How to Greet the New Biden Administration

Joe Biden

(AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

The increasingly fascistic American left is setting a trap for the rest of their fellow citizens—often termed “deplorables” but more appropriately dubbed “normals” by Kurt Schlichter—by warning we intend violence all over the country during Joe Biden’s inauguration.

This is nonsense, of course, but any kind of demonstration can be declared violent by a complaisant media or, more ominously, manipulated in that direction by provocateurs, with the slightest incident magnified beyond recognition.

Part of their intent is clearly to undermine the Second Amendment, actually to disarm us.

Another part is to justify yet more censorship and “canceling,” furthering their assault on the number one principle that makes America America, freedom of speech.

Do not fall for it. There is a much better way to protest the inauguration.

Don’t show up!

When I say don’t show up, I mean really don’t show up.

Don’t protest the inauguration in any way, not in Washington, not at your state house, nowhere. Ignore the whole thing.

— Roger Simon in Suppose They Gave an Inauguration and Nobody Came?

comments

  1. avatar FedUp says:

    This looks like a good way.
    Maxine Waters told us to do it this way.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      That lady belongs on the ballot to Congress.

      I like when the fascist Chuck asks if they can remove her. He doesn’t give a shit what people in this country think. They should remove him from office and make him chase ambulances again.

      1. avatar Freedom Fighter says:

        Point of clarification—–Schumer NEVER practiced law. He went directly into politics. “… He attended Harvard College, where he became interested in politics and campaigned for Eugene McCarthy, in 1968.[15] After completing his undergraduate degree, he continued to Harvard Law School, earning his Juris Doctor with honors in 1974. Schumer passed the New York state bar in early 1975. However, he never practiced law, choosing a career in politics instead.[16]” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Schumer

        He wouldn’t know how to earn a buck if you gave him a picture manual. It is thus with so many of the LibDems.

        1. avatar Bemused Berserker says:

          A lot like Biden, his law practice flopped so he entered Politics. He barely made it through Law school, barely passed the BAR. Likes to tell people he taught Constiturional Law, but his professorships are both Honorary not Faculty, and no record that he ever taught any classes at all.
          The incoming Commander and Thief is a Pathalogical Liar suffering from Dementia.

    2. avatar Ing says:

      Couldn’t understand but one word in ten (her mask, microphones pointed the wrong way, my damaged hearing), but damn, that was beautiful. These corruptocrats have had the field to themselves for so long, they don’t know what to do when a real person shows up and speaks out.

      I’d vote for this lady. More, please.

      1. avatar ABN LRRP RGR 3 tours RVN says:

        I like her bad’zz passion……

        1. avatar ABN LRRP RGR 3 tours RVN says:

          my mistake above typing too fast. “bad’azz”….

  2. avatar eagle10 says:

    I think the creepy/sleazy joe-kamala demotator administration wants us all to stand at attention and raise our right hands straight out and say ‘heil biden’ They will probably have their jack-booted thugs wearing black/red armbands with swastikas on them. 🤬

    1. avatar California (soon to be Idaho) Richard says:

      No they don’t. They want their true believers and useful idiots doing that stuff. They want us to shut up and get on the train without a fight….. don’t worry about your luggage, it’ll be at the station when you arrive.

  3. avatar Texsun57 says:

    Personally I say let them have the inauguration. I would spend my energies and efforts at the state levels pushing for secession. The US is lost, we no longer have a voice or a political solution. Why would anyone show up armed? So what if we did force the Marxist out, they control all the bureaucracy and media. I say let them have their Marxist utopia and all that goes with it. Red states should just form a new nation. They use language like eliminating us, and re-education… to them unity is everyone submitting to the all powerful state. The old leftist in DC have what they always wanted…. we are now the USSR of the 60s and 70s, a feeble old puppet installed as a figure head with the supreme soviet pulling his strings. They have their Pravda and TASS to spread their propaganda and censor dissent and the FBI has become their KGB.

    1. avatar Big E says:

      You assessment is correct, but not sure about the conclusion. “Letting them have it” is pretty sweeping. They aren’t going to concede anything, so we’ll have to fight for our Liberty if there is an organized secession or not.

    2. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      I don’t know if that would happen, though I find it more plausible than I would have 10 years ago. Regardless, it would be complicated. If, for instance, Texas and some other states break off, would they function as independent entities or join up under the Constitution? And what are you going to do with Austin and the other cities and/or concentrations of leftists? I’d like to think they would be tolerated and allowed to speak their mind, but who knows at this point? I don’t think we have to guess how people who are not leftists will be treated in whatever they call the collectivist authoritarian areas of the former USA, leftists are pretty open about it.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        And what are you going to do with Austin and the other cities and/or concentrations of leftists?

        Setup refugee camps in California. They already have the infrastructure in LA and San Francisco . They wouldn’t want to live in a conservative country like that anyway.

        1. avatar rt66paul says:

          Many of us here living in Ca who are not willing to leave family, business, jobs do not want that. It was the other states dumping their trash by buying them a ticket to L.A.(they called it 66ing) that filled up this states with no accounts and unemployables.
          The feds forced us the give the welfare upon entry, and now you want to continue this practice. The rest of the country trashed this beautiful state.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “It was the other states dumping their trash by buying them a ticket to L.A.”

          Wasn’t just L.A.

          I was stationed in Colorado in the early 80s. Boulder was then a leftist haven of people who believed themselves all virtuous and superior. The city council discovered that they were missing out on federal dollars for dealing with homelessness….because there were no homeless in Boulder. The city council placed ads in several big city newspapers, offering to buy a bus ticket for any homeless who wanted to move to Boulder. The tactic worked. Made Boulderites even more virtuous and superior; attracting lotsa people from Californication.

        3. avatar GS650G says:

          Better CA than other states. By keeping them in one spot we can keep.an eye on them better. Limit their influence a single state and district.

          Sorry for your situation rt66paul but they spent decades creating a haven for these people and we need to contain it.

        4. avatar Ing says:

          No, California trashed itself. Having other people send homeless addicts your way sucks, but the homeless drug addicts don’t vote. I feel sorry for the minority of people who have tried to keep the state from becoming a progtard cesspool and are now stuck in it despite their objections, but California currently has exactly what most of California voted for.

          The best thing that most of this country could hope for would be a mass exodus of conservatives.

          If only half of California’s conservatives moved to another western state in the next four years, you could tip the balance in WA, OR, AZ, and NV back toward sanity and help ensure generations of continued good governance in states like ID, UT, and MT, which already mostly have it. And provide an electoral college counterweight that’s currently missing in presidential elections.

        5. avatar hawkeye says:

          “… but the homeless drug addicts don’t vote…”

          They sure do now, in this new style of electioneering. At least on paper, and even if they never touch pen to paper.

        6. avatar Ing says:

          Ha! Yes, there is that.

        7. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I love “66ing”, that’s new to me!

      2. avatar MICHAEL A CROGNALE says:

        Not going to happen. There are millions of us who have Federal pensions, military, SS, etc who would instantly lose those by being declared in insurrection against the US. Our bank accounts will be emptied, credit cards voided. etc. Monetary warfare. The votes will simple not be there, especially in Texas.

        1. avatar MarkPA says:

          Absolutely correct.

          There may be plenty of us who might be willing to toy with the possibility of succession; but, nevertheless, won’t support the movement.

          Far too clear a memory of the outcome of the Civil War. Far too many doubts about the implications, such as the apportionment of the national debt and Federal obligations. Would Texas take some portion of the national debt? 1/50th? 1/25th? Would Texas undertake to pay the Social Security benefits of its citizens? How about those who might migrate to Texas the day-before/day-of/day-after succession? There is no way to answer these questions; and, therefore, succession can’t succeed. Not with Texas alone; not with Texas+Oklahoma.

          There must be a more likely path to success than succession. What is it?

          A successful path is one which will be subscribed to by a majority of Americans. We can rally around the flag, motherhood, apple pie. We need some such issue. (The Flag itself won’t suffice.)

          I would wish that the Constitution would be the issue to rally around. But, that’s not pointed enough for most people to grasp.

          Freedom of speech and of the press IS such an issue. Pixelnaught!
          Freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof is PROBABLY such an issue.

          Free, fair, and HONEST elections IS such an issue.
          I think it is the ONLY issue that will suffice.

          Positive voter ID; e.g., based on RealID. State-wide, interstate, and ultimately Federal voter registration database(s) where it’s one wo/man+one-vote in each election. Absentee-ballot only by-request and only with a suitable witness (e.g., by a postal clerk).

          Yes, we all have objections to such things as positive ID; databases; absentee-balloting; etc. Nevertheless, if our goal is to save the republic we will have to swallow our reservations about minor issues and make it impossible/impractical to commit voter fraud. Else, we WILL have VOTER FRAUD. And, if we have any voter fraud we WILL HAVE stolen elections.

          (There will always be a way to cast a single fraudulent ballot. Nevertheless, if it is really impractical to cast one fraudulent ballot no one will make the effort. There is hardly an election for dog catcher that turns on a single vote. Few on a handful of votes. Raise the barrier to fraudulent voting HIGH ENOUGH and there will be NONE whatsoever. Lower the barrier low enough and there is guaranteed to be plenty of fraudulent voting.)

          We would be better off PAYING for every minority individual to be brought to a voter registration office by Uber and giving them a free ID – even PAY THEM to accept an ID – then to endure the election fraud we have today.

          We already have a de-facto national ID number (the Social Security number) and a de-facto national ID document (the driver’s license). Almost all the states are members of a clearing house for traffic infractions; so, these driver’s licenses are not strictly intra-state. The credit scoring agencies know about almost all of us; as do the banks. We have already lost our ability to remain obscure.

          So why do we refuse to enjoy the benefits of secure elections for our resistance to Voter ID?

        2. avatar Manse Jolly says:

          Interesting..

