Michael Scheuer | Non-Intervention

The tyrants above; all elected Democrats at every level of government; all members of the Democrat Party; and all of the supporters of the foregoing are precisely why the Founders left Americans the 2nd Amendment, and decreed that it was never to be abridged.

Thus, the recent performance of these tyrants — seeking to negate the votes of  63 million citizens — underlines the vital importance of the 2nd Amendment and the right and duty of the citizenry to eliminate tyrants by force if no other resolution can be attained. The determination of when only that final option remains, belongs exclusively to the citizenry.

“The only real security of liberty in any country, is the jealousy [suspicion of rulers] and circumspection of the people themselves. Let them be watchful over their rulers. Should they find a combination against their liberties, and all other methods appear insufficient to preserve them, they have, thank God, an ultimate remedy. The power which created the government, can destroy it.”

–James Iredell, “Speech to the North Carolina Ratifying Convention,” 28 July 1788 (2)

–Endnotes:

–1.)  Photo from: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/19/democrats-decline-to-view-less-redacted-mueller-report/#

–2.) Bernard Bailyn (ed.). The Debate on the Constitution, Part 2, New York: The Library of America, 1993, p. 887

I highly recommend to readers of this site the following article: Barbara Bolland’s excellent, “5 Infuriating Takeaways from the ‘Afghanistan Papers’,” American Conservative, 10 December 2019. (1) Ms. Bolland’s incisive article recounts the deliberate waste of U.S. human and financial assets in Afghanistan, as well as the wholesale lies that were, for 18-plus years, used to mislead Americans by presidents, media pundits, senators and congressmen, and, most especially, consistently, and vigorously by multiple Chairmen of the Joints Chiefs of Staff and many other U.S. general officers. (NB: I suspect that Iraq has been as bad, but that shoe has yet to drop.)

While I have often discussed America’s Afghan War on this blog, I cannot add much to Ms. Boland’s article, which clearly presents evidence from just-released documents and focuses on the years after the war began on 7 October 2001. I can, however, add a bit about what happened in the short span of weeks between 9/11 and the war’s October start. (NB: I worked on Afghanistan at CIA — from several different directions — from December, 1985, to November, 2004.)

The following points underscore, I think, how lightly the most senior levels of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) took the Agency’s responsibility to provide the best possible support to the U.S. government’s Afghan war effort. I tend to believe that this fact was, in major part, the result of senior CIA officials knowing that the Bush Administration’s main goal in the Afghan War was to use it to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq, as well as to use it as the driver for a vast expansion of the police/surveillance state in the United States, which is still growing. (NB: On Iraq, for example, I recall that Agency leaders began shifting Arabic-speakers from the Bin Laden unit and other CTC components by late-2001/early-2002, and sending them to aid preparatory efforts underway for the March, 2003, invasion of Iraq.) Following is the story of these five weeks as I remember it. I was recalled to the Agency’s Counterterrorism Center in the early evening of 11 September 2001.

–1.) On 9/11, the CIA was flush with officers who had prolonged experience working on Afghanistan and the varities of war as they are conducted therein. A substantial number of these individuals – from lower GS grades to the most experienced Senior Intelligence Officers — had worked on Afghanistan for the entire length of the Afghan-Soviet War, 1979-1989, stayed on from 1989-to-1992 to assist in the final destruction of the still Soviet-armed and supported Afghan Communist regime, and then continued working on the country’s involvement in terrorism, insurgency, and heroin-trafficking to the day of the 9/11 attacks.

Now, 14-years of experience working on one facet of a private-sector institution’s business might not seem unusual – men and women spend thirty-or-more years making steel or automobiles, others preside over logistics or financial operations for the same period – but at CIA, and in the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) generally, such expertise is thought unnecessary and as a sure sign of an officer’s lack of career ambition. Some intelligence officers are permitted to specialize on particular issues for prolonged periods, but only at the personal cost of few and widely separated promotions. An officer’s decision to specialize is always made with knowledge that it will limit his-or-her chances for promotion.

–2.) Before the fires of 9/11 were damped and bureaucratic priorities took control of CIA decision-making, a team of several of the smartest, bravest, and most experienced CIA Afghan hands were deployed to Afghanistan. There they prepared the ground for U.S. relations with the anti-Taleban Northern Alliance, secured airfields and other areas for the use of U.S. Special Forces, gathered intelligence about al-Qaeda and Taleban activities, and made sure the coffee was hot when Afghanistan-ignorant U.S. general officers swaggered into the country.

These CIA officers did a magnificent and courageous job, one whose success shone even brighter after it was learned that Pentagon had no off-the-shelf plan for war in Afghanistan – not much of a surprise, as it already had refused to assist in killing/capturing bin Laden – and had no interest in exploiting the detailed plans formulated by the CIA and other IC components for destroying Afghanistan’s poppy fields and the organizations that facilitated the export of heroin to Europe, Turkey, Russia, the United States, and elsewhere.

–3.) By a week or so after 9/11, CIA’s senior bureaucrats substantially reduced the quality of Agency support not only for the U.S. military, but also for the Agency officers on the ground in Afghanistan and elsewhere in South Asia. (NB: The exceptions to this statement are the superb support for Afghan operations from the Counterterrorism Center’s Bin Laden unit — which of course gave President Clinton 10 chances to kill or capture bin Laden in 1997-1999, and thereby 10 chances to prevent 9/11 — and CIA’s always excellent and daring paramilitary operators.)

Four senior CIA officers are primarily and directly responsible for the self-inflicted wound of refusing to exploit CIA’s substantial stock of Afghan operational experience to support the Afghan war effort: Cofer Black, Henry Crumpton, James Pavitt, and George Tenet.

–4.) The gist of this travesty is that the four men responsible for providing CIA’s best effort, instead used the just-started war to test out their belief that it took no special talent or experience to understand Afghanistan and defeat Islamist terrorists and insurgents. They championed the delusion that any Afghanistan-ignorant Directorate of Operations (DO) officer could be plugged into waging the new Afghan war and do as well or better than those CIA officers who were already armed with a decade or more first-hand Afghan experience in assisting the mujahidin to defeat the Soviet superpower and/or searching for bin Laden.

James Pavitt, in particular, is at fault on this issue. He appeared to strongly dislike the Counterterrorism Center; had no significant experience in the Islamic world or its wars; and abhorred approving covert operations meant to protect Americans if there was chance they might fail and thereby further undermine his very thin credentials for serving in a senior-most CIA leadership position. Pavitt did, however, have what counted most; namely, DCI George Tenet’s willingness to coddle him and ignore examples of his human frailties.

–5.) Two of the other men mentioned above — Cofer Black (Chief/CTC) and Henry Crumpton — had spent almost all of their pre-CTC careers working issues that had nothing to do with Afghanistan or South Asia. Working on intelligence issues in other areas of the world, of course, is nowhere close to an easy thing. It is a very dangerous world, and both men were reputed to have done excellently in the region in which they were stationed. But each – whether for self-aggrandizement or their sharing of Pavitt’s view that the Afghan war, Islamist insurgency, or Islamist terrorist experience was nothing special and any DO officer without it could do the job – proceeded to form an Afghan Task Force (ATF) led by Crumpton. With Black’s okay, Crumpton filled it with officers who had spent much of their careers working on Europe, Asia, Latin America, and Africa. Again, I must add that each of these regions present a wealth of intricate and dangerous problems for the Agency officers working there, and each problem requires experience, talent, and bravery to solve successfully.

That said, in supporting an unanticipated and emergency U.S. military invasion/occupation of a country where U.S. military forces had never operated, it beggars commonsense not to have exploited the abundance of Afghan-experienced CIA officers. If your goal was – as it should have been – to have CIA do its utmost to support U.S. forces, and the victory that U.S. generals should have but never did seek, then it was absolutely necessary to bring to bear CIA’s best brainpower and country-savvy. This was never done by the CIA while it was headed by George Tenet. This struck me as odd. Tenet had been the staff director of the the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Agency (SSCI) during much of the Soviet-Afghan War in the 1980s. Throughout those years, Tenet was regularly briefed in detail on precisely how the mujahedin were gradually defeating the Soviet superpower. Ironically, Tenet, after 9/11, presided over an effort that allowed the mujahidin to defeat a second superpower in exactly the same way in which Tenet knew they had defeated the first.  (NB: How do I know this? I delivered or participated in several dozen of these briefings.)

