policeman. She didn’t do anything to provoke the shooter. It was impossible not to think of George Floyd, the career criminal who, on May 25 of last year, died while resisting arrest after committing a crime. Floyd was black; the arresting officer was white. In the ensuing months, Floyd’s death was used to justify rioting, arson, and vandalism by Antifa and BLM agitators, none of whom ended up being killed by a cop.

But nobody’s making a martyr out of Ashli Babbitt.

I’m not saying anybody should. I’m just saying that after four years of reportage that routinely demonized Trump, sugarcoated his opponents, and cruelly mocked his supporters, and after an election that was blatantly stolen yet described in the media as eminently fair, those supporters could hardly be expected not to explode – especially since they’d seen, during the previous few months, one leftist explosion after another rewarded with praise.

On January 6, Biden, oozing faux solemnity, addressed the ongoing situation on Capitol Hill. After months of referring to Antifa and BLM thugs as “protesters,” he called the non-violent people who’d entered the Capitol a “mob” of “domestic terrorists” who, in an action bordering on “sedition,” had made an “unprecedented assault…on the citadel of liberty….This is not dissent, it’s disorder.”

He wasn’t alone. In one voice, people who’d spent months cheering leftist violence expressed horror at the breach of the Capitol building and blamed it on Trump. Once the Capitol was secured, the planned challenges to the vote steal were scuttled and the election of Biden and Harris duly certified.

Whereupon the left – and not just the left – moved with the swiftness of lightning.

Accusing Trump of having incited the Capitol breach, Pelosi and Schumer raised the possibility of using the 25th Amendment to deny him his last few days in office; this weekend Pelosi indicated that she would introduce a proposal today to impeach the president for a second time, and as of Saturday night articles of impeachment drafted by Rep. Ted Lieu, David Cicilline, and Jamie Raskin had 180 cosponsors.

Republicans who were never strong Trump supporters to begin with were quick to profess outrage at Trump’s purported provocation. Cabinet members Elaine Choi and Betsy DeVos quit. The Wall Street Journal called on Trump to resign. Senator Pat Toomey gave a thumbs-up to impeachment. Forbes warned companies not to hire anybody with a Trump connection.

Both Twitter and Facebook deplatformed Trump, and when he shifted from his personal Twitter account to the POTUS account, Twitter silenced that one, too. Other enemies of the left were also kicked off social media – among them Sidney Powell, Michael Flynn, and Steve Bannon. Facebook ejected the WalkAway movement, in the process deleting countless heartfelt posts by ordinary citizens explaining why they’d quit the Democratic Party. YouTube took down a video by Rudy Giuliani. Amazon, Google, and Apple removed Parler, a “free-speech” alternative to Twitter and Facebook, from their app stores. The CEO of Mozilla, developer of the Firefox browser, wrote an essay entitled “We Need More than Deplatforming.”

(Yet the social-media accounts of the Chinese Communist Party and Ayatollah Khamenei remained untouched.)

Pelosi tried to get the military to stop taking orders from the President. Rob Reiner, Bette Midler, John Cusack, and other celebs posted calls for Trump’s arrest, as did MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough. The director of ABC News spoke of “cleansing” the Trump movement after January 20, whatever that might mean. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley, who’d taken the lead in challenging the vote steal, to be expelled from the Senate. Simon & Schuster canceled Hawley’s contract for a book about cancel culture. Biden likened Cruz to Goebbels.

For his part, Trump announced that he’d cooperate fully with the transition to a Biden presidency but that he wouldn’t be attending the inauguration – the first outgoing president since Andrew Johnson to skip the ceremony symbolizing the orderly transfer of executive authority. But how could he possibly do otherwise?

As all this happened, I tried to figure out what it reminded me of. It took two days to come up with the answer. It was the 1960 movie Spartacus. After his army has crushed the slave rebellion, Crassus (Laurence Olivier) promptly initiates the ruthless transformation of the Roman Republic into an empire, telling the republican senator Gracchus (Charles Laughton):

As the slaves died, so will your rabble if they falter one instant in loyalty to the new order of affairs. The enemies of the state are known. Arrests are in progress; the prisons begin to fill. In every city and province lists of the disloyal have been compiled. Tomorrow they will learn the cost of their terrible folly, their treason.

When Gracchus, the leader and hero of Rome’s deplorables, asks where his own name stands on Crassus’s list, Crassus shoves it in his face and shouts: “First!”