          When conflict comes we might not have a choice.

          `just sayin

        3. avatar napresto says:

          “We would be better off PAYING for every minority individual to be brought to a voter registration office by Uber and giving them a free ID – even PAY THEM to accept an ID – then to endure the election fraud we have today.”

          The problem is how this kind of thing might be abused. Payment for voting/registration and free ID and transport sounds like a great first step for a seriously malignant ballot harvesting operation.

          I actually agree with you in principle, however, and maybe the details could be worked out. This country is doomed if fully half the country believes any given election was stolen.

        4. avatar MarkPA says:

          “The problem is how this kind of thing might be abused. Payment for voting/registration and free ID and transport sounds like a great first step for a seriously malignant ballot harvesting operation.”

          No, not necessarily.

          The idea is that IF you are a minority individual OR you are elderly (above 65) OR are on SS disability . . . (add whatever special classes you want to pander to) AND you don’t already have a driver’s license . . .

          THEN you can get a free Uber ride to the county seat and get a free voter ID. Maybe you even get $5 for your time to do so.

          How many people don’t already have a driver’s license?
          Of these, how many are also members of one of the pandered-to classes?
          These few are not numerous. We can afford to give them an Uber ride and a free Voter ID. Plus the $5. The idea is to sweep-away all the phony objections.

          My grandmother died in a nursing home at 104. She never had a driver’s license. She would never have behaved so shamefully as to take an Uber ride to the county seat nor to accept the $5. (Well, maybe for the $5.)

          I really don’t see the potential for abuse.

          Whether you go to vote or not is your own decision.

          In this vein, we can also have a Vote-Mobile to go to nursing homes and people shut-in so they can vote with their Voter IDs. All this can happen in the weeks prior to election day.

          The harder problem to solve is people who are traveling outside their voting precinct during the election period. Say the worker who must travel for weeks or months at a time. Somehow he must be able to vote “absentee”.

          If absentee balloting is a free-for-all then it’s no different from vote-by-mail. If it’s too onerous (e.g., you have to vote in front of a Notary Public) then it will be objected to in order to keep it a free-for-all.

          The objective is to get a really good system in place by overcoming all the phony objections. The election system needs to be only good-enough to make election fraud impractical. That’s what the Democrats don’t want.

        5. avatar napresto says:

          “I really don’t see the potential for abuse.”

          You make some great points, and like I said, maybe the details can be worked out. But the potential for abuse is in the way a well-conceived idea like yours gets distorted into a scheme where huge numbers of low or no-information voters, who previously had no intention of voting, are recruited by one political party or the other to get registered right before an election (and then, of course, are either coerced or incentivized into actually voting on election day). Leftists would certainly come up with ways to reduce the qualifying characteristics for this program to absurdly unrestricted levels – that is already what happened in many swing states through mail-in voting provisions. There has been a longstanding push by the left to make voting easier and easier, less and less controlled, precisely because they know they can exploit such changes to bring in more votes for their side.

          And the problem isn’t that more people are voting, or that previously unengaged people can now become engaged (this is, arguably, a good thing) – it’s that these are essentially mindless, unengaged votes bought by taxpayer subsidy instead of earned through persuasion. If you can get people registered, you’re already a good way toward getting them to vote, but these aren’t registrations or votes that reflect the will of the people (thought certainly the side exploiting this system will claim they are), they are votes that reflect the ability of one party to do a better job of “playing the election game” than the other. Whichever party can best take advantage of this taxpayer incentive to convert non-voters into voters will win; ideas will matter even less than they do now.

          Then again, at least this would have SOME oversight, unlike current mail-in systems that seem to have hardly any at all…

        6. avatar MarkPA says:

          I understand your complaint. And, it is reminiscent of the Southerners’ complaints in the post-Reconstruction era that Freedmen shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

          I’m also recalling the Jacksonian “reform” when the franchise was extended to landless men. As well as women’s suffrage and 18-yo-suffrage. The Constitutionality of suffrage – in the public mind – is that every American who is of-age and not bared from voting on account of being a felon or incompetent has a RIGHT to vote.

          We can’t stand in the way of the homeless nor the ner-do-well. Not going to fly today. I certainly won’t stand in their way, nor discourage them from voting. Nor allowing any impediment to their voting.

          Which is more important?
          1. Stopping the Democrats from printing filled-in ballots in China, importing them on ships, and stuffing the ballot box? (This is a metaphor; I’m not serious.)
          2. Stopping voting by an American we might prefer – for reasons good or bad – didn’t go to the polls?

          If the republic is taken over by ner-do-well Democrats by an honest vote then we shall have to acknowledge that we lost fair-and-square. We have other recourses; such as expatriation.

        7. avatar Dude says:

          In person voting
          Paper ballots
          Photo ID
          Signature
          Thumb print with ink on the ballot, signature of poll worker that witnessed it.

          Random third party auditing and as required.

          It’s past time to stop screwing around with votes. It’s more secure to cash a $10 check.

        8. avatar napresto says:

          I’m not talking about stopping people from voting. Everyone is entitled to vote, and no one is entitled to stop people from voting. Period.

          Suggesting that it might be dangerous to subsidize voter registration because such a system could be easy to exploit for illegitimate electoral gain is nothing like suggesting that any particular group of people should be disenfranchised. Politicians and political parties exploit every law and regulation they write; half the time, they write laws specifically with the intention of exploiting them. It’s a fact of life that needs to be accounted for in any discussion like this. And the fact is: the left likes to make voting insecure (not just easy) because it makes ballot harvesting schemes, both legal and illegal, a lot easier to execute.

          Please don’t accuse me of wanting to disenfranchise anybody. You know that’s not what I’m saying.

        9. avatar ABN LRRP RGR 3 tours RVN says:

          Signing up the ne’er-do-wells and crackheads………

        10. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I dunno about that. We have retiree expats in most 3rd world countries, making their dollars go farther. I can’t see much difference if the country in question was Texas. On a recent visit, I was made to understand that Costa Rica is an extremely popular spot for US retirees, gorgeous and cheap, if nearly stone age in comparison.

        11. avatar MarkPA says:

          These are just examples. They illustrate the difficulty of trying to untangle the obligations of the US Federal government from the states and their residents; and vice versa.

          Suppose a scenario. TX decides to succeed. TX tells DC that TX won’t assume any of the national debt. (There is no clear way for TX to assume some fraction of the national debt. The owners of the particular bonds would have to acquiesce to losing the full-faith-and-credit of the USA and accepting the full-faith-and-credit of TX.) So, now TX has staked-out its position on one issue. Then, DC tells TX residents that DC won’t pay their SS benefits or pensions. “Your move” as they say.

          Now, all the TX retirees complain to the TX legislature that they won’t accept losing their pensions. The TX legislature tells the TX retirees to move to OK. The retirees say they won’t move.

          Politically, there is no great way to unwind this mess. Not in the 21st Century. It would be nearly impossible to find a state, TX in this example, where the interlocking interests were small enough to be within the realm of sorting out.

          Maybe in Montana there aren’t many retirees. And, maybe Montana’s fair share of the national debt wouldn’t be much to bicker over. But that’s not likely. If Montana’s share is $10 million and there are three retirees in Montana, then that might be just enough of a pretext to prevent the decision to succeed by Montana and for DC to acquiesce.

          A state as large as TX or CA could succeed and make a go of it as an independent nation-state. But it would be too large to untangle the interlocking mess of interests. A state such as Montana couldn’t succeed and make an independent go of it; even if it could overcome the interlocking interests.

          Maybe Idaho and Montana would be large enough to form a common nation-state. But now you have to get two legislatures to agree. That’s not going to happen.

          As much as state-pride and solidarity make for a nostalgic dream of succession, the problem is much too hard to crack. And, it could result in Civil War II. Debating the solution of succession is wasting time on a non-solution that might be better invested in some other state-based response.

          If a state objects to the way the Federal government is running the country it’s much more practical to invoke “Nullification”. We are now witnessing many states adopting medical and recreational marijuana laws; and, they ARE having success. Congress isn’t sending either the DEA or the Army into these states to impose its will on the states.

          The states could adopt laws enforcing the 1A, 2A, and the 4A, etc. In so doing the states could defy DC. There wouldn’t be much DC could or would do to stop the states from enforcing the Constitution within their own borders. A wide-spread Nullification program is a form of “succession” that COULD be made-to-work.

          I think that the best response for Red and Purple states is to decide that they will adopt and enforce election laws that secure their respective state elections; including elections for federal offices. DC will hate that. DC won’t want any state to adopt a voter-ID law or to stop mail-in balloting. DC will hate real audits and supervision of polls. But there is not a lot DC can really do to prevent a state from writing their own election laws that are non-discriminatory.

          If the states can stop election stealing over the objections of DC then we can restore the republic. Voters can still vote themselves to destruction; but, it will be the voters’ honest choice. If we can’t agree that honest elections are necessary – though perhaps not sufficient – then we can’t achieve agreement on much of any other alternative measure to preserve the republic.

          We will surely fail if we divide our efforts into multiple nostalgic solutions none of which could gain traction. We have to find agreement on prospective solutions that we can actually realize.

        12. avatar S says:

          You failed to bring up the point that when hyperinflation eventually comes, all those things you listed will be worthless. Also, as of today, pension payments don’t go away simply because you live in a different country. So if Texas became its own country…

    3. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      I plan on greeting the Biden administration by extending every bit of the civility, courtesy, and respect that the Leftist scum gave to Trump.

      Oh, and anytime they claim that there is no proof the election was stolen, ask them when the congressional investigation with witnesses called and people questioned under oath took place.

      What? That never happened?

      1. avatar Geoff "I won't be here in 20 years to annoy anyone" PR says:

        Do you think that’s maybe because…gasp…there was no tangible, real evidence that people didn’t immediately say ‘oh I lied about that,’ and therefore you’d have to be a moron of Geoff “Too Old for Critical Thinking” PR’s calibre to not understand why they didn’t waste time with a congressional hearing on the non-existent voter fraud? And that you really just don’t like the outcome so you’re whining harder than a Hillary supporter in 2016?