–6.) The new, post-9/11 Afghan Task Force (ATF) – not be confused with the first ATF, which successfully helped the Afghans defeat the Soviets — also operated in a way that made it apparent that its main task was to prove Pavitt’s belief that “anyone can do this Afghan/terrorist stuff”, and not to bring pertinent Agency experience to bear and thereby optimize the Agency’s contribution to the war effort. Set up in a secure-access vault, the ATF’s chief — Crumpton — decreed that each officer working in the vault had to have an extra marking on his/her badge before being permitted to enter. In essence, this chucklehead ensured that his able but Afghan-ignorant officers were all but sealed-off from the wealth of pertinent and recent experience that stood just outside the door of their now-sacred vault.  More than a few times, the Army and Marine field-grade officers who visited the ATF for pre-deployment briefings left the vault and immediately sought out Afghan-experienced CIA officers they knew – at the time, many were working on al-Qaeda and other Sunni fighters in CTC, and had been for 5 to 10 years – to get the real skinny on what they would face in the unique world inside Afghanistan.

In the next few years — my first-hand experience ends in mid-November, 20o4 — many CIA officers were amazed to find that virtually no field- grade officers had been prepared by their superiors for the new Afghan war by being directed to read and study the Red Army’s Afghan after-action report — written by that army’s General Staff — about the causes of the USSR’s disastrous defeat in the Soviet-Afghan war of 1979-1992. (2)

Almost none of military officers being briefed – and I suspect more than a few ATF members – seemed to be aware of this surprisingly frank study that detailed Soviet military, political, and intelligence failures during Moscow’s Afghan war. One of these failures was not having studied how illiterate, technology-poor, and ill-armed Afghans had been able, almost without exception, to defeat the far better armed and much more technically advanced armies that had invaded Afghanistan on multiple occasions since the time of Alexander the Great.

The Soviet generals also noted that they failed to understand the importance of the Islamic faith to the Afghans’ conduct of war. This failure was especially prominent in the areas of the mujahidin coping well with high casualties, especially family members; attaching minimal importance to defeat in individual engagements with the Soviets because defeat meant only that they had not yet earned the victory only Allah could deliver; demonstrating extreme patience, born of faith, that Allah eventually would award victory to His faithful; and the minimal war-weariness and morale-decline among the mujahidin due to the foregoing realities of their faith.

CIA’s Afghan hands not only read the Soviet generals’ book, but had first-hand experience in working with and supporting the Afghans whom the Red Army generals described as their conquerors. U.S. general officers had no idea of how to defeat the mujahedin, but CIA officers could easily have instructed the clueless American and NATO generals on how those haphazardly armed Islamist insurgents defeated a Soviet army loaded with superior technology and weaponry, and how they surely would be defeated by them. None of this was allowed to be shared with U.S. soldiers and Marines — unless they searched out the veteran Afghan CIA officers — going off to fight the Afghan enemy in a war that is now more than 18-years old.

In the end, there are three iron-clad lessons that CIA’s Afghan hands would have shared with the U.S. military had they had the opportunity.

–First, take to heart the lessons of a superpower’s defeat by Afghans that were graciously detailed by Red Army generals, and do not repeat them.

–Second, there will never be Western-style democracy, secularism, civil liberties, women’s rights, meaningful elections, or rule of law in Afghanistan; in other words, Westernization and secularism can never be imposed on Afghanistan. There was no sign in 2001 that more than a distinct minority of Afghans — many of them expatriates — would accept such an imposition. Even fewer would accept it in 2019, because the power of Islamism is now far stronger in Afghanistan and because the Afghan insurgents believe they have won.

–Three, because remaking Afghans into secular, libertine, and democracy-addled Westerners cannot be done by a war of any length, there is no use hanging around for more than the 18-24 months needed to conduct a savage, country-wide, and punitive campaign of human and material desolation, and then get out of the country. That course of action would have made the Afghans think twice about again messing with the U.S. military, a thought process that would have been accelerated, deepened, and lengthened once there were no more U.S. boots on the ground in Afghanistan.

Just before the October, 2001, opening of the Afghan war, the renowned, at times brilliant, British military historian John Keegan offered U.S. leaders the same first-rate advice (3) that would have been offered by CIA’s Afghan hands had they been allowed to participate in supporting the war. Keegan explained that,

The pattern to Afghanistan’s foreign and domestic wars seems to go as follows. Foreign interventions aimed at dominance founder on the belligerence of the population, who abandon internecine conflict to combine against invaders, and [up]on the country’s severe terrain. In the absence of foreign interference, however, Afghans fall easily into fighting each other, often seeking outside help, which provokes intervention, thus restarting the cycle. Limited campaigns of penetration, aimed simply at inflicting punishment, can succeed, as long as the punitive forces remain mobile, keep control of the high ground and are skillful at tactical disengagement. … Is this analysis any help to the Americans? It certainly warns against any plan to station large ground forces inside the country….

Then Keegan got down to nuts and bolts. “As America may, and should, plan to mount only punitive attacks,” Keegan wrote, “they should do so from outside Afghanistan, adding that central Asia promises to be the best basing area available.” Keegan closed his on-point advice for the Bush Administration by confiding that the most important lesson the British military had learned from more than a century of mostly failed invasions of Afghanistan from India was to have no ambition of conducting a long occupation or of reforming the people and their governing practices. “What the product of punitive attacks might be defies prediction,” Keegan wrote,

As one of President Bush’s closest advisers is reported to have asked recently: “What can we do to Afghanistan that Afghanistan hasn’t already done to itself?” Always poor and backward, it has been reduced by civil and foreign war to a wasteland. The best that can be hoped of military action is to regenerate division between its many tribes and factions, which may yield terrorist hostages to American wrath, and to frighten the Taliban leaders. … Afghans, though doughty warriors, are also pragmatists. They like fighting but are prepared to live to fight another day if the odds are stacked against them. The trick America must achieve is to stack the odds in its favour.

Obviously, neither Bush, his advisers, or his generals, nor – astoundingly, the British cabinet and generals – gave a hoot for Keegan’s defeat-avoiding advice and so will end with a much more humiliating and total defeat than did the Red Army. That reality is bad enough, but the fact that CIA officers – and, ironically, Red Army generals — could have provided as good advice as Keegan, but based on much more recent and detailed evidence and first-hand experience, speaks to the unrelenting danger that cowardly, self-aggrandizing, and grossly ignorant senior bureaucrats consistently pose to U.S. national security.

Endnotes:

–1.) Barbara Boland, “5 Infuriating Takeaways from the ‘Afghanistan Papers’,” American Conservative, 10 December 2019,  at https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/5-infuriating-findings-in-the-afghanistan-papers/

–2.) Lester W. Grau and Michael A. Gress, (Eds.). The Soviet-Afghan War How a Superpower Fought and Lost. Manhattan, KS: Kansas University Press, [21 January] 2002

–3.) John Keegan, “If America decides to take on the Afghans, this is how to do it,” 20 September 2001, at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/4265748/If-America-decides-to-take-on-the-Afghans-this-is-how-to-do-it.html

This morning news is replete with condemnations of QANON, his team, and their followers. Much is made of the accused murderer of a gang boss whose lawyers claim that his support for QANON shows his insanity. Support for such an inane and daft argument, of course, will only occur if a court is presided over by an Obama-appointed judge.

The point of noting the foregoing is that, beyond being a silly lie, it is too little, too late to save the Democratic coup-ists and insurrectionists. Why? Because there is so much accuracy – and well-proven accuracy – in three years of QANON postings that there is no need to defend either the published material or QANON and his substantial team of loyal-citizen researchers. (NB: QANON also has millions of followers and researchers overseas, good people who are now supporting his work and also working take down their own tyrannical rulers.)

The republic-wide insurrection against the President and his administration has long been documented and fully outlined by QANON and team, as has the extremely well-merited and excruciatingly painful punishment that is coming to the insurrectionists. Personally, I would prefer immediate and lethal, post-trial punishment – by loyal-citizen firing squads chosen by lottery – but will stand by any decision that is supported by the majority of loyal citizens. Remember that, in this case, “enough” will be enough only when loyal citizens – not the politicians — say it is.

