|I believe in the|
June 13, 2017
President Trump may be chief of state, head of government and commander in chief, but his administration is shot through with disloyalists plotting to bring him down.
We are approaching something of a civil war where the capital city seeks the overthrow of the sovereign and its own restoration.
Thus far, it is a nonviolent struggle, though street clashes between pro- and anti-Trump forces are increasingly marked by fistfights and brawls. Police are having difficulty keeping people apart. A few have been arrested carrying concealed weapons.
That the objective of this city is to bring Trump down via a deep state-media coup is no secret. Few deny it.
Last week, fired Director of the FBI James Comey, a successor to J. Edgar Hoover, admitted under oath that he used a cutout to leak to The New York Times an Oval Office conversation with the president.
Goal: have the Times story trigger the appointment of a special prosecutor to bring down the president.
Comey wanted a special prosecutor to target Trump, despite his knowledge, from his own FBI investigation, that Trump was innocent of the pervasive charge that he colluded with the Kremlin in the hacking of the DNC.
Comey's deceit was designed to enlist the police powers of the state to bring down his president. And it worked. For the special counsel named, with broad powers to pursue Trump, is Comey's friend and predecessor at the FBI, Robert Mueller.
As Newt Gingrich said Sunday: "Look at who Mueller's starting to hire. ... (T)hese are people that ... look to me like they're ... setting up to go after Trump ... including people, by the way, who have been reprimanded for hiding from the defense information into major cases. ...
"This is going to be a witch hunt."
Another example. According to Daily Kos, Trump planned a swift lifting of sanctions on Russia after inauguration and a summit meeting with Vladimir Putin to prevent a second Cold War.
The State Department was tasked with working out the details.
Instead, says Daniel Fried, the coordinator for sanctions policy, he received "panicky" calls of "Please, my God, can you stop this?"
Operatives at State, disloyal to the president and hostile to the Russia policy on which he had been elected, collaborated with elements in Congress to sabotage any detente. They succeeded.
"It would have been a win-win for Moscow," said Tom Malinowski of State, who boasted last week of his role in blocking a rapprochement with Russia. State employees sabotaged one of the principal policies for which Americans had voted, and they substituted their own.
Not in memory have there been so many leaks to injure a president from within his own government, and not just political leaks, but leaks of confidential, classified and secret documents. The leaks are coming out of the supposedly secure investigative and intelligence agencies of the U.S. government. The media, the beneficiaries of these leaks, are giving cover to those breaking the law. The real criminal "collusion" in Washington is between Big Media and the deep state, colluding to destroy a president they detest and to sink the policies they oppose.
Yet another example is the unfolding "unmasking" scandal.
While all the evidence is not yet in, it appears an abnormal number of conversations between Trump associates and Russians were intercepted by U.S. intelligence agencies.
On orders higher up, the conversations were transcribed, and, contrary to law, the names of Trump associates unmasked.
Then those transcripts, with names revealed, were spread to all 16 agencies of the intel community at the direction of Susan Rice, and with the possible knowledge of Barack Obama, assuring some would be leaked after Trump became president.
The leak of Gen. Michael Flynn's conversation with the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, after Obama imposed sanctions on Russia for the hacking of the DNC, may have been a product of the unmasking operation. The media hit on Flynn cost him the National Security Council post.
Trump has had many accomplishments since his election. Yet his enemies in the media and their deep state allies have often made a purgatory of his presidency.
What he and his White House need to understand is that this is not going to end, that this is a fight to the finish, that his enemies will not relent until they see him impeached or resigning in disgrace.
To prevail, Trump will have to campaign across this country and wage guerrilla war in this capital, using the legal and political weapons at his disposal to ferret out the enemies within his own government.
Not only is this battle essential, if Trump hopes to realize his agenda, it is winnable. For the people sense that the Beltway elites are cynically engaged in preserving their own privileges, positions and power.
If the president cannot rewrite Obamacare or achieve tax reform, he should not go around the country in 2018 wailing about Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer. They are not the real adversaries. They are but interchangeable parts.
He should campaign against the real enemies of America First by promising to purge the deep state and flog its media collaborators.
Time to burn down the Bastille.
Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.
When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson
"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
|stupid beyond |
seems like folks are recycling what they read a month ago. I believe this is the 3 type of article(from different authors) in 3 months.
What man is a man that does not make the world better. -Balian of Ibelin
Only boring people get bored. - Ruth Burke
No, we may be moving in that direction, but we are not near Civil War.
"The world's in a bad way, my man,
And bound to be worse before it mends;
Better lie up in the mountain here
Four or five centuries,
While the stars go over the lonely ocean" - Robinson Jeffers
|The Unmanned Writer|
I don't think we are any closer than we were in 1984.