Yes, the author of the novel Spartacus, Howard Fast, was a Communist. So was Dalton Trumbo, who wrote the script. In Trumbo’s mind, Crassus’s list may well have been, at least in part, a reference to the Hollywood Blacklist, which had caused a brief hiccup in his own otherwise spectacular career. But for millions who saw the film, the idea of listing, arresting, and imprisoning “enemies of the state” would surely have brought to mind, above all else, the terrible reign of Stalin, who had died seven years earlier. Today it also recalls the brutal tyranny of Mao.

There’s no intrinsic magic about America that protects it from becoming Mao’s China or Stalin’s Russia. Only utopians believe in the perfectibility of man. People are people. And some of the people who are now, or are about to be, in power in the United States would, if accorded enough power, do far more to those of us who falter in loyalty than merely take away our social-media accounts.

Indeed, as scary as the situation may be right now, one thing’s for certain: worse is on its way. The Democrats now control both houses of Congress and are about to be handed the executive branch. The totalitarian-minded elements in that party are on the ascent, backed up by Silicon Valley, the legacy media, and much of corporate America. And they’re about to party like it’s 1793. In Paris.

The sky’s the limit. And therein lies our hope, long-term though it may well be. Without doubt, these people will overreach. Their lists will grow so long, their cancelations so widespread, that, as happened with the Reign of Terror, everyone who isn’t clinically insane will finally realize that things have gone too far and will, in one way or another, put an end to the madness.

But how far will things have to go before that happens? How long will it take? And how many lives will be destroyed before it’s over? These, alas, are the all too sobering questions that have yet to be answered. In the meantime, those of us who care about liberty will simply have to do our best to keep enduring the daily tsunami of evil ideology, fake news, and contempt for decent people, and to continue hoping that the true and good will yet prevail.

Bruce Bawer, Frontpagemagazine

The Wisdom of Ayn Rand on Capitalism

Capitalism is a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned.

The recognition of individual rights entails the banishment of physical force from human relationships: basically, rights can be violated only by means of force. In a capitalist society, no man or group may initiate the use of physical force against others. The only function of the government, in such a society, is the task of protecting man’s rights, i.e., the task of protecting him from physical force; the government acts as the agent of man’s right of self-defense, and may use force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use; thus the government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of force under objective control.

Capitalism demands the best of every man—his rationality—and rewards him accordingly. It leaves every man free to choose the work he likes, to specialize in it, to trade his product for the products of others, and to go as far on the road of achievement as his ability and ambition will carry him. His success depends on the objective value of his work and on the rationality of those who recognize that value. When men are free to trade, with reason and reality as their only arbiter, when no man may use physical force to extort the consent of another, it is the best product and the best judgment that win in every field of human endeavor, and raise the standard of living—and of thought—ever higher for all those who take part in mankind’s productive activity.

The flood of misinformation, misrepresentation, distortion, and outright falsehood about capitalism is such that the young people of today have no idea (and virtually no way of discovering any idea) of its actual nature. While archeologists are rummaging through the ruins of millennia for scraps of pottery and bits of bones, from which to reconstruct some information about prehistorical existence—the events of less than a century ago are hidden under a mound more impenetrable than the geological debris of winds, floods, and earthquakes: a mound of silence.


Trump vs. The Establishment

The Biden Election Thief is not yet inaugurated, but the Democrat and Republican establishment has already closed ranks against President Trump and the American people.

The House and Senate, backed up by neoliberal Junk Economists Larry Summers and Paul Krugman and billionaire owned presstitute media, blocked President Trump’s effort to boost the Covid relief package from $600 per American to $2,000. The Democrat/Republican Establishment wanted the money for defense contractors instead.

The Lie Factory, a.k.a. New York Times, pretended that the issue was the popularity of giving a 3% pay hike to soldiers instead, but the real issue was about reestablishing the US budget as a piggy bank for the rich.

$2,000 would have kept Americans, left without income from the Democrats’ lockdowns, in their homes for another month by paying the mortgage or the rent. $600 might pay down their credit card debt enough to be able to use their cards one more time. As America’s leading economist, and some would say only economist, Michael Hudson, has emphasized, the only way the American economy can be put back on its feet is through debt forgiveness. This is too radical of an idea for a country in which all explanations are controlled in order to serve the Establishment.

I have said from the beginning that Trump stood for the people against the Establishment, and that every dumbshit complaining about Trump was strengthening the Establishment’s hold on the American people.

Success in the House and Senate comes from serving powerful interest groups, not from serving the people. This is why most Republicans in Congress are content for the election to be stolen. It gets Trump out of the way of the Establishment’s agenda.