In addition to the irrefutable fact that QANON data have been overwhelmingly accurate, a review of the clear facts about the leading insurrectionists’ behavior and intentions add luster to the savage house-cleaning that is approaching, per QANON, commonsense, the Constitution’s provisions, and answered prayers. It ought to give QANON deniers (AKA: coup-ists, insurrectionists) plenty to think about as they wait their for their own inevitable and personal hell to arrive. (Maybe all of the following, gallows-headed traitors will write a Q on their palm and claim innocence by insanity?)

–1.) Nancy Pelosi: Framer-in Chief of President Trump; from a “fine Catholic home” that taught her Catholicism says it is okay to kill 61 million babies; fit to live in a high-security nursing home, but not to work in one. Mother of a son who is just as lawabiding, adult, and talented as Biden’s son Hunter.

–2.) Barack Obama: Kenya-born: Iran’s “man of the century”: insurrectionist in the shadows; lover of Ayatollahs; collector of pallets of cash; leading Climate Change hoaxer; and, not a crime, just fact: another typical Rahm Emmanuel-like, Chicago-based, shit-bird loser

–3.) Chuck Schumer: Abettor of the crimes of Pelosi, Obama, Feinstein, and Biden; a lead despicable in using people killed in shooting incidents – perhaps arranged by his party – for prompting fake crocodile tears, political gain, and the end of the Bill of Rights.

–4.) Adam Schiff: Nazi-like Gauleiter; shredder of the Constitution and Bill of Rights; longtime pal of a rich, Democratic-bundler, druggee, and accused doper/murderer of young men; illegal phone-tapper; Pharaoh-like dresser-upper at private parties (or rituals?).

–5.) John Brennan: Coup-ist; treasonous bastard; close ties to Saudis and perhaps 9/11: serial perjurer: hides his desperate fear with MSNBC tirades and Tweets, the latter all his IQ makes possible. (NOTE to the CIA Director: When will you get rid of the multiple Agency employees who are feeding intelligence to Brennan, Clapper, Pelosi, Nadler, Schiff, and other republic-and-Constitution attackers? If not forthwith, they will sink the whole Agency. Times a wastin’.)

–6.) Gerry Nadler: Nazi-like Gauleiter; Bill-of Rights destroyer; seemingly a former overseer at Tara; a mumbling, bumbling, none-too smart, Mr. Five-by-Five-type, this last no crime, but he has none of the redeeming qualities of that lad:

“Well, twirl my turban, man alive!, Here comes Mister Five by Five, He’s one of those big fat bouncing boys, Solid avoirdupois! That man, Can really jump it for a fat man, The only trouble is there’s no way of knowin’, Whether he’s comin’ or goin’.” (1)

–7.) Diane Finestein: 20-year playmate of a Chinese spy – imagine the pillow talk; architect of Kavanaugh’s framing; outspoken “Friend of China”. Enough said.

–8.) Joe Biden: Thief harvesting (local and U.S. taxpayer?) dollars in Ukraine and Cyprus – at least; decades-long, child-feeler-upper; taunter and ridiculer of old, sick men; hider/abettor of Obama, Lynch, Holder, and IRS felonies; father of an over-age, moronic, crack-user that Dad forced the military to accept.

–9.) Hillary Clinton: All-time-champion foundation felon; inept but dedicated election-rigger; partner in husband-wife firm associated with several dozen mysterious murders; champion of the mass-murder of American babies, as well that of the Haitians abandoned by her charity; too many more items to count.

–10.) John Podesta: Pizza? Seth Rich? DNC Server? Enough said.

–11.) Eric Swalwell: Effeminate me-tooer participant in the illegal framing of Kavanaugh and the President; violator of the Geneva Accord’s prohibition against releasing poison gas against civilians, a brutal attack seen and heard on MSNBC video.

–12.) James Clapper: Serial perjurer; taker of constant, lousily disguised trips to Australia to seek refuge from a foreign government that will shield him from the avengers of his and Brennan’s lies, treason, and other crimes. He eventually will wish to changes places with the Koala bears dying in brush/forest fires.

–13.) Christopher Steele: Foreign mercenary waging war against a legitimately elected U.S. president; just another typical anti-U.S., MI6, British asshole — arrogance, smug looks, cowardice, big talk, no doing.

–14.) John Kerry: Obama’s successor as lover of Ayatollahs: close family involvement with Biden crime family: abettor of the globalist/foreigner attempt to impose the quack-science Climate Change hoax in the United States to destroy the earning-power, savings, and liberties of America’s now-rising working and middle classes.

–15.) David Ignatius: Washington Post’s latest lying, pundit-in-chief; court-historian for the self-proclaimed resistance; No talent, but decades of publishing lies and compromising intelligence operations; now knee-deep in support of the Democratic party’s illegal coup and insurrection.

—Question: Does the Constitution and the 1^st Amendment protect pundits who knowingly publish data meant to further a violent domestic insurrection and destroy the national government, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights?

–Answer: The Founders, God bless ‘em, were not dummies. Ignatius, his fellow lying scribblers, and all the U.S. citizens named above will pay dearly for their ill-deeds. There is no Constitutional protection for U.S. citizens who wage war against their country, especially those who enlist foreign governments to assist them.

—

–1.) Lyrics by Ella Mae Morse and Freddie Slack, “Mr. Five by Five” at https://www.amazon.com/Mr-Five-By/dp/B01DFGMQHU

Pathetic Females: First there was Christine Blasey Ford, then there was Marie Yovanovitch, and now there is Lisa Page, three revolting products of fifty years of American feminism. It seems clear that these three slobbering women have been ruined by that feminism, and may well have been raised by three mothers who were likewise ruined. The mighty contemporary American feminist-woman, it seems, specializes in demanding preferences for education and jobs, the right to murder, and laws assuring their dominance over men. Then once they get into the workplace they pretend to be tough, smart, and honest.

But once they run into difficult situations — Ford, a perceived threat to her right to murder found in Hillary’s defeat and Kavanaugh’s nomination; Yovanovitch’s seemingly treasonous work to overthrow Trump before and after he defeated the feminist god, baby-butcher, and criminal Hillary Clinton; and Page, who appears to have loved stupidly while blithely committing fraud and treason – they invariably seek refuge in playing the 1900-1960 kind of women, those that they and their like inaccurately berate as inferior women. They cry, even weep; pout; take on the demeanor of a sweet, but victimized, 12-year-old Shirley Temple; claim intimidation; and, of course, blame men for their problems. These three women are pathetic charlatans and appear to be warning signs that there are several generations of American women that are riddled with similar perpetual adolescents. These women are non-adults who masquerade as responsible adults until they are challenged, do not get what they want, or are caught in compromising or criminal situations. As always, Mr. Dylan, America’s greatest post-war philosopher and historian, used lyrics to nail such women to the wall. That, of course, is what little girls of the type of Ford, Yovanovitch, and Page richly deserve.

I just can’t fit
Yes, I believe it’s time for us to quit
But when we meet again
Introduced as friends
Please don’t let on that you knew me when
I was hungry and it was your world
Ah, you fake just like a woman, yes, you do
You make love just like a woman, yes, you do
Then you ache just like a woman
But you break just like a little girl (1)

Just before I published this piece, a fourth suffering sister of the three little girls discussed above flew onto the stage. A law professor named Pamela Karlan explained to the judiciary committee that the Constitution clearly demands impeachment of the president because she personally hates Trump; would never walk past one of his hotels; and thinks the president’s young son is a worthy target of her abusive comments. Childish, incoherent, hateful, ignorant of the Constitution and the Founders’ intent, and oh so sensitive about her agonizingly hurt personal feelings, Professor Karlan is a stereotypical, unable-to-grow-up feminist loser, and a malignant part of the feminist disease that is battering the republic, its institutions, its social cohesion, and all normal citizens of both genders. Time to charge into adulthood, Professor Karlan, as you have now demonstrated that a 60-year-old little girl has nothing worthwhile to contribute in the public arena.