        We didn’t have a congressional hearing about how dumb most of your comments are, but that wasn’t worth anyone’s attention either.

        ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

        1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “…but that wasn’t worth anyone’s attention either.”

          It did you! What a fucking joke my widdle troll is!

          Durrrrrrrrrr… 🙂

        2. avatar drunkEODguy says:

          but we had enough evidence of “Russian Collusion” to burn up literal hours upon hours of Congressional time and MSM airwaves? Please GTFO with that.

      2. avatar MarkPA says:

        ” . . . they claim that there is no proof the election was stolen . . . ”

        It doesn’t matter if “there is no proof”.

        Let us suppose that Biden really did win – by just 1 legitimate vote – in each of the battleground states. (I don’t believe that; it’s merely a supposition for the sake of exploring this argument). That (supposed) fact doesn’t matter.

        What does matter is that I DON’T BELIEVE this (supposed) fact. Nor does a significant minority of the population believe it. Those of us apostates in the 2020 election have lost faith in our electoral system. The nation cannot stand as a republic (with democratic suffrage) without faith in the electoral system.

        Those of us apostates are not suffering a delusion. There is ample evidence of fraud. Much of it by inference. Why would Democrat election officials block the windows through which Republican poll watchers observe the counting if that blockage were not intended to obscure fraud? Not proof-positive of fraud; but what other logical inference might be drawn.

        The Democrats, their politicians and judges, are doing everything in their power to destroy evidence, suppress inquiries, and prevent discussion of evidence. All of this destroys faith in the electoral process. It does not matter that – as a supposed FACT – that Biden won by 1 legitimate vote in each battleground state. The foundation of faith is crumbling.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          Exactly.

          To a large degree “trust in the system” is what a republic runs on. And like with individuals, when that trust is broken it’s hard to get back. Why or how it was broken doesn’t actually matter.

          What does matter is that millions of people either believe the election was a fraud or believe that it’s a real possibility; which is to say that they believe the entire system is or may be severely compromised/corrupt.

          A republic cannot function under those circumstances. More disturbing though is the fact that it seems that no one wants it to because literally no one is really trying very hard to restore faith in the system, which would be a fairly easy (but possibly painful) thing to do. Instead it seems like both sides are gaslighting each other and themselves for… reasons.

          I’ve talked about this before in terms of how and why people come to the conclusion that mass shootings are far more common than they really are. In this case we have a similar thing going on where it would be fairly easy to write off a lot of the really crazy talk from both sides as being just the work of trolls until you end up with a PBS lawyer getting fired for talking about taking away the children of anyone who voted for Trump… and that’s on the heels of actual “mainstream” politicians talking about “lists” and “retribution” which is on the heels of years of ridiculous inquiries driven by ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims that were given one-sided traction in the media.

          At this point it’s pretty easy for both sides to believe that the other side is 100% full of people who want to commit politically motivated mass murder.

          Fuckin’ sad but that’s where we’re at.

        2. avatar MarkPA says:

          I mostly agree with your comments with a couple of exceptions on which I will comment respectfully:

          “. . . or believe that it’s a real possibility; . . . ”

          Those who think that it’s a real POSSIBILITY that Biden won by 1+ votes are few in number (IMO). I fear that a simple majority want to believe in the system so badly – or want to believe in the Democrats so badly – that they hold the opinion (that Biden really won by 1+ votes) as a religious CONVICTION. These can not be convinced otherwise. No point in trying.

          “A republic cannot function under those circumstances. . . . no one is really trying very hard to restore faith in the system, . . . . Instead it seems like both sides are gaslighting each other and themselves for… reasons.”

          True, a republic can’t function without faith in the system. Nevertheless, a tyranny CAN function without faith in the system. In fact, a tyranny might decide – rationally – to undermine faith in their own system. I think the USSR functioned in this way. As long as the people joked at how stupid the system was and how poorly it functioned the people wouldn’t be likely to try to do their best at promoting reform. The few in power wanted the people to feel hopeless; there was nothing to be done constructively. Obey and muddle through. Or escape. These were the only viable options.

          “. . . until you end up with a PBS lawyer getting fired for talking about taking away the children of anyone who voted for Trump… and that’s on the heels of actual “mainstream” politicians talking about “lists” and “retribution” which is on the heels of years of ridiculous inquiries driven by ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims that were given one-sided traction in the media.”

          He just went one step too far, one moment too soon. The rhetoric must be rolled-out in measured beats. Anyone who gets a note ahead of the conductor’s baton must be eliminated. It’s not that he was wrong; it’s that he was politically incorrect.

        3. avatar strych9 says:

          Interesting thesis on the USSR. I’ve never really considered such a thought process but rather just kind of rolled with the assumption that the Soviet version of TPTB (W?) were 1) incompetent and 2) self-interested. Generally speaking I try not to ascribe to malicious behavior that which I can explain through a combination of being greedy and not very bright. I’ll have to go back and re-read a couple of a books with an eye towards this idea.

          As for the rest… without writing a book here I think we’re looking at a muddled mess. There are some Democrats (both voters and pols) who are stupid, some who are scared shitless of the Far Left and then there’s the Far Left. There’s probably a smattering of people not in those groups too.

          Generally, I think your hypothesis about “wanting” it to be true is probably correct for a lot of people though not necessarily that the “want” is an active desire but rather that they can’t bear to contemplate the alternative. A lot of politics gets wrapped up with people’s personal identity as “good” and such a thing requires that people contemplate that at least portions of the Democratic Party are so corrupted as to be overtly bad and supporting them would make the person considering this potentially bad. People seem to avoid even basic consideration of these sort of ethical questions when those questions directly affect the person doing the consideration.

          However, what I find particularly disturbing is that, as I said, there’s no particular reason that this can’t all be put to bed without significant violence (at least at this juncture over this topic). An open, transparent and full investigation would take a long time but a binding agreement could easily be reached beforehand that was, in essence, a “binding arbitration agreement”. That is to say “We’re going to set up a fair, open process and let the chips fall where they may. At the end of that process we have agreed that the faults, no matter how wide or deep, will be properly addressed yadda yadda…”. This would have to be accompanied by an agreement between all parties that certain things would potentially change based on the outcome. Like, for instance, Biden would agree that his entire administration would resign and turn things over to a independent party for the remainder of the term if mass fraud in his favor were found and Trump would agree to drop the whole thing if such fraud wasn’t found.

          While it would require the work of actually being open and transparent such a thing would either put to bed the idea that the election was stolen by essentially proving that it was not, or it would prove that the election probably (or definitely) was stolen and provide a roadmap for addressing that both immediately and going forward. Regardless of the outcome most people could look at that and say “the system” is working and therefore there’s no need to go outside the system with violence.

          Of course this is all a pipe-dream because it would take a carefully negotiated Act of Congress signed by Biden to accomplish this and that has about a 0% probability of happening. It would also require LE to step up at the Federal, State and Local levels in a way that anyone who fucked around and tried to blackmail the group doing the investigation would be dealt with. Antifa or Proud Boy, there will be no tolerance for tomfuckery here attempting to subvert this process because it’s too important. That’s equally unlikely to happen.

          Realistically I’m not sure this problem can be solved. Not because it’s unsolvable but because entrenched powers don’t want it sorted out any way other than in their personal favor and because really there isn’t the political will from anyone to do it. There’s plenty of will to shitstir, troll and fuck off but not much to actually do something truly useful because… well, if you do something really useful someone’s gonna get stuck holding a bag of shit and no one wants to be that person, especially the people who deserve it.

        4. avatar MarkPA says:

          I think it can be solved only by the voters in Red and Purple states through deciding that they want honest elections in their states.

          If they do, then they have to elect state legislators who will accomplish that goal.
          If they don’t, then state legislatures will be owned by the Democrats.

          These are the only two alternatives.

          The state legislatures have to draft bills on how elections will be conducted. Then, they have to threaten those in the executive branch that will carry-out the election laws to the letter. E.g. tell the Secretary of State that s/he will work for a salary of $1 if there is any breach in the election law. (This is merely illustrative.)

          Once we get scrupulously honest elections We the People can vote our way to tyranny. I will no longer care much; I will be weeping.

        5. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Generally speaking I try not to ascribe to malicious behavior that which I can explain through a combination of being greedy and not very bright.”

          Lotsa people make that mistake. It could be the death of us.

        6. avatar drunkEODguy says:

          Seriously, it may have been a PITA and cost the govt tons of money but as close to as possible to a non-partisan auditing of the election in the battleground states would have gone a long way, at least for me personally and probably many others, to making have a warm and fuzzy feeling about the integrity of the election. Instead any concerns or fears have been shouted down, gaslighted, criticized, or mocked. No real effort has been made to check on these things, despite the fact there were multiple instances of odd behavior and abnormalities across the states. Just the fact alone that this was the first election in our history that had such massive use of mail in ballots across all 50 states for tons of people who usually wouldn’t have qualified for it should make the desire to audit everything even greater. Instead, nothing.

        7. avatar MarkPA says:

          And that which you have just recited is enough to convince me that the elections in the battleground states were stolen.

          Thank you for your support.

        8. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “Once we get scrupulously honest elections We the People can vote our way to tyranny.”

          The ‘crux of the biscuit is in the apostrophe’.

          Election night scared the Leftist shitless, and with good reason.

          Not only did their candidate not win by the margins they expected, our turnout was so massive that every plan they were making was in jeopardy.

          There is one thing we can do to get honest elections. Keep repeating this phrase, ad nauseam –

          “If I have to show an ID to buy a gun, then you must be required to show an ID to vote.”