The Establishment uses its presstitutes to keep the public brainwashed and befuddled. But such an obvious and blatant theft of a presidential election as we have witnessed might have awoken the insouciant American public. If not, perhaps Nancy Pelosi’s pandering to a handful of woke idiots and “transgendered” freaks will.

House Democrats are leading the charge to take our language away from us. We are not to be permitted to use traditional gender words. Instead we have to pretend that there are many genders and so many of these many genders that males and females must no longer be allowed to suppress and offend by the use of gender male/female words. https://www.theepochtimes.com/proposed-house-rules-seek-to-erase-gendered-terms-such-as-father-mother-son-daughter_3640653.html

The Democrats in the US House of Representatives are leading the way by establishing a “gender neutral” “rules package.” “Gender neutral,” of course, isn’t neutral. It discriminates against the traditional use of mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles, grandmothers, grandfathers, sons, daughters, and prevents us from knowing or identifying the gender of those of whom we speak. The Democrats’ new terms are: “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepsibling, half-sibling.” So, are you speaking of brother or sister, mom or dad, grandpa or grandma? The new Democrat language doesn’t let you know. The dumbshit Democrats think that putting us in the dark makes us more inclusive.

Did you know that there are binary and nonbinary people? Do you know what these people are? Why is Pelosi restructuring the English language in the interest of people we have never even heard of, much less experienced? Who does Pelosi represent? Why does she not represent us? America has a Speaker of the House who represents who? Nonbinary people. What has that got to do with us?

A seaman becomes a non-word. A chairman becomes an inanimate object, “chair.”

Not knowing who is who or whether we are addressing a person or an inanimate object, say the Democrats, makes us more inclusive. If Republicans vote for this, we have more than one political party that needs extermination.

We can joke about having to introduce one’s danghter-in-law as one’s sibling-in-law, and a son or daughter as a “sibling,” and one’s half brother as a half sibling. But this destruction of language and meaning is being done in the name of a tiny minority who assert that being a minority gives them rights over the majority. Somehow it is the imposed on majority who are oppressive, not the tiny minority of freaks that are oppressing the majority by taking away their language. In a democratic society, why are Democrats representing a tiny minority against the majority?

Congress’ answer is: “That’s what we do.” Congress represents the military/security complex, pharmaceuticals, agri-business, Wall Street and the Big Banks, “preferred minorities,” the Israel Lobby, digital communication monopolies, and other interest groups rather than the interest of the American people in whose name Congress speaks. It is difficult to get any moral standing out of representing these money-grubbing interest groups, so Congress gains moral authority by representing nonbinary people and shemales. Why does representing sexual freaks convey moral authority?

So. Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat House tells us that the House represents nonbinary people—people who are neither male nor female. Who then represents the vast majority who are male and female?

Why do dumbshit Americans vote for Democrats and Republicans who do not represent them?

Do these dumbshit Americans expect to survive?

Where are the leaders for these dumbshit Americans? They are going to have to fight for their lives. How are they going to do that without leaders?

Paul Craig Roberts, UNZ Review

America’s Worst Days Seem to Have Arrived. What Do We Do ?

We will soon live in an America where our government, our “news” media and the technology that millions of Americans rely on to communicate will be under the control of a single political party and viewpoint: The Left.

The people on the Left, from Nancy Pelosi to Jack Dorsey, hold us in contempt. Many of them literally hate us. The hate our nation. Many of them would be more than happy to throw the Constitution into a trash can. We have very little, if anything, in common with these people. They have been attacking the President of the United States non-stop since 2016. They conspired to steal the 2020 election from the American voter. We know they did this. But they control the media and the technology, hence they control the narrative that influences those Americans who don’t pay to the details of what is happening.

I don’t want to live in a nation that is effectively ruled by one political party and by a powerful, unelected technology oligarchy. It’s bad enough already that I live in state where I don’t have representation by my state senators or governor.

What are we supposed to do? There is no reason to believe that Joe Biden will make a sincere effort to unite us as Americans. Even if he did he would be overruled by the more extreme leftists such as Kalama Harris, AOC, Ilhan Omar, Hirono, Obama, etc.

Do we form a new political party? Do we attempt to create a red-state union so we can have some measure of independence from the DC swamp? Armed rebellion? Writing letters to our representatives seems pointless.

I don’t want violence but we’ve been pushed into that direction by the Left for some time now. There’s over 70 million of us. We need to unite and figure out something and we need to do it soon.