2^nd Amendment: The journalist Jed Babbin has written in The Spectator that, here in Virginia, a leader of the state’s anti-Constitution, Democratic Party, State Senator Dick Saslaw, has “introduced a bill (SB 16) that he will sponsor in the 2020 legislative session. That bill will outlaw not only the sale or transfer but also the possession of certain firearms.” (2) In addition, Babbin explains, “every rifle of the common AR-15 design and a great many pistols and shotguns in common use for personal defense, target shooting, and hunting would be banned. Not only would they be banned, but because SB 16 makes it illegal to possess such firearms, they also would have to be either surrendered to or seized by police authorities in the jurisdiction in which they are located.” (3)

Since reading Mr. Babbin’s article, I have not only bought more ammunition, but found that “dozens” of Virginia’s counties have declared themselves a “2^nd Amendment Sanctuary County”. This is a credible and praiseworthy use of the term sanctuary, pro-Constitution and not meant, as are all other domestic sanctuary entities, to destroy the Constitution and the republic. On 3 December 2019, Spencer Neale wrote in the Washington Examiner:

Counties across the state of Virginia are passing Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions in anticipation of strict gun control measures planned by the majority-held Democratic Virginia General Assembly.

On Monday, citizens spilled out of the Betty Queen Center in Louisa where an estimated 600 people gathered to pass a resolution that protects the gun rights of Virginians. 22 other counties in Virginia have signed similar resolutions including Appomattox, Bedford, and Lee counties.

In Halifax [County], citizens overwhelmingly passed a resolution opposing any new gun control legislation that might be passed in the coming state assembly. In southwestern Buchanan County, residents signed a statement demanding the resignation of Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam. (4)

This is about par for Virginia’s ol’ black-faced Ralphie and his fellow fascist Democrats. It also perfectly fits with the national Democratic Party’s strategy  for killing the republic, and will serve as its first campaign to try to remove the citizenry’s ability to defend against and defeat the tyranny Democrats intend to impose on Virginians and then on all Americans. The Democrats ought to stop for a moment and recall that British General Thomas Gage tried to forcibly disarm many of the people of Massachusetts, both in Boston and its environs. Those attempts ended with Lexington, Concord, the blood-soaked British retreat to Boston, Bunker Hill, the cannon-filled threat from Dorchester Heights, and the mighty British army and navy haplessly fleeing Boston for Canada.

Ol’ black-faced Ralph ought to bear that lesson in mind and determine how much he and his supporters value their own hides, as well as the hides of those they send to do their unconstitutional dirty work by confiscating weapons from law-abiding Virginians. Recall also, that America’s freedom and liberty owes a tremendous amount to Virginians, including George Washington, the single bravest and by far the greatest American. But Washington was not often a man of words; the great Virginian Patrick Henry, however, always was. “If we wish to be free,” Mr. Henry declared on 23 March 1775,

“if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained–we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!” (5)

A final point. My predictions are not often correct, but the quickly rising tide of opposition to Democratic Richmond’s intention to disarm Virginians by force, and so unconstitutionally negate the 2^nd Amendment and make Virginians unable to resist tyranny, makes it as near as possible to a certainty that the national Democratic Party will have to arrange a gun-based slaughter of young, probably school-age Virginians. Such an attack probably will be meant to kill numbers exceeding those that occurred in the arranged slaughters in Las Vegas, Broward County, or San Fernando; this to fuel a temporary wave of unthinking and grieving emotions intended to help Democrats disarm Virginians. Black or white victims will not matter a whit to the Democrats, so my best guess is that either a Christian Christmas Eve service or a post-New Year’s Christian grammar school may well be the most likely targets.

In this case, forewarned is, quite literally, forearmed.

–Endnotes:

–1.) Bob Dylan, “Just like a woman,” http://www.bobdylan.com/songs/just-woman/

–2.) Jed Babbin, Gun Confiscation Comes to Virginia,” 2 December 2019, at https://spectator.org/gun-confiscation-comes-to-virginia/

–3.) Ibid.

–4.) Spencer Neale, “Dozens of Virginia counties pass Second Amendment sanctuary resolution,” 3 December 2019, at https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/dozens-of-virginia-counties-pass-second-amendment-sanctuary-resolutions. Another media article notes that 43 Virginia counties have so far declared 2^nd Amendment sanctuaries. See, “Virginia Has Become An Overnight Tidal Wave Of Second Amendment Sanctuaries,” at http://gunrightswatch.com/news/2019/11/24/virginia/virginia-has-become-an-overnight-tidal-wave-of-second-amendment-sanctuaries/

–5.) This passage is from Mr. Henry’s eternally important “Give me liberty, or give me death speech”. The speech can be found at https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/patrick.asp

During a recent interview on CBN, I said that it appeared to me that the country could be justifiably judged to be in a state of insurrection. Several internet sites have taken note of the interview, which is surprising as the masters of the internet make my writings and talks quite hard to find.

On several occasions, I sat down to write a blog piece on the insurrection that has been occurring in America since President Trump was elected, and even well before then. On each occasion, I thought “No, this must be obvious to everyone.” The reaction that the video CBN interview has received, however, makes me think a piece on insurrection is in order.

In the winter of 1860-1861 – often called America’s “Secession Winter” – President Lincoln patiently sought to deal with a parade of seceding states, the formation of the Confederate States of America (C.S.A.), and interference with the national government’s activities, such as the mails, and facilities, such as arsenals and naval installations. The certainly must have been other disruptions in the working relationships between the national government and those of the states, and perhaps especially in the functioning of the federal judiciary in the seceded states.

Lincoln and the U.S. Senate worked in their own lanes throughout the winter to try and find a peaceful resolution to the confrontation and the restoration of the Union. That effort came to an end on 12 April 1861 when C.S.A, President Jefferson Davis ordered the bombardment of Fort Sumter, which is located on an island in Charleston’s harbor. The Confederate attack was not a shot across the Union’s bow, but a 24-plus hour attack that reduced parts of the fort to rubble, and caused the fort’s commander to surrender the post. The attack started a brutal, four-year civil war that yielded 620,000 dead combatants, all Americans, all fellow countrymen.

On 15 April 1861, President Lincoln recognized he could no longer deal with secession by reassuring rhetoric and avoiding actions provoking the South, and, of course, the Senate’s peace talks already had ended. On that day, he issued a proclamation calling for 75,000 volunteers to join the U.S. military for the propose of restoring the Union. The proclamation explained, in part,

“By the President of The United States: A Proclamation, 15 April 1861

WHEREAS the laws of the United States have been, for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.  …” [1]

Now, we can flash ahead almost 16 decades and see that the republic is now experiencing an insurrection broader, more violent, and far more threatening to the survival of the republic and the Union than anything the C.S.A. did before the attack on Fort Sumter. Most especially, the republic now demands — as Mr. Lincoln wrote — a force that can “cause the laws to be duly executed”. Consider the following three points, two specific and one more general.

–1.) The Union’s contemporary enemies have created “sanctuary” states, cities, and towns for protecting illegal aliens, among them many known criminals, from the application of valid laws passed by the national legislature and signed by the president. In essence, the word sanctuary used in this way amounts to the de facto and, at times, the de jure nullification of the national government’s laws and prevents the executive branch from exercising its obligation – under the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause — to fulfill the terms of the immigration laws. It also prevents the national government form helping to protect the lives and property of those U.S. citizens who are endangered by the nullifiers’ illegal actions to shield murderers, rapists, and child molesters from deportation, as well as their willingness to watch their illegal-alien pets spread several contagious diseases – some deadly — in areas where they are being protected and where those diseases have been absent for much of a century.

Often times, moreover, the authorities who issue sanctuary declarations also use their power to forbid state and/or local law enforcement authorities from assisting the national government’s attempts to enforce the republic’s laws and protect the citizenry. At present, the proliferation of sanctuaries across the nation certainly has created, as Lincoln said, “combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.” (NB: The fact is, of course, that the sanctuary movement has been abetted at every step of the way by many Democratic federal, state, and local judges.)