          Oh, the outcry that will ensue. if they refuse (and they will), then we demand they remove the requirement for an ID to buy guns. All rights are equally important, right?

          Use the Leftist playbook against them. Saul Alinsky would be proud…

        9. avatar Phil Wilson says:

          ‘“Generally speaking I try not to ascribe to malicious behavior that which I can explain through a combination of being greedy and not very bright.”

          Lotsa people make that mistake. It could be the death of us.”

          Ultimately, does it really matter whether the person driving the car over you is malicious or stupid?

        10. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Lotsa people make that mistake. It could be the death of us.”

          Yes. When you ascribe “stupid” to someone, the general tendency of people is, “Oh well, what the hell, they didn’t mean to do it. Maybe they will learn from their mistake.”

          When you ascribe evil intent, you know who your enemies are, and you do not pretend/hope they will pass you by in the future. Your enemies are never well intentioned toward you.

      3. avatar Southern Cross says:

        The latest impeachment proves the new government will be petty, vindictive, and spiteful. Just like Nancy Pelosi and other senior Democrats.

        1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          And it enrages conservatives even further.

          That will motivate an even higher turnout…

    4. avatar jwm says:

      If we’re going to have to fight to balkanize ourselves into separate, weaker and less prosperous nations why not fight to retain one country? A free nation the way it was meant to be?

      Do we really want to be the ones that history remembers as having lost the Republic?

      1. avatar Ed says:

        Agreed! Why should we let a habitual Child-sniffer, a avowed communist vp, a Xanax addled house speaker, and random somali immigrants (infiltraritors)and marxist barmaids steal this great country from those of us who actually LOVE it? The Founding Fathers would certainly NOT stand for this….

      2. avatar Texsun57 says:

        It is lost already, we let them have it a long time ago when we did not stand up to them. They have their tentacles so deep in every institution there is no removing them. Do you still think there is a chance to vote them out? You saw the last four years… if it were ever possible again to elect our choice for president he would meet the same resistance and persecution and be demonized as Trump was. Yeah, saving our republic sounds good and noble but we already let them take it, and they would see it destroyed before they let us take it back. The republic is the people and the spirit, not the capitol building, DC and the bureaucracy. It would be easier to defend a reborn Republic from a strong position then trying to take this one back.

        1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “…and they would see it destroyed before they let us take it back.”

          As long as they are the ones in charge after it happens.

          They are laying the groundwork right now. According to them, this nation is so fundamentally broken it cannot be fixed.

          Therefore, burn it down, start from new, with a ‘fair and socially just constitution’…

      3. avatar Southern Cross says:

        Ed, the Founding Fathers would have not only run out of tar and feathers, but also the rails to run them out of town on.

        1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          All of it, ‘social justice’ included, is the ground work to take America over.

          They want the ‘Revolution’ their parents wanted in the 1970’s…

      4. avatar Phil Wilson says:

        There just seem to be too many people these days that want an entirely different model of government, or at least think that they do. But their belief seems to be strong enough that it probably doesn’t matter for practical purposes if they are deluded or not.

        As many have said, when people generally have the same or at least similar goals, but disagree about how to achieve those goals, there can be compromise and the effective understanding that if we try one way and it doesn’t work, we can then try another way. But when large groups have entirely different goals, the probability of it all holding together long term is much lower.

  4. avatar Shire-man says:

    Does anybody on the left ever tell black bloc or antifa not to march downtown and set buildings on fire?
    Seems like when Bush Jr. got elected the left was all apeshit about their being rounded up and sent to camps.
    They went balls deep nuts over the Patriot Act, as did I and still do, but now they’re all about PA 2.0.

    19 short years ago they were the ones jumping ship from mainstream tech devices and apps to make use of encrypted, discrete and private options. Now they’re on their knees slobbering all over big techs jock.

    19 short years ago librarians were writing defiant letters and taking very public stands against moves to track patron data and usage and refusing to pull materials off of shelves and now they’re piling up books to burn and making lists of deplorable patrons who read deplorable works.

    But what do I know. I’m just a 40 year old boomer.

    1. avatar BC says:

      Whoa there. Wait a minute.

      Since when did 40 year olds get lumped in with ‘boomers’?

      1. avatar 300BlackoutFan says:

        Anyone who opposes the left, or social justice, or is against cancel culture, etc, is called a boomer.

        Being called a boomer is a bigoted slur, spoken by those that think they are not bigots.

        1. avatar Prndll says:

          This is part of the problem. The twisting of the language to make thing mean what they don’t. Just like making people think AR means Assualt Rifle.

        2. avatar rt66paul says:

          Sorry, there are many liberal Boomers, who are the children born after WWII and Korea up to about 1964. Some were flower children, others were disco, but most were liberal. What was liberal then and what is liberal now is 2 different animals.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “What was liberal then and what is liberal now is 2 different animals.”

          Disagree. I was in college with liberals “then”. The only difference is the amount of power they can employ. The intent was always there. BTW, those flower children and other baby leftists were the direct issue of “The Greatest Generation”. I, and some others, were blessed to have parents whose mantra was not, “My kid’s gonna have it better than I did.” The flower children were raised to have no backbone, no appreciation for the effort that enabled them to hold their parents is complete contempt for selling out to “the system” (i.e. the capitalist economy that brought jobs and solid incomes).

      2. avatar Hippi says:

        ah like some of us genxrs we were raised by boomers and if you went into the trades we were trained by boomers so I don’t know about you but by 25 I was a grumpy old fuck like the ones around me.

        1. avatar Prndll says:

          No matter how hard we fight against it, we do become our parents. That doesn’t make someone a boomer.

        2. avatar Pb_fan59 says:

          Gee, I’m one of those boomers in the trades that was supposed to train you… so were you one of the ignorant fucks with your nose stuck in your smartphone for half of the day, or one of the know-it- alls that learned everything there is to know in day school where you considered a 70 score a job well done? And then you wonder why we’re all a bunch of grumpy old fucks ! Great to be retired now, my neck is starting to heal from shaking my head for the last 25 years.

        3. avatar Nero "...diction, not grammar..." Wolfe says:

          “No matter how hard we fight against it, we do become our parents. That doesn’t make someone a boomer.”

          Yes! Despite whatever Progressive Insurance advertises!

    2. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      “Does anybody on the left ever tell black bloc or antifa not to march downtown and set buildings on fire?”

      As you imply, of course not. They don’t hate violence. They hate people who oppose them.

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        “Does anybody on the left ever tell black bloc or antifa not to march downtown and set buildings on fire?”

        Yes, they did just that when they realized public polling was showing support for BLM tanked from a +70 to just 30 percent after the Minneapolis riots.

        Setting that police precinct on fire with police inside and trying to seal the back door exits with concrete was when most folks said “Enough”

        https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZKN4ApXsAA-0tW?format=jpg&name=large

        And to no one’s surprise, Antifa mostly knocked that shit off…

        1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

          Yes, but they’ll refrain or not based on whether or not it serves their purposes.

    3. avatar GS650G says:

      I vividly remember the left accusing the right of being authoritarian in the 80s and 90s. Look who’s big brother today?

      1. avatar muckraker says:

        This!^

      2. avatar Dude says:

        I remember it from like four months ago.

  5. avatar Not_Very_Good_Deplorable_Infidel says:

    I will abstain.

  6. avatar Craig in IA says:

    I’ll wait to make my moves until these theives actually do something that is un-Constitutional. The author here is correct and its important for those of us with any experience (or brains) not to feed their little frenzy.

    One thing I do advocate, however, is for everyone (and that’s almost everyone!) whose Congressman/woman/thing and Senator ran to a microphone to denounce the short-lived US Capital take-over contact them and let them know that there was no armed insurrection. It’s also lucicrous in a civilized society to have to condemn lawbreaking- no one should stand for such action and should not need to explain that they are opposed to it. It goes WITHOUT saying and should remain as such.

    This little soirée was miniscule in both economic loss and violence as compared to the left-inspired and authorized comandeering of the streets of Seattle, Portland, and the burning and looting of over a dozen American cities. So the Congress was scared- it’s about time they learn to respect those on the right as much as they fear the crazies on the left. Remain in close contact with your elected reps, especially if they are Republicans.

    1. avatar Roger J says:

      You mean like vast vote fraud?

    2. avatar Blackened Is The End says:

      Sorry Craig, no offense, but it seems you haven’t woke up yet. The Republic is lost. Most Republicans are part of the overthrow. Those that weren’t will probably go the way of Antonin Scalia or simply be purged in some other creative way. Sad, but true. So, what now coach?

  7. avatar Rev. Phil says:

    I was born in the early “boomer” years. I’m still going strong and have plenty of history to look back on!

  8. avatar GS650G says:

    This is the start of a very big lesson for the country. Every few years they need a refresher course.
    So kick it off with much dancing and drinking. We’ll be over here on the sidelines.

    I don’t even watch them on TV.

  9. avatar Error404 says:

    Doesn’t matter if real protesters show up at the inauguration. The antipastos will show up dressed as armed protesters wearing Trump hats, beat on the police, and the media will report it as “violent right wing racist x-ist extremist Republican conservative Trump radicals blah blah blah with fully semiauto assault cannons”. And then the rest of us get ducked over for it with unpatriot act 2.0.

    1. avatar Prndll says:

      It will never matter to the narrative. But it does matter what faces are in the videos and pictures. CYA is important right now.

    2. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      That’s my prediction as well. I’m sure there are some actual Trump supporters who would be willing to participate, emotions are running very hot right now. But regardless of that, The Narrative will be pushed as long as it serves the purposes of Progressives, and absolutely they will stage crimes if it helps them further The Narrative.

  10. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    To quote former President Bush don’t get upset “just go shopping”. But go shopping wearing a “not my President Biden” t-shirt or where a President Trump t- shirt or hat.

    Not every protest has to be a large organized event. You can protest individually.