The Sickness Represented by Leftist Mask Obedience

Leftists LOVE wearing masks. They insist they’re doing it for others–not for themselves. But that’s absurd. If masks really help, they’re available to all who wish to protect themselves. All leftists become hostile (even violent) when they see someone not wearing a mask. “I’m protecting you. So you should protect me back.” But the very idea of a mask is SELF-preservation. The leftist is not smart enough to grasp this obvious fact. And the leftist isn’t honest enough to admit that his real motive for mask-wearing is SHOWING OFF. “Look at me. I have virtue.” Leftists wish to be seen as self-sacrificers, because they think self-sacrifice is the epitome of virtue. It’s all so SICK.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

Rules for Revolutionaries in the 21st Century

Since George Floyd’s death, events seem to be spiraling out of control. For weeks, Americans were bombarded, almost on a daily basis, with reports of large protests in major cities, accompanied by rioting, looting, burning, assaults, and even murders.

Observing these events unfold, average U.S. citizens, watching TV from the purported safety of their home, might be bewildered by these transformative events, the purpose of which is nothing less than a “re-imagining” of America. To better understand exactly what is happening, let’s take a cue from my 21st Century Revolutionary Handbook. There are ten rules to explain what the radical left is planning.

#1: Inertia is fatal to a revolutionary movement.

The overtures of the late 60s movement are eerily similar to what is happening today. The problem for leftists was that, back then, the revolution centered around the anti-Vietnam War Movement. Once peace came, the revolution’s impetus died out. The 2008 Occupy Wall St Movement had the zeal, but cold winter months in New York were not conducive to this type of protest.

The lesson: choose your cause carefully. Today’s cause célèbre is “systemic racism” and its offshoots. Racism can be recycled perpetually. Recently, for example, the Mayor of Louisville, Kentucky, declared racism to be a public health crisis.

#2: Do not identify your ideology by name, nor state exactly what you will do after you are in power. Speak only in vague generalities and use simple two- or three-word phrases the public can identify with.

Terms such as “Socialist,” “Communist” or “Marxist” generally have a negative connotation and, while millennials like them, the population at large does not. Do not look to antagonize ordinary Americans more than is necessary. The revolution will need its army of “useful idiots” for the future.

Instead, use terms such as “progressive” or “social justice warrior” to describe yourself. These are far less threatening to the average American. Fidel Castro initially identified himself as a “humanist.” Only after he felt secure in his new position did he announce to the world: “I am a Marxist Leninist.”

#3: The revolution must get control over mass media and the education system.

Truth is defined by whatever the revolution says it is, and anyone who dares speak out is immediately silenced. Only information advancing the revolutionary cause may be heard and taught. Once the revolution gains control over mass media, it controls all the information that is disseminated, and once the revolution gains control over the education system, it controls the future.

#4: All the apparatus of the state: the ministries, civil service, justice system, military, and law enforcement must be brought under control.

This rule is simple. Whatever the revolution cannot control could eventually be used against it. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all dealt with the problem of possible anti-revolutionary activists through purges aimed at crushing all potential opposition, which extended even to family members. Stalin allegedly remarked that it was fine if innocents were punished along with the guilty, because “that sends an even stronger message.”

#5: All vestiges of the old must be destroyed in order to build the new. This includes all history, traditions, culture, and iconography that cannot be made to conform to the new ideals.

“Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.” George Orwell, 1984

In the late 1950s, Mao unleashed the cultural revolution on China. It repudiated what Mao called the “four olds”: old ideas, customs, habits, and culture. Estimates vary as to the number of people killed but it was most certainly in the millions. Coming as it did after the disastrous policies of the “Great Leap Forward,” China was left an economic and cultural wasteland.

#6: Conventional ideas about religion and family are anathema to a revolutionary movement.

Absolute loyalty to the revolution must come first; this extends to one’s family. Children are encouraged to inform on their parents if they hear anything that can be interpreted as “counter-revolutionary. Organized religion must also go. The revolution cannot have loyalty to God supersede loyalty to the state.

#7: The revolution can only succeed in times of extreme economic, political, and social unrest.

This is an important point. A generally content, gainfully employed, and prosperous populace is not likely to support a revolutionary movement aimed at overthrowing the government, party, or individual that has provided these benefits. For the revolution to be successful, the population must be brought low and kept in a state of abject misery. Years ago, former White House Chief of Staff and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel stated: “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Activist/actress Jane Fonda brought this up when she noted: “COVID is God’s gift to the left.”

#8: Ultimate victory in the revolution will go to that segment of the revolutionary body that is the best organized, best financed, and most ideologically dedicated.