–2.) The state governments of California, Colorado, New York, Washington, and Oregon — and major cities therein — are in the midst of efforts to quite openly dissolve republican governments within their jurisdictions and replace it with socialist-oriented ones. No one seems to mention it, but such an effort at any level of government in the United States is utterly unconstitutional. Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution says:

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.” (2)

This was a question that never came up during the Civil War, as the struggle pitted the world’s two most free and thoroughly republican governments against each other. Quite simply, socialism can never be voted into existence at any governmental level in the United States and, without a constitutional amendment that vitiates Article 4, Section 4, any attempt to do so is an act of insurrection and/or rebellion fully meriting immediate suppression by the Executive Branch using the republic’s military assets. Sanders, Warren, and the Democrats’ other socialists and communists ought to thank goodness that their speech is protected by the 1^st Amendment. They can keep bleating, but any tangible success in their effort to establish a socialist or any other kind of non-republican government in a state, several states, or nationally will earn for the would-be creators of such a hell-on-earth the Constitution’s considerable capacity for wrath. With that righteous wrath will come nooses for those conducting the destruction of republicanism and, should it happen, the jurists who supported that destruction with numerous partisan and unconstitutional legal decisions that facilitated the demise of republicanism.

–3.) The Democratic Party and George Soros and his many organizations are engaged in widespread efforts to destroy American society, a process that has produced untold numbers of unconstitutional, liberty-denying, and abusive actions at the state, county, and local levels.

— Democratic Party-associated judges in the federal judiciary have routinely denied President Trump’s ability to use claims of executive privilege that are constitutionally protected. In addition, Democratic-controlled operatives among the U.S. military’s general officer corps, the federal civil service, the CIA AND FBI, Congressional staffs, and among senior officials at the Departments of State, Defense, and Justice have and are conducting a coup d’état against both President Trump and the Constitution. The perpetrators of this coup also have closely cooperated with multiple foreign powers to overthrow the Trump administration. This last fact alone ensures, praise God, that if the law is followed, their mass arrest, trial, conviction for treason, and execution by hanging ought to be as close to a sure a thing as the fact that night follows day.

–Democratic judges, state and district attorneys, governors, mayors, school boards, and city councils have deliberately cut away portions of the Bill of Rights-guaranteed liberties of the citizens under their jurisdiction. The most common civil-liberty reductions  have occurred in the citizenry’s rights to free speech, peaceful assembly, religion and conscience, and press freedom (especially on the internet and social media), as well as by incrementally abridging the absolute right of U.S. citizens to be armed with weapons of a quality sufficient destroy a tyrannical – that is, under the Constitution – non-republican government.

–The Democratic Party, Soros, and their organizations also have championed every possible form of child abuse across the United States, starting with the murder of 61-plus million infants and the use of the fake “climate science”, manufactured by the UN, Democratic leaders, U.S. universities, NASA, and NOAA, to terrorize children via media outlets and their own teachers. In addition, they are seeking – in cooperation with state and local officials, school boards, and teacher unions – to destroy the self-confidence, self-image, commonsense, and religious faith of this and future generations of children by pushing sexual deviants of every kind into grammar and high schools for a kind of sickening show-and-tell that portrays the glories of sexual perversion and depravity. The authors of these attacks on the minds of our children claim they are teaching understanding and tolerance. Not a chance. Their sole intention is to confuse children, while simultaneously cultivating and recruiting them into a life of sexual perversion and anti-Christianity. While all of this is clear, we have not even begun to unravel the vile and inhuman barbarity against children that has been practiced and protected by Democratic leaders and followers – and certainly some Republicans – and which was managed by their best friend, the child molesting, child trafficking, child torturing, blackmailing, and lifetime Democrat, Jeffrey Epstein.

Led, funded, and pushed by the Democratic Party, the U.S. State Department, and George Soros and his network, today’s America-hating secessionists and nullifiers have done enormously more damage to republicanism, the economy, the citizenry’s health, private property, children, and social cohesion than did the Confederate nation prior to the war-starting attack on Fort Sumter. Indeed, those who have deliberately blocked the lawful execution of the laws by the national government’s Executive branch, have deliberately carved out huge cities that are every bit as much out of the Union as the states of Alabama and Mississippi were in 1861.

On balance, it is easy to recognize that an insurrection is now underway in the United States, one that is far more dangerous to the republic than that conducted by Jefferson Davis and the C.S.A, in 1861-65. Though fierce, lethal, intelligent, and durable enemies, the Confederacy’s political and military leaders were honest, competent, and honorable men; they neither disguised nor lied about what they were up to. In addition, their goal was much the same as that of Lincoln and his colleagues; namely the preservation of republican government in the C.S.A.’s territory.

All of today’s Democratic Party – leaders, members, and supporters — is dedicated to destroying the United States via an insurrection that it has been orchestrating conducting for decades, and which was thrown into high gear when Mr. Trump became a presidential candidate and then president. These people, unlike the C.S.A. leaders, have neither honor, honesty, nor a lick of dedication to the preservation of republican government. The situation President Trump faces today is more dire than that produced by the Southern insurrection that confronted Mr. Lincoln. We must pray that Mr. Trump recognizes this fact in all its ugliness and danger, and that he is prepared to defend the republic and reestablish the blessings of republicanism for all Americans, using, if necessary, the same resolve, means, and ruthlessness manifested by Mr. Lincoln.

In one way, such action will be easier for President Trump than it was for President Lincoln. Lincoln, after all, had to fight and kill his rebelling fellow countrymen — among them members of his extended family — and he and his wife suffered greatly from impact of that brutal reality. President Trump will have no such concern. The republic’s Democratic/Soros enemies cannot be described as “fellow Americans” by any stretch of the imagination. They richly deserve to be, as was said on both sides during the civil war, “hurried down to Hades”, and with the utmost pain that it is possible to inflict.

–Endnotes:

–1.) See https://www.visitthecapitol.gov/exhibitions/artifact/proclamation-president-united-states-april-15-1861 & https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/civil_war/LincolnEmergencySession_FeaturedDoc.htm

–2.) https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

Here goes:

–1.) President Trump, one can say with confidence, is engaged in trying to complete the other half of Robert Mueller’s job. Mueller found no connection between Mr. Trump and his campaign and Russia, and no obstruction of justice. (NB: No case can be built in U.S. constitutional jurisprudence for saying, as did Mueller, that he cannot indict Trump but cannot exonerate him. Such a statement proves Mueller either is a devious liar or a decidedly addled old man.) Mueller’s findings are conclusive; no Russia ties, no obstruction. These findings, of course, ignored the fact that illegal operations were undertaken by the Democrats — with foreign help — to end candidate Trump’s campaign and, later, to overthrow his presidency. No one among the Muellerites or the Democrats thought this fact was worth investigating.

–2.) The residue left behind by Mueller and his gang of partisans included much regarding Ukraine. These men and women knew that at least some of their framing of Paul Manafort was based on a “black ledger” fabricated by pro-Clinton Ukrainians; that the DNC server was controlled by a company owned by a wealthy Ukrainian, and may have been moved there to be kept away from Comey’s traitorous keystone cops (as if they wanted it); that the U.S. embassy in Kiev was a hive of anti-Trump cooperation between George Soros and his lieutenants and the U.S. State Department under Hillary Clinton and John Kerry; that Ukraine that was largest single donor to the criminal Clinton Foundation; and that numerous senior Ukrainian-government officials were outspokenly pro-Hillary Clinton in 2016. Clearly, this is more than enough to suspect that nothing good happened in Ukraine for Mr. Trump and the United States in 2016 or since, as well as that Ukrainians directly and indirectly sought to prevent Trump’s victory in 2016.

–3.) Now president, Mr. Trump decided to complete the half of the Mueller investigation that Mueller’s traitorous lynch mob left unstarted. Once the just-noted Ukrainian assistance for Hillary Clinton in 2016 was documented; once the video was shown of Joe Biden publicly bragging that he forced the removal of a prosecutor who was investigating crimes committed by a Ukrainian energy company whose Board of Directors included Biden’s son; once it became known for sure – via documents now being published across the globe but not by U.S. mainstream media – that Biden’s son was paid at least $83,000/month even though he had no talent or experience pertinent to the work of an energy company; and once it became known that Biden, his son, members of the Kerry family, and other of their friends also appear to be enjoying $1.5 billion of ill-gotten loot from the Chinese government, Mr. Trump had to act against the Ukraine-based corruption that appears to have been demanded from the Ukrainians by Soros, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and the U.S. State Department.