    They are looking for a reichstag fire event. Don’t give them the opportunity.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      “They are looking for a reichstag fire event. Don’t give them the opportunity.”

      Exactly.

      1. avatar CanoeIt says:

        My concern is that “we” will make a showing, even if we don’t show up. All it takes is some whackadoodles in Trump apparel to condem us all. As for me personally, I will focus on family preparedness and continuing living my life the same way I always have. If/when necessary, I will defend myself and my family by whatever means necessary. If they haven’t imploded the country in four years, they will damn sure alienate far more than just conservative voters. They have fundamentally destroyed most trust in elections, government, and law or enforcement. Funny thing trust…it takes a lifetime to earn, and a second to lose. I see a third party finally being potentially viable. The dems have have shifted further left than most of thier base will (thus the cheating and lies), and GOP have proven to be weak kneed feckless go along to get alongs. Time for a (W)e (T)he (P)eople Party.

        1. avatar MarkPA says:

          “I see a third party finally being potentially viable. ”

          Perhaps it’s a mistake to think along the lines of “third party” vs. working within the GOP.

          Under present circumstances, with Democrats in control of the WH, Senate & House, and soon the judiciary, the argument for voting for a RINO is lost.

          I have voted for a RINO because I wanted to keep the Senate or the House in Republican control. When it was clear that one or the other chamber was lost, it seemed more useful for me to vote for the Democrat so that I could knock the RINO from incumbency. Then, I could pray for a better Republican in the next election.

          I think that we must register as Republicans and instruct our RINO legislators that we have no use for them whatsoever. We will back whomsoever runs against them in the primary. We will back their Democrat opponent if we think we can push her over-the-top. If the Democrat is a shoo-in to beat the RINO then we will vote for a third-party candidate.

          I doubt that the Republicans will soon take control of either chamber of Congress. So, the strategy of voting for a RINO is pointless.

          Our only hope is to convince Republicans and any third-party candidates who might emerge that we will support either one indifferently only so long as we are convinced that they are NOT RINOs.

          As a party, the GOP is clearly useless today. If it can’t maintain a majority in its chamber then it can’t do any good as a party. A few individual legislators can stand and speak about principle. Nevertheless, the leader of each chamber (Speaker, Majority Leader) runs that chamber for the most part. When s/he is a Democrat the members of that party work largely in lock-step.

          Our case is with our fellow voters. Our objective must be to elect those to our state legislatures who will work for honest elections. Those state legislators who will not work for honest elections are useless. Doesn’t matter how many parks they build in our neighborhoods.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          Usually I find it’s better to use existing infrastructure for your own purposes than to tear it down and start over, though sometimes the latter option can’t be avoided. *cough* NRA *cough*.

          Dunno. Guess we’ll find out. Or we’ll all die wondering. It’ll get sorted out one way or another.

        3. avatar MarkPA says:

          Interesting point; about the NRA.

          If We the People-of-the-gun can’t get our shit together to fix our own NRA (which we haven’t accomplished) then how do we imagine we will get our shit together to fix our state governments let alone the Federal government.

          There are several other fine gun-rights organizations out there (along with one or two flaky gun organizations). Still, none of them has yet to build itself to the stature (once) held by the NRA.

          If we think we are so clever then why have we failed to organize and build a new gun rights organization that could outstrip the NRA for the leadership position.

          The Democrats have their game down; we don’t. What do they know about organizing themselves which we refuse to learn?

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The Democrats have their game down; we don’t. What do they know about organizing themselves which we refuse to learn?”

          Dims want to control your every action. Non-Dims just want to be left alone. Evil always has the initiative.

        5. avatar Ing says:

          If the Republican party goes along with impeaching Trump and removing him from office at this point, they’re sunk. They’ll have alienated a good half of their voter base, and they were barely treading water electorally at the national level to begin with. The Republicans now are the Whigs of 170 years ago. So it’ll be either a brief political bloodbath with a renewed R party or a lean, mean new party coming out of it — or Democrat domination for decades. Unless the Democrats tear themselves apart, too…one can only hope. Or maybe the GOPe will get in on the “progressive” fraud machine too, and then *none* of them will need actual votes anymore.

        6. avatar hawkeye says:

          “My concern is that ‘we’ will make a showing, even if we don’t show up.”

          This. The left talks in circles, referencing each other as the only reliable sources, and they control the narrative.

          As long as this is the case,whatever what we do will always be a “heads we win and tails you lose” affair from their perspective, and they’ll make damn sure that is what the rest of the world sees.

          I think we are on the verge of falling in too deeply to be able to rescue the country from the usual prosperity to apathy to collapse cycle, but we’re not over the cliff yet. It has to start from the ground and go up from there. School boards, city councils, county commissioners, state legislatures. That’s how the left did it. A single county board of elections can change everything if it’s done a few times in the right places, as we just witnessed. How many states are still red? Reinforce them. How many are purple? Tip them back. It’s slim, but we still control the majority of state legislatures and governors.

        7. avatar Dude says:

          “Usually I find it’s better to use existing infrastructure for your own purposes than to tear it down and start over”

          That’s basically what Trump did. Actually, he was the RINO. He was able to bring in more people than the Bush-McCain-Romney set could in their wildest dreams because he wasn’t a republican, and they hated him for it.

        8. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “The Democrats have their game down; we don’t. What do they know about organizing themselves which we refuse to learn?”

          They exploit emotions to get votes, (No more dead children!) while we tend to only focus on facts.

          We need an effective fusion of the two…

        9. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “If the Republican party goes along with impeaching Trump and removing him from office at this point, they’re sunk.”

          It looks like that will not happen :

          “McConnell Won’t Convene Senate For Emergency Impeachment Trial”

          “Update (1257ET): According to the Washington Post, McConnell is done mulling – and has decided not to convene the Senate for an emergency trial – meaning the Democrat-controlled Senate will do so during the Biden administration.”

          https://www.zerohedge.com/political/mcconnell-mulls-launching-senate-impeachment-trial-friday

        10. avatar Dude says:

          “McConnell is done mulling”

          He was never going to convene the Senate to impeach Trump. He was merely signaling that he was done with Trump so he doesn’t get canceled by his donors.

  11. avatar Ron says:

    So.. don’t protest because the media will make us look like bad guys or something?

    So… we lost the right to protest, and the left still has it?

    Lose your fear of the media and democrats.

    They are NOT as strong as they tell you they are.

    And they’re not as unified either.

    1. avatar Prndll says:

      The right to protest was and is there. Large groups of armed pro American protestors gathering at the capitals is not a good idea. This is not the way. There is absolutely no proof that it works. Unlike saying there is no proof of fraud (there is), gatherings like this do not result in anything productive.

      1. avatar Ron says:

        So what then we just sit at home and say we’re protesting?

        That’ll show em.

        1. avatar MarkPA says:

          Nope. The point is to be scrupulously law-abiding. Invading the House chamber was trespass at the very least. Moreover, invading the House chamber couldn’t possibly have made a positive impression on anyone no matter how well it might have turned-out.

          It is acceptable to march around the Capital area mall and shout all you want. That’s where to get the photo op.

          It’s acceptable to visit the Capital building. In ones and twos; in families; in groups of chaperoned school children.

          It’s stupid to gather in a relatively large group of adults and enter the Capital building with the slightest hit of protest. Even if the large group is perfectly peaceful the photo evidence of the entry will be made to look like a mob assaulting the seat of government.

          IIRC, the gathering of 20,000 armed men, women and their children around the VA capital in Richmond on Lobby Day last year came out perfectly peacefully. I recall that capital security erected a fence to keep protesters outside the capital building and there was no attempt to breach the fence. Had provocateurs attempted to do so they would have been dragged back by the peaceful protesters (who, I might mention in passing, were heavily armed to make their wishes known with a kind word and a gun). That fence prevented any provocateurs from taking advantage of the situation.

          The Richmond armed demonstration was a risky proposition. Nevertheless, it is in sharp contrast with the invasion of the US Capital building on 6Jan21.

          The trick here is to figure out what, where, and how to protest to have a successful outcome and how NOT to protest to hand a victory to our unworthy opponents on a silver platter.

  12. avatar GS650G says:

    MAGA hats and Trump shirts will shortly be banned in public so get ready for that. BoweL Movement members will stop visible Trump supporters in public and make them raise their hand in supper and denounce their racist past. Or at least try. That’s when it gets interesting.

    1. avatar Ron says:

      Yep. There’s also speech laws coming. Anything deemed racist or sexist will become a federal offense.

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        No need for that.

        They won’t allow you to speak in the first place…

      2. avatar Phil Wilson says:

        And those laws will be ex post facto, with ever-changing definitions of unacceptable speech. You will be at most immediate risk if you have any influence at all, or stand between a leftist and what they want (e.g., if you own something a leftist covets). History is pretty clear on those points.

    2. avatar TheUnspoken says:

      They already basically are banned in public, since antifa goons or triggered snowflakes will attack the elderly or kids wearing MAGA gear, or possibly even kill you over it.

      Meanwhile some causes and views can be put on sports jerseys or worn as corporate uniforms at Starbucks, but Conservative views are not allowed.

  13. avatar jwm says:

    What new biden administration? It’s just an extension of the old beijing administration.

  14. avatar Old Coyote says:

    I am old and sick. My wife is old and sick. We have talked about it and have decided that we will not bow to the Crown but will resist … Any way we can, and with out lives if necessary.
    How many others will do the same? If the numbers are high enough, We will not have died in vain.

  15. avatar MarkPA says:

    The OP has it dead-on right. If we are to prevail we must NOT do stupid things.

    Our UN-worthy opponents sometimes do things which – I’ll argue – are stupid. But they know how to get away with doing them. We don’t know. And, we stubbornly refuse to learn.

    We refuse to learn to NOT do stupid things. We refuse to learn what our unworthy opponents know how to do successfully. First priority is to NOT do stupid things. Second, learn (from our opponents if necessary) how do things successfully.