A revolutionary movement can be composed of many divergent groups, each of which has a peeve with the central government. In our country we have, among others, minorities, LGBTQ, and feminists all rubbing shoulders with liberals, socialists, anarchists, globalists, Islamists, and hardcore Marxist revolutionaries. The last group is the best organized and funded. They are completely devoted to the “righteousness” of their ideology and even have their own para-military group – Antifa. Their goal is the complete destruction of the American political and economic system.

#9: You don’t need a majority to force your will on an entire population.

Most people assume that any revolution must have popular support to succeed. This may have been true in some cases, but not all. The Bolsheviks swept into power in Russia in Nov 1917 with a simple slogan: “Peace, Land, Bread.” Although one cannot be certain of the precise number of hardcore committed Communists among the masses of disaffected citizenry, it would have been comparatively small. The Nazis, for their part, never got more than 38% of the popular vote.

#10: After victory, the revolution will turn in directions not initially anticipated.

In addition to exacting revenge on their opponents, revolutions usually turn on many of the very people who were their most ardent supporters. One only must look at Hitler’s “Night of the Long Knives,” Stalin’s “Gulag Archipeligo, and Mao’s “Cultural Revolution, for examples.

Some of the above rules already apply to America; others will soon. There is no doubt that as a society we have made enormous strides in the last half-century, yet we are still struggling to come to grips with our past.

Sixty years ago, electing an African-American with the unlikely name of Barack Hussein Obama to the highest office of the land would have been impossible. The same is true about the minorities and women now seated in the House, Senate, and even Vice President-elect’s position.

Do we now throw all that away and adopt the failed economic and political system of our former Cold War adversaries? I hope not.

There is no perfect economic or political system, but there are systems that generally work better for more people than others. As imperfect as it is, capitalism works better than communism. Capitalist systems encourage innovation, individualism, personal responsibility, and independence.

Marxist systems mandate conformity of ideas, thought, belief, and speech. As always, they admit nothing, deny everything, make counter-charges, and in the final analysis, double down on their ideology. Whatever our many problems, allowing the left to implement the Rules for Revolutionaries, overthrowing our entire system, is not the answer.

As for the revolution itself, George Bernard Shaw stated it best when he wrote: ”Revolutions have never lightened the burden of tyranny; they have only shifted it to another shoulder.”

Caren Besner is a retired teacher who has written articles published by American Thinker, Sun-Sentinel, Dr Swier, News With Views, The Front Page, The Published Reporter, Washington Examiner, The Algemeiner, Jewish Journal, Independent Sentinel, Jerusalem Post, Arutz Sheva, San Diego Jewish World, The Times of Israel, The Moderate Voice, IsraPost, The Jewish Voice, Joo Tube, The Florida Veteran, and others.

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/01/twentyfirst_century_rules_for_revolutionaries.html#ixzz6jAJQs3qp
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/01/twentyfirst_century_rules_for_revolutionaries.html#ixzz6jAJ9W4n6
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Statement From Parler

Sunday (tomorrow) at midnight Amazon will be shutting off all of our servers in an attempt to completely remove free speech off the internet. There is the possibility Parler will be unavailable on the internet for up to a week as we rebuild from scratch. We prepared for events like this by never relying on amazons proprietary infrastructure and building bare metal products.

We will try our best to move to a new provider right now as we have many competing for our business, however Amazon, Google and Apple purposefully did this as a coordinated effort knowing our options would be limited and knowing this would inflict the most damage right as President Trump was banned from the tech companies.

This was a coordinated attack by the tech giants to kill competition in the market place. We were too successful too fast. You can expect the war on competition and free speech to continue, but don’t count us out.

The Wisdom of Ayn Rand on Moral Cowardice

Moral cowardice is fear of upholding the good because it is good, and fear of opposing the evil because it is evil.

Moral cowardice is the necessary consequence of discarding morality as inconsequential. It is the common symptom of all intellectual appeasers. The image of the brute is the symbol of an appeaser’s belief in the supremacy of evil, which means—not in conscious terms, but in terms of his quaking, cringing, blinding panic—that when his mind judges a thing to be evil, his emotions proclaim its power, and the more evil, the more powerful.

Twitter is the Enemy of the American People

On Oct. 18, 2020, Twitter banned the account of Dr. Scott Atlas for defending President Donald Trump’s position on mask mandates. In his tweet, he cited scientific studies, and the tweet contained absolutely no false information.

Also in October, Twitter banned the account of The New York Post for accurately reporting on a story about Hunter Biden’s laptop. Today we know these were just the first salvos in this evil company’s assault on American liberty.