–4.) It is perfectly obvious, then, that Mr. Trump – as the republic’s chief law enforcement officer – had to move against the Ukrainian oligarchs and criminals who had been dragooned by the Democratic Party, the U.S. State Department, and the U.S. embassy in Kiev (does the odious name Victoria Nuland ring a bell?) to assist them in, first, stealing the 2016 election for Hillary Clinton and, second, to remove the legitimate president of the United States. At this point, Mr. Trump’s Ukraine policy has done immeasurably more to ensure the fairness of the 2020 election, than Comrade Obama ever did to stop what his criminal regime claimed to be Russia’s intervention in 2016. In fact, the Clapper-Brennan-hyped claims of massive Russian intervention in 2016 increasingly look like much ado about not much, and much more like overwrought assertions that provided the groundwork from which to frame and eliminate a presidential candidate and then a fairly elected president.

–5.) Because all of the foregoing is factual, I would maintain that Mr. Trump would have been negligent as the republic’s chief magistrate if he had not sought to ensure that the gangster-led Democratic Party was not able to turn their allied Ukrainian oligarchs, forgers, and thieves against the American people again in the 2020 election. Indeed, Mr. Trump might well have been held accountable at the 2020 polls if he had not moved against the country’s greatest, most lawless, and most disgusting enemies, the Democratic Party and its Ukrainian minions.

A final point, Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, Schumer, other Democratic criminals, their hired, well-paid media guns, and that ass Romney claim that Mr. Trump went after Ukrainian corruption only because he feared Joe Biden would defeat his reelection bid in 2020. This claim is far beyond absurd and lies on the border of daft. Any person who has seen recent video of Biden the political campaigner – tongue-tied, bleeding from the eyes, unable to recall the second point of a two-point statement, bragging about his old segregationist buddies, projecting the image of a swaggering dazed man, getting publicly angry at his own supporters’ questions, not knowing what state he is visiting, etc. – can easily see that he is as much of an electoral threat to Mr. Trump as a bow-and-arrow would be to an Abrams tank.

I once wrote in this space that Joe Biden was the pale shadow of a former nothing. I hereby apologize for vastly over-rating him.

Mr.Trump: This will be short, but, with respect, please pay close attention.

Last week, former-U.S. Attorney Joe diGenova suggested on a FOX program that George Soros and his international, blatantly anti-U.S., and thoroughly anti-freedom organization were enemies of the United States. Mr. diGenova also suggested that Soros has unusually great influence in the actions and policies of U.S. Department of State and its diplomats, embassies, and consulates overseas. Both contentions are obviously true.

Well, one might say, no kidding, Mr. diGenova. But, then again, the hard facts he clearly enunciated seem to have escaped most of the U.S. officials who are charged with the responsibility of destroying U.S. enemies. Many of these men and women — like those that testified to support Schiff last week — appear to prefer to serve themselves, their personal ideologies, and the Democratic Party, rather than the republic’s interests and survival.

Since the diGenova interview, the disloyal Israel-First media across the United States — and in Israel — have damned Mr. diGenova as an anti-Semite and demanded that FOX ban him from its network.

Now, Mr. diGenova was simply and absolutely correct. Since its inception, Israel’s national security policy has been, in part, to ensure that all known Nazis, and those who willingly assisted them in perpetrating the murder of six-million Jews, be captured, tried, convicted, and imprisoned or executed.

The sole deliberate exception to Israel’s eternal and worldwide dragnet, that I know of, is George Soros, who told CBS’s 60 Minutes that he had, during the war, willingly helped in the Nazis’ round-up of Hungarian Jews and the confiscation of their property; that he felt no guilt about what he had done; that it was “the happiest year of my life, that year of German occupation [of Budapest]”; and that the experience of helping to seize the property of Jews taught him how to behave toward others for the rest of his life.. (Listen to the comments of Soros at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8Id0-Lsyr0; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGWizajL7tA)

Notwithstanding this very public admission of his participation in parts of the Holocaust, Soros has never been bothered by the Israeli government. This wartime accomplice to mass murder has been allowed to strut the earth and distribute his billions to groups bent on destroying the Western tradition, republicanism, and Christianity.

Is there another Nazi-accomplice that Israel has permitted to live the good life, flaunt his assistance in the exploitation of  Nazi Jew-killing, and never, for a moment, fear that Israeli justice finally would corner him? I do not remember any. I do recall, however, that Israel secured for retribution a 90-plus year-old and nearly helpless ex-Nazi-prison guard and U.S. citizen – who at the time threatened no one – and then tried and incarcerated him.

Why is Soros free? The only possible explanation of why George Soros is free is that Israel approves of his campaign to destroy the United States, the West, and Christianity, and that it wants him free to keep it rolling along.

As good a question is why has the U.S. Congress not demanded –as it has for other Nazis and their helpers — that U.S. law-enforcement authorities arrest Soros for the “crime against humanity” he claims credit for, and turn him over to Israel for trial. Such a trial, of course, would yield – because he publicly admitted/bragged about his part in Nazi atrocities – the conviction and subsequent execution of this dedicated enemy of America.

The answer, of course, is that Israel and disloyal Jewish-Americans, as well as the organizations and media they own, have suborned most of the U.S. Congress and much of the senior U.S. civil service. These elected officials and senior civil servants allow Soros to continue his accelerating, Democratic-backed effort to destroy the United States because their insatiable greed and/or thirst for office have left them easy marks for Israeli blackmail (perhaps based on materials from Epstein and his crew?), manipulation, and control. Among the Jewish members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, all appear to deliberately have moved, when it comes to Soros, from the territory of being militant “never again-never forgetters” to the lotus land of  ”letting bygones be bygones”

God damn the gang of them, Mr. diGenova, please do America a great, republic-saving favor and hound that bastard Soros with the truth until the U.S. government or Israel feel forced to arrest, try, and deliver to him the execution his actions so richly merit.

The televised impeachment hearings this past week will be very useful for the American people. What each witness said will help the citizenry understand part of the reason why the United States gets into so many wars — U.S. diplomats side with foreign leaders — and why their taxes are spent and wasted in foreign countries, and always are channeled to the local favorites of the Democratic party, particularly to George Soros’s network of subversive, anti-U.S. organizations.

Posing as a demure, Shirley Temple-like innocent, the fierce Democratic partisan Yovanovitch, in particular, explained this to Americans. After preaching to the committee that no government should be allowed to interfere in the elections of another country, she admitted under oath that neither she nor her embassy staff made a single attempt to stop either the then-Ukrainian government’s long and vicious campaign of public attacks on candidate Donald Trump, or its creation of the false evidence which it provided to the FBI to nail Paul Manafort. I wonder how much of a gratuity she got from George Soros and/or Hillary Clinton for doing nothing to protest the pro-Clinton, Ukrainian government’s rhetorical and material intervention in the 2016 election? Yavanovitch also is reported to have arranged the electronic monitoring of U.S. journalists working in Ukraine to investigate the crimes there of the Clinton Foundation, Burisma Energy, and the flamboyant and hysterically inept Biden criminal family.

A few other points about the hearings are worth noting:

–Taylor (who worked for Soros-funded groups), Kent, and Yovanovitch provided no information about improper behavior by President Trump. They did, however, present endless and self-aggrandizing personal views about how U.S. foreign policy should be conducted, as well as their intense resentment of the President for not agreeing with, and following in an unquestioning manner, their sage advice based on long experience. They also resented the President and his advisers for ignoring “inter-agency policy agreements” on which of his policies should be followed and which to ignore. In short, these three senior time-servers were claiming that only senior bureaucrats, rather than the constitutionally designated elected official, ought to formulate and manage U.S. foreign policy.

In my own experience, the inter-agency process is designed for only one purpose, and that is to prevent the full and immediate application of policies that the president has directed to be pursued. During the Soviet-Afghan Communist-Mujahedin War (1979 to 1992), for example, only CIA and NSA reliably labored to implement President Reagan’s policy of driving the Red Army from Afghanistan. The State Department led the effort of other agencies to slow-roll or derail Reagan’s orders in order to protect the Democrats’ beloved Gorbachev and his barbarous Soviet regime. This resistance to Reagan also wanted to provide weapons not to men who would kill Soviets, but to Afghanistan’s Gucci guerrillas, corrupt men who wore suits; talked a lot, often in English; ran heroin internationally; and fought not at all.