Sentiment without action is the ruin of the soul.
Help, I'm having premonitions of future flashbacks.
Only in an insane world are the sane considered insane.
Some people listen to the noise of the world,
And some people listen to the quiet.
Civil War? No. Violence sanctioned by the left? Already there.
|The Ice Cream Man|
CA, NY and PR need us to pay their bills
|Lawyers, Guns |
Add IL to that list.
The term Civil War is over used. It's nothing like the 1860's although we are just as divided, but not regionally. It's not going to be these States against those States. There are freedom loving people in all 50 States and there are blood-sucking commies seeking to control us in all 50 States.... just more of them in CA, NY and IL.
The divide is the Country Class v. the Ruling Class, aka the Washington Elites.
Angelo M. Codevilla laid it out here, in 2010:
America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution
"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible."
-- Justice Janice Rogers Brown
"The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth."
|God will always provide|
Civil war? Not yet. But The DC Swamp does need to be drained! Thoroughly. If not, there will be more blood in our streets.
Really? The chart below shows how much each state gets back in federal money spent in that state for each dollar of federal taxes paid from that state. You may be surprised by the results.
The whole article:
|Just because you can, |
doesn't mean you should
They're not going to give it up easily as we see.
Once again, one of the signs that Trump is on the right track is seeing who is lining up against him. On both sides of the isle.
Civil war? Against those Antifa pussies? One of them will get their ass beat and they'll all retreat to their organic multi gender safe space.
|Muzzle flash |
Regarding the legality of the Press to publish leaked classified or privileged information--the First Amendment does cover them and prevents them from being tried for doing so. However, the First Amendment does NOT cover those who provide the leaked information to the Press, and they can (and should) be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The Press may be allowed to publish anything it gets, BUT it should be required to reveal the source of the information if asked. The idea that they have the right to conceal their sources is bogus. It is true that if sources were to be revealed, there would be a great many fewer such sources willing to leak information. I don't see that as a negative. The leakers seem to feel they have a duty to reveal the information, so they should be willing to take credit for doing so. And if the Press refuses to reveal its sources, it should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice. (Jail time!)
Texan by choice, not accident of birth
When they ask me, "Paper or plastic?" I just say, "Doesn't matter to me. I am bi-sacksual."
|10mm is The|
Boom of Doom
These sorts of statistics are easy to manipulate based on what you include and exclude on both the revenue and expenditure side.
The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People again must learn to work, instead of living on public assistance. ~ Cicero 55 BC
The Dhimocrats love America like ticks love a hound.
This is the critical point. Conjuring up the specter of a civil war is a bit of a stretch, but this is a real threat to our democracy.
|When you fall, I will be there to catch you -With love, the floor|
Does this include Federal installations such as military bases? As stated, they can add or delete whatever they wish.
Maybe we are in a Civil Cold War. The shots have yet to be fired.This message has been edited. Last edited by: wcb6092,
You can only go so far in any one direction before you eventually drive off a cliff
I see why people think we might be moving towards civil war, but I disagree. Having been to several places drowning in civil war, there are stark differences: we don't have cleanly divided sides, either philosophically or geographically. We're moving that direction, but there's a lot of space between here and there, and many non-violent possibilities in between.
Episodic violence is a potential. But organized conflict, or even a Syria style multi-way conflict is not on the near horizon.
That said, my opinion is predicated on an assumption the National financial status remains viable. Who knows what wild cards await if significant inflation or something similar happens.
|No double standards|
That would be a bingo.
I teach college accounting/business in Silicon Valley. Many numerical studies are crafted to support the desired end goal.
"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women. When it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it....While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it"
- Judge Learned Hand, May 1944
|Get Off My Lawn|
Not a civil war right now, but a Cold War.
"I’m not going to read Time Magazine, I’m not going to read Newsweek, I’m not going to read any of these magazines; I mean, because they have too much to lose by printing the truth"- Bob Dylan, 1965
I agree with this. But as things get uglier and uglier, the potential is there for widespread violence. Not with one side against the other, but with lots of flash points across the country-- rallies, protests, marches-- that turn deadly violent.
Often in history things don't go in straight lines, so you can't just extrapolate from what is happening at the moment. But from the 1960s there has been conflict between the left and the right, one that has had it's escalations and de-escalations, twists and turns, but that, overall, has been growing in scope and intensity. Two Americas are emerging, and they are mutually hostile.
We won't have a civil war, but there's going to be some real trouble.
"You get much farther with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone."
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2 3 4|