For all its talk about safety, community, and the health of discourse, we see today that Twitter acts in favor of one interest and one interest alone: its own, even when it means destabilizing the American people. On Friday, the company permanently banned Trump from its platform and began a purge of conservative voices.

They claim this is needed to protect America from a coup. That is a farcical lie. They did it because their political enemies such as Trump and Sen. Josh Hawley are now out of power, and they mean to keep it way.

As a private company, Twitter is free to do as it pleases. And I am free to call them what they are: a shill for communist China that seeks the destruction of America.

Do you doubt that? Then explain why Iran can call for Jews to be killed on Twitter’s platform and China can spread propaganda about how rounding up Uyghur men and forced sterilization of Uyghur women is actually good, but Donald Trump can’t tweet. It is evil. And anyone defending Jack Dorsey’s death machine is complicit.

We live in two Americas right now. In Republican-led Florida and Texas, economies are open, people go to restaurants and movies, small businesses can prosper. In Democrat-led New York and California, lockdowns are crushing the people. They are not allowed to gather in person, only on big tech platforms. Guess which outcome Twitter prefers?

Now compare the effects of COVID on these two Americas. There is no rational way to argue that the lockdowns led to better results.

I want to put this as clearly as possible. Twitter attempted and largely succeeded in silencing dissent to policies that were against its own interests. They don’t care about the suicides, overdoses, missed cancer screenings, or poverty caused by these actions, they only care about money and power. Blood is dripping from Jack Dorsey’s hands across the globe and here at home as he counts his billions.

Feckless Democrats and faux conservatives applaud or look the other way at Twitter’s actions because it serves their purposes; the poor, blind fools have no idea that they will be next. This has nothing to do with the Constitution, or laws, this has to do with Dorsey being a liar who orchestrates mass disinformation campaigns on the American people. Twitter’s safety guidelines have nothing to do with safety, they have to do with profit.

I am not writing here about Section 230, or legislative approaches to rein in Big Tech. That can come later. I am writing to make it clear that Twitter has played a central role in destroying Americans’ lives through lockdowns, lying to them about Hunter Biden to win an election, and enabling the world’s most brutal regime to practice genocide in peace.

Twitter doesn’t want to serve you; it wants to rule you. And it is well on its way.

Now Big Tech is seeking to deplatform Twitter’s competitor, Parler. Politicians and journalists are cheering for censorship and suggesting that cable operators should ban conservative news outlets. You see, these people know what is good for you and what isn’t. They just want to protect you from dangerous information. To them, you are a child and they are your parents, the only difference being that you pay them an allowance.

Now we Americans have no choice. Now we must convene our secret meetings in person, far from the peering eyes of Big Tech and its Chinese overlords, for whom it will do anything.

Consider the fact that in many places in America meetings are literally illegal right now. Everything changed on Friday. The cards all stare up at us from the table now. Twitter’s goal is to create for our children an America our parents would not recognize.

Twitter is the enemy of freedom, the enemy of liberty, and the enemy of the American people. It must be treated as such.

David Marcus, The Federalist

The Truth About January 6th, and Where We Go from Here

According to a left-wing propaganda narrative that you can read in the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, and similar outlets, the violence in Congress that occurred in the afternoon of January 6 was the culmination of a long series of outrages by President Donald Trump. When he lost the November election to Joe Biden, he could not accept his loss. He kept making baseless claims that he had won the election and accused Biden supporters of using fake ballots and rigged voting machines to inflate the totals for Biden. He kept filing lawsuits to get parts of the verdict overturned, but the courts rejected all his claims. He thought he still had a chance on January 6, when the electoral votes are counted in Congress. He wanted Vice President Mike Pence to violate the Constitution. Although Pence has the purely ceremonial role of presiding over the joint session, he wanted Pence to toss out slates of electors who opposed him, or at least send them back to the states for recertification. Pence refused to violate the Constitution. When Trump found out about it, he was so angry that he incited part of a rally supporting him to storm Congress and shut down the session. Because of him, several people were killed. He is a sore loser who should be removed from office immediately and sent to prison for sedition as well.

Every word of this narrative is false. Let’s take one item out of chronological order, because it has gotten so much attention. It’s alleged that Trump became enraged at Pence because Pence wouldn’t violate the Constitution. In fact, there is a good case that what Trump was asking Pence to do was perfectly legitimate. As John Yoo and Robert Delahunty pointed out in an article in the American on October 19,

We suggest that the Vice President’s role is not the merely ministerial one of opening the ballots and then handing them over (to whom?) to be counted. Though the 12th Amendment describes the counting in the passive voice, the language seems to envisage a single, continuous process in which the Vice President both opens and counts the votes.