–This loathsome diplomat threesome also underscored the enormous difference between Trump’s “America First” foreign policy and their “Ukraine First” foreign policy. Not one of the diplomats could find fault in anything the Ukrainian government wanted U.S. taxpayers to finance. Indeed, they were upset that working stiffs in the United States have not been forced to fork over more of their taxes to help Democratic-allied diplomats like themselves to pal around with the generally corrupt Ukrainian elite, while allowing the latter to stuff their private bank accounts with U.S. tax dollars. This sort of behavior is common to all U.S. diplomats and especially those of ambassadorial rank. They do not represent the republic, but rather the foreign government to which they are accredited. For these people, who are falsely identified as loyal U.S. ambassadors, America is never right and never, ever first. Once installed in a foreign capital, they are the ambassador of the local government – rich, poor, democratic, authoritarian, or tyrannical — in its unending campaign to extort as much money, military assistance, loan guarantees, and other booty from the U.S. government and people as possible. They also actively belittle the president to local government officials and political leaders and assure them it is safe to ignore what he says. Overall, U.S. ambassadors are a lethal, anti-U.S. cult of the savagely self-interested.

–The only true thing that these three sad hacks had to say must have almost caused Schiff’s blood to shoot out of his ears. First, Kent somehow allowed himself to tell the truth, acknowledging that the Ukrainian energy company Burisma is deeply corrupt and that both it and Hunter Biden should have been investigated. Then Yovanovitch slipped and told the truth. She clearly acknowledged to a questioner that she had been briefed by Obama’s gang, before her Senate confirmation hearings, about the increasingly strong stink of corruption that was hanging over Burisma and the drug-using, tossed-from-military Hunter Biden and his father. Obama’s pukes also advised her on what to say and how to deal with the issue in her hearings and during her tenure in Kiev. Interestingly, when asked if the Obama briefers who had prepared her for the Senate hearing had supplied her with the same kind of data about the innumerable number of other deeply corrupt Ukrainian companies, which the three diplomats already had said threatened U.S. interests, Yovanovitch puased for a moment, searched her memory, but could not remember any such data, probably because there were none.

Schiff’s farce will continue for at least another week, but it is now clear that the three star witnesses struck out, and that there is nothing that can be said by those remaining in the parade of clownish witnesses – unless one or more decides to commit perjury — that merits even a passing thought of impeachment. The most positive thing to come out of the hearings so far is the reality of how abominably the U.S. citizenry is served by their State Department and its diplomats. Indeed, the three witnesses made it clear that they are operating to serve the regimes to which they are accredited and themselves. In all cases, the republic, in their view, can take the hindmost

I am being harsh here on U.S. diplomats. My views, however, are shaped by experience. The U.S. ambassador in Saudi Arabia – with his intelligence adviser, John Brennan – worked tirelessly with CIA chief George Tenet, in 1997-1999, to stop all attempts to capture or kill Osama bin Laden. All of them feared the Saudis would be angry at America — and end their payoffs? — if an U.S. attempt to eliminate bin Laden was successful. Earlier, in the mid-1990s, the U.S. ambassador in Qatar and Clinton’s so-called “terrorism czar” forbid the execution of a CIA operation to try and capture an al-Qaida ally named Khalid Shaykh Muhammad. These founts of wisdom asked the Qatari government to arrest the man and turn him over to U.S. authorities. The Qataris snapped to attention and acted immediately — by warning Khalid Shaykh Mohammad and allowing (helping?) him to escape from Qatar without a trace. You may recall, that this fellow – more commonly called KSM – was later to be the operational commander of the 9/11 attacks. Such is traditionally the type of disasters that the State Department and its ambassadors are ready to inflict on their fellow citizens so long as can they keep their host regime happy, and probably their own bread being buttered by the foreigners..

The information in the foregoing paragraph is, of course, well-documented. The verifying documents can readily be found in the archive of the 9/11 Commission. I know this because I hand delivered them in a fat, three-ring binder — double-wrapped for security, of course — to the head of the Commission. For some reason the validating papers in the archive have not yet been published for the review and education of the American people. I believe that the citizenry would find the archive’s papers quite informative. Indeed, they might be so convincing as to make the republic’s collective trigger finger pull, pull, and keep pulling, and so begin to eliminate those who are torturing, fleecing, and deliberately killing the republic, its economy, its laws, its liberties, its cohesion, its children, and its religion.

President Trump, please release those papers. Time to let the cards fall where they may.

–1.) Does Michael Bloomberg carry an Israeli passport as well as a U.S. passport?

–If so, why would he believe that loyal Americans would elect to the presidency a disloyal citizen who has sworn allegiance to a foreign country, and would, if elected, be an agent of a foreign power sitting in the White House? This man merits investigation – if there are any loyal federal law enforcement officials left — and, if he carries an Israeli passport, the candidate must withdraw from the race.

–2.)Why are Ukraine’s interests more vital than U.S. interests?

The impeachment hearing today showed that the U.S. government intends to give Ukraine $700 million or more in American taxpayer money. U.S. national interests would not be hurt a bit if Russia took all of the Ukraine. There still would be, after all, the whole of western Europe and the Atlantic Ocean between the republic and the Russians. What would be hurt, would be Europe’s estimate of its own national security, because the EU governments know they are disarmed, effete, and that Russia’s military could be in Paris in less time than the Wehrmacht’s blitz consumed. So, our $700 million to Ukraine is just another sickening episode of Europe trying to suck the American tit dry and get U.S. citizens to pay for its defense. This European practice started when they bellied up to drink from the Marshall Plan’s trough, and they have not stopped sucking since.

Why in God’s name is that $700 billion not being spent on the genuine domestic interests and needs of the United States? Damn Ukraine and Europe, use the money scheduled to be wasted on them and devote it to feeding malnourished American kids. If any money is left over, use it to build more wall.

–3.) Why is there no due process, civil-liberty and Bill-of-Rights protections, or legal representation being afforded to the President in Congress today?

It appears that the answer could be that these are the new rules of the U.S. rule-of-law game, ones that all Americans must play under. Now, that should mean that – if what’s good for the goose, is good for the gander — all loyal U.S. citizens ought to be able to identify the Democrats who have unleashed the diseased and criminal alien-foreigner tidal wave on them; destroyed their education system, and with it the minds of the young; created a halo-crowned horde of sexual deviants who are valued, rewarded, and protected more than normal Americans, especially children; given – as in Ukraine – trillions of dollars to foreigners while Americans are hungry, without homes, seriously ill, unemployed, or barely making ends meet. Under the new rules being installed by the Democrats, it seems that Americans are free to identify their Democratic enemies, refuse them due process, and dispose of them as they wish. This might be an especially good development for contemporary Blacks, Asians, Catholics, and Southerners, all of whom deserve some revenge for the Democrat’s abuse of them through their first terrorist organization, the Ku Klux Klan; their effective retarding of U.S. economic growth; and their use of abortion to gradually wipe out the Black American community, a process that has so far killed more than 61 million Americans.

If, in time, the foregoing turns out to be the new American way of law, the only sound advice for loyal Americans is to buy plenty of ammunition and rope, pick your own targets, and, if it becomes necessary, do what seems necessary to eliminate the enemy. The Democrats will find that loyal Americans can also play the arrogant, Stalinist, and murderous Schiff-Pelosi-Shumer-Obama-Clinton game. Again, turn-about always is fair play — and often very satisfying.

–1.) After three years of investigating Russia’s supposed intervention in the 2016 election, and Moscow’s ties to President Trump, the verdict supplied, by the Democrats’ pale-shadow-of-a-superhero Mueller, is that all of it was a hoax. I wonder, if it is proper to invent evidence to frame a president for cooperating with a foreign power, if the FBI’s counterintelligence geniuses have ever conducted an investigation of Senator Bernie Sanders. Sanders, after all, has always expressed empathy with the Soviet Union and its economic ideas, is an ardent admirer of Karl Marx, honeymooned in the USSR, has spent decades paling around with the Ortega brothers, the Castro brothers, and Nicolas Madur0, and visiting the workers’ paradises now operating in Nicaragua and Cuba. In short, he relentlessly has worked to gain first-hand knowledge of how to install the Soviet system in the United States. Some of the best spies maintain a goofy, near-demented public persona — like that of Sanders — as a way to disguise the existence and cleverness of their covert activities. Time for FBI counter-intelligence have a look at the self-professed Soviet-lover Bernie? At least there is a lot of evidence to start with on Sanders, and, after all, turn about always is fair play.