    I suspect (but can’t know or prove) that there were provocateurs among those who stormed the Capital. I invite you to follow an exercise. These provocateurs numbered: 0; 1; or many.

    If they were many then they were successful in provoking the attack.
    If they were 1 then perhaps that 1 had some influence.
    Now, just for the intellectual exercise, assume there were 0 provocateurs.

    Those genuine Trump supporters violated the law – at least trespass – and gave our opponents the photo op they would have paid for. They drew blood from our side. And they can claim it was righteous blood. We gave them a bloody victory. What might those genuine Trump supporters have hoped to accomplish? NOTHING.

    Suppose there was just 1 provocateur. Ideally, s/he would have been at the head of the line, gotten the most clear photos; and, fallen dead. Then, we might have DOXed her/him and held up the head “on a pike” as the Democrat who was violent. But s/he would have been at the back of the line and disappeared just as the violence broke out.

    Suppose the provocateurs were many. AND, suppose genuine Trump supporters didn’t ascend the first step of the Capital. All those provocateurs would have been photographed as they ALONE entered the House chamber. They would have all been DOXed as Democrats/BLM/Antifa. And so, they WOULD NOT HAVE DONE SO. The incident would NOT have happened. And it is THIS which is the OP’s point.

    The only place we can intimidate a politician is in our own neighborhoods. We have to persuade our neighbors to put aside their positive sentiments toward their politicians. Yes, perhaps their politician tells them what they want to hear. Perhaps s/he built a park in their neighborhood with their taxes. But what is important now?

    Isn’t free, fair and above all honest elections the ONLY point now?

    Isn’t that the last (indeed the first and last) step in the path of government by consent of the governed? If we will not have honest elections then the next step is politics by other means. None of us wants that. So, we must secure honest elections. If OUR politician – our state representative/senator – won’t do that then we need to find someone who will do his duty.

    It’s either honest elections; or, Civil War II. The last Civil War didn’t turn out well for anyone. So it’s imperative that we strive to make the last full stop at the “stop sign” of honest elections so as to minimize the risk of Civil War II.

    Naturally, honest elections are the LAST thing our unworthy opponents want. And they will make that abundantly clear; they have already done so. Mao wrote: “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party.” The same must be true of: the ballot box; the soap box; the jury box; as for the cartridge box.

    In 2020 it appears that they commanded the ballot box. Likewise, in Pixelnaught they commanded the soap box. In 2021 they will take the jury box. What’s left?

    If we cannot convince our neighbors to insist upon restoring honest elections then there is nothing we can do to stop the Pixelnaught of Big Tech, the Masters of the Universe. Nothing to stop them from taking the jury box.

    Succession can not succeed while there is a corrupt ballot box. And, even in the Reddest state, they will corrupt the ballot box to stop succession. Succession can’t succeed without sufficient organization and a collective effort. Pixelnought will prevent organization at scale.

    Simply defending the 2A can’t succeed while our unworthy opponents control our state legislatures, Congress, the courts and soon SCOTUS. Remember, we are trying to avoid Civil War II. If we can’t get our neighbors to insist on honest elections how could we imagine we can get them to support the 2A?

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      +110.

      100 for the second sentence. 10 for the rest.

      Don’t think I’ve ever given 100 bonus points before. That’s gotta be a level up. Pick your stat points carefully.

      1. avatar MarkPA says:

        Thank you; you are very generous. I won’t spend your points; I’ll treasure them forever.

        I just would have switched the allocation; 10 for the second sentence and 100 for the rest.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          I don’t think you get how “bonus points” work… LOL.

    2. avatar Ing says:

      Pixelnacht! I like it!

      All the rest, also spot on. Sarah Hoyt has some good ideas on being smart about taking action — and on goading the enemy into doing its own stupid and self-defeating things. And staying motivated and organized: https://accordingtohoyt.com/

      1. avatar MarkPA says:

        “Pixelnacht! I like it!”

        I wish I had thought of it first.
        I’ll claim I read it first and copied it.

        I think it’s a good “flag pole” to rally around in opposition to the Monsters of the Universe de-platforming we the deplorable and disloyal opposition.

        I think the public cares more about the 1A than the 2A. If so, we need to get them on-board in opposition to the new regime. It’s no longer possible to distinguish between the Democrat National Committee and the 4th Estate (which today is Google, Facebook and Twitter).

  16. avatar Cruzo1981 says:

    The stupid has already started and that corpse isn’t even in the WH yet. Clyburn just proposed a black national anthem. Things are going to get bad. I would prefer to just ignore them, but they will be passing laws soon and the time to fight might be closer than rather than further away. River runs red…

  17. avatar former water walker says:

    I’m going to the gun range on
    Faux Imacculation Day. With my AR & my shotgun I’m picking up today. @ # I support 45!

    1. avatar Ing says:

      That’s a good idea.

      Might be only with the .22 rifles, since that’s the only ammo I’ve been able to find on the shelves with any frequency, but that would be the perfect way to relax, have fun, and give a symbolic middle finger to the totalitarians and their puppet thief-in-chief.

  18. avatar Frank M. says:

    Nonsense? Do you live under a rock or are you being willful obtuse?

  19. avatar NORDNEG says:

    And the leftists military commanders are already advising the troops on what their supposed to do under the new administration…
    that right there is kinda spooky…
    just like the Republicans, America just might be history.

    1. avatar RV6Driver says:

      Do you honestly believe the US military is gonna come after citizens??? Should I be more concerned about being snatched up by a special ops team or a hellfire from a drone strike?

      I understand your concern but you’re kinda getting into zombie apocalypse territory…..

      1. avatar MICHAEL A CROGNALE says:

        I am a retired USAF Officer and a graduate of the collateral duty Legal Officer course. I am not a lawyer but keep in mind that the military is trained and required to follow the orders of their superiors without fail. If they believe the order to be unlawful they must still carry them out and file an IG complaint afterwards. It is likely that they will be briefed that the people they are going against are in rebellion against the US and have surrendered their rights under the Constitution.

        1. avatar MarkPA says:

          Unfortunately, I think you are right.

          In the very beginning (the first day, week, month, year) our governments will take considerable care to pick their opportunities.

          E.g., issuing a Red-Flag gun confiscation order. Is such an order Constitutional/or-not? Will a cop or military officer put his career/pension at risk by refusing to execute such an order? I’m not convinced.

          Eventually, there would be cops/soldiers who would start to question the wisdom of the civil war they are ordered to continue prosecuting. That eventual point won’t come on the first day or week. Nor is it sure to come in the first month or year. Governments are careful enough to increment selectively.

          The actual outcome of any (most) wars is indeterminate. That’s the point; to prevent politics by other means by deterrence and by politics through regular order.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          Orders are disobeyed “at your own risk” essentially but Art. 92 specifically states that it relates only to lawful orders. In every case outlined by Art. 92, other the Dereliction of Duty, it’s incumbent on the prosecution to show that the order that was disobeyed was lawful from the jump, otherwise 92 doesn’t apply.

          In United States v. Keenan the court upheld a murder conviction stating that “the justification for acts done pursuant to orders does not exist if the order was of such a nature that a man of ordinary sense and understanding would know it to be illegal.”

          Of course, the gray area is “What is and what is not a lawful order and where does your opinion of what is lawful and not lawful line up with the UCMJ and other applicable law be it national or international?”. Orders are presumed to be lawful… unless they are not lawful, the question is if the person receiving the order knows the difference. Even military courts in this country won’t accept “I was just following orders” for illegal activities conducted by our own service members.

          Fail to follow a lawful order and you’re fucked but follow an illegal order and you’re fucked if it comes up later and you’re probably not going to have JAG on hand to tell you the difference at the time. Still, if the order is later deemed to be unlawful then it’s a crime to follow it.

        3. avatar MarkPA says:

          The great difficulty in this discussion is whether we can rely upon the courts – both Article III courts and military courts marshal – to uphold the Constitution in good faith.

          When (if) we reach the point where a soldier or cop must seriously contemplate refusing to execute a direct order because he considers it unlawful, the assumption of confidence in the courts will be severely eroded if not broken down entirely.

          This duty to refuse to execute an unlawful order serves only to protect an occasional individual with courage while the courts are functioning in good faith. Under tyranny, courts can’t function in good faith and so the soldier/cop is put in the untenable position of being hanged immediately for refusing to obey or risk being hanged eventually for having obeyed an unlawful order.

          Not a pretty prospect, but that’s the way it is and will be.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The great difficulty in this discussion is whether we can rely upon the courts….to uphold the Constitution in good faith.”

          The problem is that the courts are already convinced they do uphold the Constitution in good faith.

        5. avatar strych9 says:

          The truth of the matter here for me personally is that I’m kinda checked out on this shit. So far as I can tell somewhere in the middle of March 2020 all the adults fucked off on vacation, left a bunch of spoiled 12 year olds in charge and the adults have yet to return. This seems to be the case across a host of issues which is stupid beyond belief and extremely frustrating so part of me just wants to say “Wake me up when people are ready to adult again”.

          In all likelihood shit’s gonna get real deep on a bunch of fronts here in the next six months because there’s a giant knot of small problems that no one wants to address and, in many cases, actively work to make worse. I don’t really understand that behavior when a slew of simple solutions would rid us of the knot but… I doubt it’s going to change considering the way things have gone for the last 10 months. I generally expect things to get worse, quite a lot worse, before they start to get better because they’ll only start to get better when people feel enough pain to actually do something about these things.

        6. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Well, I am a retired Air Force officer and combat veteran, and NOBODY ever even insinuated that there was some manner of requirement for me to obey any unconstitutional order from my superiors, quite the opposite. From the Nuremberg trials to the enlistment oath, what military members are required to do is protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. “I was just following orders” was not accepted as a defense in 1945 and people were executed as a result. If you were so trained, as you describe, you should have strenuously objected, and withdrawn from the training if the concept was pressed. Because it’s bullshit.