The check on error or fraud in the count is that the Vice President’s activities are to be done publicly, “in the presence” of Congress. And if “counting” the electors’ votes is the Vice President’s responsibility, then the inextricably intertwined responsibility for judging the validity of those votes must also be his.

If that reading is correct, then the Electoral Count Act is unconstitutional. Congress cannot use legislation to dictate how any individual branch of government is to perform its unique duties: Congress could not prescribe how future Senates should conduct an impeachment trial, for example. Similarly, we think the better reading is that Vice President Pence would decide between competing slates of electors chosen by state legislators and governors, or decide whether to count votes that remain in litigation.

Yoo is a controversial person, but there’s no doubt he is a constitutional law scholar in good standing.

Well, you might say, what right did Trump have to blow up on Pence just because Pence disagreed with his understanding of the Constitution? The answer to that is simple. Pence had assured Trump that he accepted his claim that there were irregularities in the voting. He said at a rally in Georgia on January 4, just two days before the count, that the case for widespread election fraud would be made to the American people when Congress meets this week to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s victory over President Trump.

“We’ve all got our doubts about the last election. I share the concerns of millions of Americans about voting irregularities,” Pence said at an indoor congregation at Rock Springs Church in Milner, Ga., in support of Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue in runoff elections there.

Pence, who by law will be tasked with declaring a winner of the Electoral College vote, seemed to leave open the possibility that Trump could still remain in power for a second term.

“Come this Wednesday,” he said, referring to the impending certification of election results, “we’ll have our day in Congress. We’ll hear the evidence.”

The election was in fact stolen from him. It’s easy to hack voting machines, such as those made by Dominion, to change vote totals. When I say this, I’m not relying on a source the Left will dismiss as fantasies from conspiracy-theory nuts. According to a story published by NBC News last year,

It was an assurance designed to bolster public confidence in the way America votes: Voting machines “are not connected to the internet.”

Then Acting Undersecretary for Cybersecurity and Communications at the Department of Homeland Security Jeanette Manfra said those words in 2017, testifying before Congress while she was responsible for the security of the nation’s voting system.

So many government officials like Manfra have said the same thing over the last few years that it is commonly accepted as gospel by most Americans. Behind it is the notion that if voting systems are not online, hackers will have a harder time compromising them.

“We’ve all got our doubts about the last election. I share the concerns of millions of Americans about voting irregularities,” Pence said at an indoor congregation at Rock Springs Church in Milner, Ga., in support of Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue in runoff elections there.
It Takes a Revolution:…Klayman Esq., LarryBest Price: $13.01Buy New $12.74(as of 06:53 EST – Details)

Pence, who by law will be tasked with declaring a winner of the Electoral College vote, seemed to leave open the possibility that Trump could still remain in power for a second term.

“Come this Wednesday,” he said, referring to the impending certification of election results, “we’ll have our day in Congress. We’ll hear the evidence.”

The election was in fact stolen from him. It’s easy to hack voting machines, such as those made by Dominion, to change vote totals. When I say this, I’m not relying on a source the Left will dismiss as fantasies from conspiracy-theory nuts. According to a story published by NBC News last year,

It was an assurance designed to bolster public confidence in the way America votes: Voting machines “are not connected to the internet.”

Then Acting Undersecretary for Cybersecurity and Communications at the Department of Homeland Security Jeanette Manfra said those words in 2017, testifying before Congress while she was responsible for the security of the nation’s voting system.

So many government officials like Manfra have said the same thing over the last few years that it is commonly accepted as gospel by most Americans. Behind it is the notion that if voting systems are not online, hackers will have a harder time compromising them.

“We’ve all got our doubts about the last election. I share the concerns of millions of Americans about voting irregularities,” Pence said at an indoor congregation at Rock Springs Church in Milner, Ga., in support of Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue in runoff elections there.
It Takes a Revolution:…Klayman Esq., LarryBest Price: $13.01Buy New $12.74(as of 06:53 EST – Details)

Pence, who by law will be tasked with declaring a winner of the Electoral College vote, seemed to leave open the possibility that Trump could still remain in power for a second term.

“Come this Wednesday,” he said, referring to the impending certification of election results, “we’ll have our day in Congress. We’ll hear the evidence.”

The election was in fact stolen from him. It’s easy to hack voting machines, such as those made by Dominion, to change vote totals. When I say this, I’m not relying on a source the Left will dismiss as fantasies from conspiracy-theory nuts. According to a story published by NBC News last year,

It was an assurance designed to bolster public confidence in the way America votes: Voting machines “are not connected to the internet.”