–2.) Rumors are flying here that Virginia governor Ralph Northam and his lieutenants are, after Tuesday’s election win, planning a victory ball to be called “Black Tie and Black Face: A Night in the South we are building”. Details are sketchy, but the current scuttlebutt claims that Northam wants to have a “Pick-a-Ninny” contest during the event. The idea is to have all of the Democratic Party’s congressional leaders come down to Richmond, dress them in formal clothing and blackface, and then form them in a line across the stage facing the audience. Members of the audience then will be randomly chosen to pick the top ninny; that is, the person on the stage who is holding the “super-prize” promised for the winner. There is no super-prize of course — with Democrats it’s always promise, never delivery — this is merely a game to make all attendees winners feel good about themselves. After all, any member of the audience who selects an on-stage Democratic leader cannot fail to pick a demented and thorough-going ninny.

–3.) The most enduring side-splitter since the 2018 mid-terms remains Nancy Pelosi’s enraptured announcement of how the nation was on the high road to salvation because so many women had been elected to the Democratic congressional contingent in November 2018. Now, I was privileged over my working career to work alongside some of the smartest, strongest, savviest, and most self-confident, competitive, perceptive, persuasive, and successful women that can be imagined. Indeed, the ten chances given to Bill Clinton to capture or kill Osama bin Laden by June, 1999, were, to a very substantial extent, attributable to the tireless, often dangerous work of female officers based at Langley and at many posts overseas. My impression was and is that these women and their colleagues spelled the end of anti-female discrimination from the rusticating and often half-wit Old-Boy leadeship at CIA. Did these women have to withstand the animosity of CIA’s Old Boys even as they repeatedly found and targeted bin Laden? You bet they did. While they were breaking their backs to get bin Laden, senior CIA officials – including Coffer Black, now said to be Romney’s foreign affairs adviser, John Brennan, George Tenet, the Deputy Director of Operations Jim Pavitt, and, of course, all of the senior FBI officers engaged in the bin Laden effort, most especially the late, lying cur John O’Neill – ridiculed them, laughing and slapping each other on the back as they referred to the women as “fanatics” and the “Manson Family.”

Times have changed, however, and for the worse. I have long believed that the kind of argument Pelosi made – in essence, more means better — is nothing more than a moron’s chant. The willy-nilly addition of more people to a project has absolutely nothing to do with improving the quality of the project’s staff. More often than not, such a reckless addition of more people lowers the quality and effectiveness of the staff. Pelosi’s pledge that the Democrats can do better because they have more women — or men for that matter — than they had before the 2018 election is evidence of the addled Speaker’s advanced idiocy, previously seen in her having new female members dress as white-robed, Klan members for the State of the Union. Blessed (?) with a huge augmentation of females, Pelosi and the congressional Democrats have accomplished precisely nothing except a further derangement of U.S. society, which, if one recalls Pelosi’s contention, boldly underlines the fact that more usually is nothing more than more. In the case of the Democratic caucus, these new congresswomen are actually a detriment, nay, an obstacle to effective governing. Recalling the horde of perpetually adolescent females of all ages – speaking filth and flamboyantly adorned with pink representations of their private parts — who participated in the post-inaugural women’s march, the case for believing that such women will ruin the republic’s political life is fast becoming an easily defensible one. These disgusting Democratic women, these me-too-ers, in and out of congress, think, speak, and behave in a manner that could be concisely and precisely defined in the plural form of a derisive, four-letter word of German-English-Scandinavian origin, one that slips my mind at the moment. Thank God that the number of Democratic congresswomen and their marching, whining, foul-mouthed, and vulva-badged me-too sisters are a tiny, permanently juvenile, and irrelevant portion of American females, and one that will be swept away by the mass of American women who can think, act, compete, work, and win for themselves.

–4.) Only the globalists’ hoax about human-caused, climate-change is a longer-running sham than the campaign to overthrow President Trump, and it is far beyond the point of being just sophomoric and intolerable. After thirty-five years of predictions of doom, not a one has ever remotely come close to occurring, and this is part of the reason for the just-noted reality. The litany of dead-wrong predictions by these infantile so-called scientists include: Glaciers that refuse to melt, but defiantly grow; sea levels that refuse to rise and remain static; life-promoting carbon dioxide levels trending a bit higher, thereby promoting a to-be-welcomed greening of the earth, rather than its demise; polar bears whose numbers are steadily growing, long after their scientist-promised date of extinction; expanding numbers of icebergs and thicker fields of sea-ice that are reducing to rubble the scientists’ promise of tropical conditions and year-round, clear sailing in the Arctic; and children remain quite able to recognize winter and snow, the disappearance of which the scientists promised long ago.

Simply put, human-caused, climate-change scientists cannot get their forecasts even close to being right. They support their deceitful and evidence-poor predictions with more of the same, and they falsify the historical climate data to fit their multiple and indelibly false predictions of a human-caused climate catastrophe. These scientists remain in the news, fighting the non-existent phantom of human-caused climate change, only because they are on the take from the authoritarian and eternally greedy globalists who want to install, and benefit from, the unending treasure-trove they intend to derive from a humans-enslaving carbon tax. (NB: I would again urge anyone interested in understanding the bone-deep perfidy, lies, and greed of those who lead the human-caused, climate-change fraud to watch and listen to the videos made by a man named Tony Heller. They are available at realclimatescience.com. Mr. Heller speaks softly, but the truth of his words cut like a keen stiletto deep into the scientist-fraudsters. If it matters, I have never met, or spoken to, or corresponded with Mr. Heller.)

This past week, 11,000 “scientific experts” claimed that billions of human beings – apparently mostly from Africa — must be eliminated from the earth to end the human-caused “climate crisis” that in no way currently exists. These scientific experts clearly are government-grant-funded gangsters bent on driving and abusing humans as if they were a herd of disposable tax-paying automatons to fix human-caused climate problems that do not and will not exist. These scientific experts, of course, also are in lockstep with the mass-murdering abortionists, the more quietly murderous geneticists, and the universal-health-care fanatics, freaks who long to cut off medical care for the elderly, the crippled, the terminaly ill, and their political opponents. To me, the best way to address the human-caused climate-change liars is to eliminate them from the earth in the same manner they intend to kill billions of Africans. In this case, not one of the 11,000 of them would be missed, except perhaps by the Clintons, Obamas, Bushes, Gates, and other such human-haters. Time is wasting, and if human beings wish to avoid death-by-climate experts, these hoaxing quack scientists themselves should be the first to be rendered painfully and permanently silent.

–5.) An important event that came to my notice in the past several days is another episode of the sordid criminal affairs of the Biden family. Joe Biden’s brother, James Biden, is reported to have derived many millions of dollars from being part of a group that is building $1.5 billion of inexpensive housing in Iraq; the construction money coming from the U.S. taxpayers. James Biden reportedly knows very little – if anything – about residential construction, and the incident seems to me to be another big-time theft by the Biden family. Much more troubling in regard to James Biden’s apparent scam, however, is the fact that not a single politician, journalist, cleric, or pundit has yet asked the question: “Why are U.S. taxpayers being forced to pay for brand-new housing for Iraqis – most of whom hate America – when so many hard-working, tax-paying U.S. citizens and their kids are in need of either better housing, or simply any kind of housing at all?” The last three administrations – apparently including President Trump’s – have appropriated U.S. tax funds to ensure that many of America’s enemies can live under a roof, cozy and warm. First, Bush and Cheney removed Saddam Hussein, by far America’s most effective partner against Islamist insurgents; second, Bush, Cheney, and Obama facilitated Iran’s expansion from its western border into Iraq, and then onto the Syria-Lebanon border; and, third, the Trump administration and Pelosi/Schumer, are making sure that Iran’s Iraq-based military and civilian people — and/or the Shia Iraqis they favor — are well-housed. This is madness and I, for one, would stop the expenditure of every single tax dollar designated for foreign aid meant to make life better for foreigners – including the republic’s enemies – so long as there is so much to be done at home to assist working Americans. That is, all foreign aid and foreign military-aid must be ended, so that money can be reapplied to the needs of working Americans who cannot make ends meet. If the sight of Iraqis and Iranians lounging about in homes built by American tax dollars does not make American trigger fingers even more itchy, I am not sure what will.