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “I understand your concern but you’re kinda getting into zombie apocalypse territory…..”

        Waco, 1993: ATF, FBI, Army National Guard. The victims didn’t think the government attack on “suspicion” of child abuse and converting semi-auto rifles into full-auto. 900 representatives of the federal government and military destroyed 75 (or so) civilian lives. There were no words of regret from the National Guard.

        BTW, I was there. Fort Worth. Listening to it all unfold on the radio. The real betrayal of American citizens at the Branch Davidian compound was the fact that the feds prevented local LE from any involvement. The Sheriff was on good terms with the people in the compound, and volunteered to have the leader come to Waco city to talk to the feds. His offer was rejected out of hand because the raid was federal business.

        1. avatar Southern Cross says:

          The Feds were “respect ma authoriteh” types. They wanted to put on a show to “shock and awe”.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The Feds were “respect ma authoriteh” types. They wanted to put on a show to “shock and awe”.”

          American authorities willingly firing on fellow citizens, based on suspicion. Don’t trust your life to “good will” of people authorized to kill you.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          For several weeks after the beginning of the Waco clusterfuck, here in Austin we had regular news “updates” concerning the raid to rescue underage virgins from the horrors of child sexual abuse, until I was literally screaming every time about some hint of a reason the ATF was involved. Only near the final massacre did word of “heard guns firing really fast” start circulating. That was the absolute worst abuse of authority in my lifetime, and AFAIK there was never anyone who lost his job, much less went to prison for the murders of 70-80 religious folk including dozens of women and small children.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Only near the final massacre did word of “heard guns firing really fast” start circulating.”

          I do remember a snippet of video of a ATF commando on a segment of roof, apparently trying to gain some firing point advantage. Then of the shock on his face as bullets came at him from below and inside, bullets coming through the shingles at him. What a hasty retreat for a guy in full battle rattle faced with return fire from a bunch of amateurs inside. When I heard the “guns firing really fast”, I knew it was from the full-auto rifles of the ATF.

          And the nation yawned.

  20. avatar Sam I Am says:

    The best response to the inauguration would be a display of Falun Gong style protest; stand (with backs toward the site and politicians) silently, and un-movingly. Then adopt the fall on the ground tactic of the Left during the 60s, when approached by authority.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      Those are very good ideas.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Those are very good ideas.”

        Unfortunately, organizing across the nation would take time that is unavailable.

  21. avatar Dog of War says:

    I’m going to treat the Child Sniffer & Chief with the exact level of respect he deserves. Which is none.

    1. avatar PMinFl says:

      I don’t really expect to interact with the president on a personal level, therefore I will try to ignore anything coming from that party/office.

      1. avatar Dog of War says:

        Well, same. But for one thing, after this election I am now actively hostile to the entire democratic party and the left in general. Does this mean that I’m going to attack or otherwise try to harm a leftist? Absolutely not. But I will not be supporting them, and I’ll probably even laugh and mock one whenever they come to harm. And I sue as hell will be voting straight ticket republican for, probably, the rest of my life. Which something I never did to begin with.

        One of the core reasons why we can even have a working and civil society is the idea that we have fair elections. And this election was anything but fair. The democrats stole this election. And when people pointed out how this election was compromised, we were mocked and abused. And the icing on the cake is that when we had a protest against this theft and a minuscule fraction of that protesters committed illegal acts of violence the left went into open authoritarianism. The open hypocrisy of that alone is beyond that pail. Yes, it was completely unacceptable for that protest to devolve until the point where people died… But the facts of how and why those people died is that 4 out of the 5 people that died died from accidents and medical unforeseen medical issues. Hell, the only person that was actually murdered was one of the pro-trump who was unarmed and shot by a cop. This past year we had riots across the nation instigate by the far left. Something like 30 or more people were straight up MURDERED by leftist rioters! Not to mention the multiple billions of dollars in damage to private and public property.

        Sorry to be a bit ranty here, but this past week or so has just been a complete sh*t show all around. And I am getting real damn tired of listing to leftist P.O.S. using it as an excuse to enact their fantasies of power. Of course I’m also a bit sick of the cowardice from the GOP establishment. But that’s another problem for another day.

        1. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          I agree with that so much I had to double check I didn’t write it myself.

  22. avatar LastOfTheOldOnes says:

    George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Paul Revere……

    They were part of a violent overthrow of an illegitimate government.
    No wonder the left wants to eliminate our Founding Fathers.

    Will WE, the righteously outraged “PATRIOTS”, also sit here and eliminate them? Looks like it….

    “Don’t get upset, just go shopping”, yeah, that will show them…..

  23. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

    Let them eat cake.
    Right now there are important steps we need to take.
    1. Continue supporting the decertification of electors and investigation into voting systems. The decertification will be ceremonial but could prove important later.
    2. Support our congress critters to filibuster all the insane legislation coming down the pipe. It is going to be fast and furious. Some of it will make you face palm I assure you.
    3. Work hard to primary establishment GOP. Yup this sounds insane but we can see how well the establishment stood up in congress on Jan 6th. Cruz had the right idea, but there was not enough support across congress to sustain such objections.
    4. Buy more guns and ammo. Sounds silly, but with what I suspect will happen I think we will see an assault weapons ban by EO. whether it holds up in court or not doesn’t matter. At this point it will be about framing the narrative of federal agents storming homes of “domestic terrorists” removing “weapons of war”. This will be played on every TV channel ad nauseum. Waco will have looked like child’s play. I suspect we will see the gun industry legislated to death unless our GOP representatives stand firm and filibuster everything.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “2. Support our congress critters to filibuster all the insane legislation coming down the pipe. ”

      The filibuster is a rule controlled by whichever party controls the legislature. Rule changes only require a one-vote majority. It is quite easy to vote to eliminate filibuster when your opponent tries it, then reinstate the filibuster when you want to stop your opponent.

      Time for people to come to grips with reality. The left wants to eliminate all opposition. The Republicrats just want to be invited to all the cool clubs and parties. Reported yesterday, McConnell wants to impeach and convict Trump so as to be rid of him, and all his voters. The Swamp wants it cesspool back.

      (“Another source told Fox News that McConnell told associates that impeachment will help rid the Republican Party of Trump and his movement.”)
      https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconnell-believes-trump-committed-impeachable-offenses-supports-democrats-impeachment-efforts-report

      1. avatar PMinFl says:

        McConnell and Graham can go kiss each others asses. They are not of any assistance to the American public, but self serving POLITICIANS (dirty word). Why is it that democrats stick together while republicans are competing for title of RINO in chief?

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Why is it that democrats stick together while republicans are competing for title of RINO in chief?”

          Leftists (i.e. Democrats) are united in the goal of seizing absolute power. Republicrats want to feel good about themselves, and be liked by Leftists.

  24. avatar Lance says:

    How to greet the Biden Admin?

    You don’t.

  25. avatar Patrick H says:

    It’s actually the FBI that is warning about violence from the right on inauguration day, as they warned about the potential for violence before the riots.

    They are not “the left” except in somebody’s fevered imagination.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Are the FBI making up these warnings out of thin air, or is somebody “tipping” them to a problem? Ah! That would be the left.

      1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

        Are the FBI making up these warnings out of thin air,

        Are we talking about the same FBI who knew about the PREPLANNED riots days before Jan 6th but failed to say anything until AFTER the IDIOTS in the House Impeached Trump for a second time?

  26. avatar AlanInFL says:

    .I. JB. You suck big time.

  27. avatar Mr No says:

    They bought their way in and now the rest of us have to suffer through it or get out if my wife wasn’t anchored to a grave I’d be out of here faster than a jack rabbit 🐇 on a date. It SUCKS but like I said love it or leave it….. I wouldn’t blame anyone for leaving…… it pisses me off that the blacks can riot burn loot rape pillage plunder anything they want and it’s called “ peaceful demonstrations..,, but when we (the people) protest it’s an insurrection I saw no one with “ the big bad AR15s “ at that demonstration… I just hope that someday “ we the PEOPLE “ have a voice

  28. avatar Mr No says:

    They bought their way in and now the rest of us have to suffer through it or get out if my wife wasn’t anchored to a grave I’d be out of here faster than a jack rabbit 🐇 on a date. It SUCKS but like I said love it or leave it….. I wouldn’t blame anyone for leaving…… it pisses me off that the blacks can riot burn loot rape pillage plunder anything they want and it’s called “ peaceful demonstrations..,, but when we (the people) protesting it’s an insurrection I saw no one with “ the big bad AR15s “ at that demonstration… I just hope that someday “ we the PEOPLE “ have a voice

  29. avatar Alan says:

    I’ll greet the chinese stooge, waving one finger on each hand.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      Yep. The ol’ middle finger is going to be flying high and proud on inauguration day.

      Fuck the thief in chief and that commie whore.

  30. avatar Idaho Boy says:

    Donald Trump: Worlds Greatest and Most Expensive Flight Risk at Taxpayer Expense.

    I’m betting that Trump flies to Dubai just before the inauguration while he still has immunity from indictment. No extradition treaty, TWO Trump golf courses, and a close personal friendship with Hussein Sajwani.

    No doubt we’ll get Air Force One back, but not Trump. Time to get a real tan.

    1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

      I’m betting that Trump flies to Dubai

      Don’t let your Alligator mouth overload you Canary bank account… Air Force One will fly to South Florida where they will safely deposit the Trump family and then it will be flown directly back to Maryland where it belongs… If the Trumps wish to visit Dubai he has his own plane fully capable of flying him there… There will be NO indictments, NO impeachment convictions… Save your money for something you really need like anti-TDS inoculations…..

      1. avatar MarkPA says:

        “There will be NO indictments, NO impeachment convictions…”

        I suspect that this is largely correct.