Then Acting Undersecretary for Cybersecurity and Communications at the Department of Homeland Security Jeanette Manfra said those words in 2017, testifying before Congress while she was responsible for the security of the nation’s voting system.

So many government officials like Manfra have said the same thing over the last few years that it is commonly accepted as gospel by most Americans. Behind it is the notion that if voting systems are not online, hackers will have a harder time compromising them.

But that is an overstatement, according to a team of 10 independent cybersecurity experts who specialize in voting systems and elections. While the voting machines themselves are not designed to be online, the larger voting systems in many states end up there, putting the voting process at risk.

That team of election security experts say[s] that last summer, they discovered some systems are, in fact, online.

over 35 [voting systems] had been left online and we’re still continuing to find more,” Kevin Skoglund, a senior technical advisor at the election security advocacy group National Election Defense Coalition, told NBC News.

“We kept hearing from election officials that voting machines were never on the internet,” he said. “And we knew that wasn’t true. And so we set out to try and find the voting machines to see if we could find them on the internet, and especially the back-end systems that voting machines in the precinct were connecting to to report their results.” …

The three largest voting manufacturing companies—Election Systems &Software, Dominion Voting Systems and Hart InterCivic—have acknowledged they all put modems in some of their tabulators and scanners. The reason? So that unofficial election results can more quickly be relayed to the public. Those modems connect to cell phone networks, which, in turn, are connected to the internet.

Trump has every right to be suspicious. Shouldn’t there be a full and impartial investigation by recognized experts of whether fraud occurred? If the Biden camp thinks the election was fair and honest, shouldn’t they have welcomed a full investigation? But of course they didn’t. And this type of fraud is just one of many others, such as truckloads of Biden ballots arriving after it looked like Trump was winning, in just the right numbers to give Biden the victory.

When we look at Trump’s complaints, we need to bear one vital fact in mind. As Mike Davis noted in New Left Review, November–December 2020, p. 5, “Biden eked out a slim victory, in some states only by microscopic margins, that won him 306 electoral votes, the same as Trump four years ago. A mere 256,000 vote in five key states purchased 73 of those votes.” This is why Trump is right: because just a few votes could change the outcome, and because there was a lot of apparent fraud, a full investigation was needed.

But, some people might say, this doesn’t excuse Trump. Didn’t he incite people at a rally to invade the sacred halls of Congress? Well, in the first place, the halls of Congress aren’t “sacred”. They belong to the people. And Trump didn’t incite violence. Not at all. He wanted a peaceful protest, and this is what he got, aside from a few antifa activists who crashed the protest. They had been bused into Washington earlier.

According to in the American Thinker published on January 7,

January 6th’s events are being seized on as a game-changer, leading to calls to invoke the 25th Amendment; calls to impeach and remove President Trump; and efforts to discredit Trump, his supporters, and conservatism. It has distracted attention from issues around the legitimacy of voting procedures in several key states and guaranteed the Electoral College vote just before 4 A.M. that ratified Joe Biden’s and Kamala Harris’s inauguration as president and vice president.

Applying the classic legal question ‘cui bono?’ (‘who benefits?’), it is clear that Democrats, anti-Trump establishment Republicans, the leftist media, and TDS-sufferers all are victorious.

Disturbing video available (for now) on Twitter shows Capitol Police allowing demonstrators to enter the Capitol grounds. . . Elsewhere at the Capitol, the police sent out to hold a perimeter were unable to hold off mobs.

Why was the United States Capitol left so vulnerable?

After the demonstrators were led in, a policeman killed a young woman at point-blank range. The police and Secret Service ended the session of Congress, not the peaceful demonstrators. To give themselves cover, they imported a few Antifa agitators.

Why did they do this? I suggest they did this for a reason, which will become clear if we ask, What was going on just before the demonstration? The members of Congress were about to hear a debate on the objections raised against the votes in the swing states. The American people would have been able to hear the evidence for themselves. This had to be stopped. By stopping the session for about six hours, the debate was shifted to the very late evening hours of January 6 and early morning hours of January 7, when very few people were watching. Besides, all the attention was now on the protest rather than the fraudulent voting.

What can be done now? President Trump should not urge us all to “come together.” Instead, he should support secession. States and communities that support Trump are too far apart from supporters of the Biden-Harris BLM camorra to live in a united country. “Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14 [Douay-Rheims Bible])

Lew Rockwell, at Lewrockwell.com