        Bear in mind that whenever there is a trial (whether in an Article III court or in the Senate) there must be a public presentation of evidence and a vote by the jury/Senate.

        Before the trial there must be discovery; and that’s what the Democrats won’t want.

        Clearly, if Trump is indicted for something independent of his political service then the Democrats have nothing to fear. Spitting on the sidewalk; tax evasion. That’s fine.

        Conversely, if Trump is indicted for Russia-gate; Ukranian-gate; COVID-gate; InvasionOfCongress-gate, etc. then we have to deal with the evidence that the Democrats don’t want laundered in public. Yes, lots of talk of indictments and impeachment; but, nothing of substance.

        The House can indict Trump for having an orange complexion. If that’s what the House deems a High Crime or Misdemeanor, then that goes to trial in the Senate. But there is no evidence there, one way or the other. The Democrats can’t drag-in the bleeding corpse or smoking-gun. It doesn’t go anywhere. Nor can Trump push for discovery of the Democrats’ evidence. It just becomes a farce like the last impeachment; and the Democrats don’t want that again.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Many folks seem to be missing the obvious. The Dims need nothing but majority vote to impeach. The Senate will turn over to Dim control. The Dims need nothing but sufficient votes to convict. No hearings, no evidence, no nothing. The Dims have declared that Trump can be convicted in the Senate long after Trump leaves office. The goal is to ensure Trump cannot run for President again. With Dims, power overrules everything else.

        2. avatar MarkPA says:

          Takes a 2/3 super-majority to convict on impeachment.

          The Democrats might approach 17 Republicans to join with them in a conviction vote. However, that’s not certain. And, a few Democrat senators might refuse to vote to convict.

          If the evidence presented against Trump doesn’t persuade any Senator’s constituents, that Senator could be in trouble in getting re-elected.

          I doubt that a Senator (fearful of his constituents’ support) would risk his own re-election just to prevent Trump from running in 2024. I acknowledge that there is such a possibility, but I think it’s unlikely.

          Moreover, if the Senate were to convict Trump in an impeachment it might make a martyr out of him. People who (heretofore) didn’t support Trump might conclude that Trump was unjustly convicted. Impeachment – and especially a conviction – could backfire on the Democrats.

          I think they would rather pursue him with a tax evasion charge or some other civil/criminal offense. Not an impeachment conviction.

        3. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          Bear in mind that whenever there is a trial (whether in an Article III court or in the Senate) there must be a public presentation of evidence and a vote by the jury/Senate.

          Also bear in mind that the ULTIMATE goal of IMPEACHMENT is removal from office (or in Trumps case to prevent him from EVER holding office again)… A trial in the Senate cannot begin until Jan 19 since McConnel has said he will not call the recessed Senate into a “special session” and since Trump will be leaving office at noon on the 20th there will be no trial… You can’t have an impeachment trial on a person no longer in office…

        4. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          The Senate will turn over to Dim control. The Dims need nothing but sufficient votes to convict

          Sam: No matter who is in charge of the Senate they need 16 Republicans to convict in this case… THAT won’t happen.. Democrats SAYING that Trump can be convicted long after he is out of office does NOT make it a FACT…

        5. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          Dims got 10 Congressthings to vote impeachment

          out of 211 Republican Congressmen a total of 10 RINOs crossed over.. There are maybe three or four Senators that are THAT stupid, possibly offset by two or three sensible “Red State Democrats….

        6. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “There are maybe three or four Senators that are THAT stupid…”

          McConnell will remain senior Republicrat in the upcoming Senate. He still wields control over the Repubs. McConnell wants Trump “and his movement” gone from the party. He refuses to allow an impeachment trial between now and inauguration, but that does not prevent Chuck-U Schumer from initiating a trial when the Senate convenes for regular business.

          As to only a handful of Republicrat Senators willing to vote to convict…there are only about 10 really committed conservatives in the Senate (Freedom Caucus?). The Republicrat swamp never really supported Trump for anything, they maybe went along sometimes. Both parties want to send a message that there is no room for a pragmatist/populist candidate for President. The Swamp will never again tolerate someone who is not beholden to the establishment, and establishment donors.

          “Another source told Fox News that McConnell told associates that impeachment will help rid the Republican Party of Trump and his movement.”
          https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconnell-believes-trump-committed-impeachable-offenses-supports-democrats-impeachment-efforts-report

        7. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I am thinking the Dems *do* want that, because they are stupid beyond imagination.

          And Sam, that is an UNIDENTIFIED source, meaning it never happened.

    2. avatar Idaho Boy says:

      You’re all missing the big picture.

      Conviction in the Senate is far from certain. Conviction in SDNY is FAR more likely. And that’s just for starters. He’s likely to face charges in Georgia as well.

      I do not suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome. He is simply the worst President we have ever had. A large part of what makes him so bad is that he has convinced half the country that without him, all their dreams will die. No dream should be dependent on one individual to make it happen.

      If you want to keep your dreams alive, hitch your wagon to someone who has at least some respect for the Constitution. Good manners would be a plus.

      1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

        Idiocrats, the NEW left wing…

        1. avatar Idaho Boy says:

          Let’s agree to disagree.

        2. avatar ChoseDeath says:

          I’ll agree that you’re wrong. SIMPLY THE WORST PRESIDENT WE’VE EVER HAD. There isn’t any metric, fact, stat nor any conceivable objective ANYTHING that you can produce to back that up. That is so fucking outlandish as to be dismissed outright. You explain to me how he’s worse than either of the Bush assholes? Or Obama. Or FDR.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          “Worst ever” is clearly Obama, if Trump had lost in 2016 Hillary would have taken the title long before now. Clinton ended up better than either Bush, once he got slapped around over AWB.

  31. avatar MADDMAXX says:

    but any kind of demonstration can be declared violent by a complaisant media

    Two things: (1) “complaisant”? My school taught it as “COMPLACENT”… Must be French spelling or…. And (B) Any demonstrations WILL be deemed “dangerously violent” by a complicit media regardless of it’s true nature… It IS what THEY say it is….. I do agree that ignoring the inauguration is a good tactic… The greatest insult one can visit upon a bully is indifference…

  32. avatar NTexas says:

    OMG THE COMMENTS … GOD BLESS AMERICA AND OUR CONSTITUTION .
    STAY HOME AVOID THE VIRUS , WELCOME AND THANK GOD THAT WE GOT NEW PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT .
    ELECTORIAL VOTE OK IN 2016 WHEN tRUMP WON , NOW NOT OK WHEN LOST IN 2020 . ONLY ONE TRY TO STEAL WAS tRUMP TRAITOR TO OUR CONSTITUTION.
    PRAYERS FOR FAMILY OF OFFICER THAT WAS MURDERED PROTECTING OUR CAPITAL AND CONSTITUTION .

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I bet there is a grade school in N Texas, you should check and see if you can qualify to get in.

  33. avatar Alan says:

    Interesting idea.

  34. avatar Manse Jolly says:

    Interesting comments about ‘fair elections’ and ‘restoring credibility’.

    Going with the argument that Creepy Joe won. The numbers suggest that the country is split roughly equally.

    ..and both sides loathe, despise and downright hate each other now and that was before the election.

    I just don’t see the very good ideas that were presented in earlier posts working. I wish it were not so.

    No one will be charged, no indictments, no investigations, nothing. And that will be another wound that festers. The Washington Elite have decided that there will not be another outsider as the Peoples President.

  35. avatar MADDMAXX says:

    THE illustrious FBI STILL fucking the American people and LYING about it…

    https://www.westernjournal.com/fbi-reverses-told-america-confirms-agency-knew-people-coming-capitol-re

  36. avatar possum says:

    Good or bad President Biden is not going to be able to take the stress of being Commander in Chief. ” Black don’t crack” but it certainly aged President Obama and he had it pretty good, another four years and President Trump would have gotten old fast too, and Trump has a different demeanor then Biden, ( shit thought of a guy fighting with his gal. He said she said, ” You drink and your whole demeanor changes.” He said he said, ” Yeah yah dumb cnt, the more you bitch da meaner I get.” ,, But no Biden won’t last long

  37. avatar Mikey says:

    I am one of those Americans that displays the flag only on “flag days” like 9/11 or 7/4. Inauguration day is one of them. I flew it 4 years ago when Trump was sworn in. I’m probably not going to do it this time as an act of doing nothing. I would hang it upside as a sign of distress, which would be fitting, but I don’t need a visit from the state police. About 200 people a day pass by my place. What would you do on the 20th? How about the rest of the flag days?

    1. avatar MADDMAXX says:

      What would you do on the 20th?

      Drop it to half mast, seems appropriate… Mine flies at 30 feet 24/7/365…. Will probably drop it this weekend to complete the move…

  38. avatar LarryinTX says:

    How to greet them? With a one-fingered salute, of course.

  39. avatar Bemused Berserker says:

    There’s been Voter Fraud/ Manipulation in every election since at least 1800. It’s one of the three reasons the 12th Amendment was drafted and ratified in 1804. I’ve voted for 42 years now, and there’s always the allegation that Fraud/Manipulation occurred in every single election I’ve participated in. So the question isn’t “Was There Voter Fraud/Manipulation, the question is How Much and Did It Effect the Results.” I’d say there’s sufficient evidence to warrant a complete Forensic Audit. That’s the only way will know How Much and How It Effected the Results. Recounts don’t work, they usual only find errors in arithmetic. Signature Audits don’t work that well, especially when the State’s Signatory Validation statute is whittled down to the point, that both the voter and the witness can both sign with an “X” (as GA’s laws currently stand). When you reach the point where the witness can sign with an “X,” we’ve got some real problems.
    Other last minute changes were done in at least 7 States that only benefitted one Party, though the media claims otherwise.
    Until there’s reform and a major overhaul of the system, the fraud/ manipulation of the vote will continue.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email