Previous Post
Next Post


Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is publicly proclaiming that the election is “rigged.” The anti-Trump mainstream media reckons the real estate tycoon is goading if not preparing his supporters for armed insurrection, should Ms. Clinton win the election. Here’s The New York Times take on the subject:

The country has not had a presidential candidate from one of the two major parties try to cast doubt on the entire democratic process and system of government since the brink of the Civil War, said Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian at Rice University.

“I haven’t seen it since 1860, this threat of delegitimizing the federal government, and Trump is trying to say our entire government is corrupt and the whole system is rigged,” Mr. Brinkley said. “And that’s a secessionist, revolutionary motif. That’s someone trying to topple the apple cart entirely.”

That’s the polite version. The press is actively searching for insurrectionist Trump supporters at rallies and scouring the comments section under posts. Needless to say, they’re finding people predicting if not calling for violence — and giving them the oxygen of publicity.

This morning’s Today show ran an entire segment on Trump “revolutionaries.” [Click here to view.] “Not all Trump supporters but some are talking about rising up or a revolt,” Today’s talking head proclaims, “seizing on Trump’s rhetoric of a rigged system.”

The anti-gun left already use the “gun rights advocates as insurrectionists” idea to further their civilian disarmament agenda. Combine that with the recent “revelation” about “super gun owners” — the alleged three percent of gun owners who own over 50 percent of America’s private arsenal — and you have a recipe for . . . something really bad.

Should a Trump supporter (or two or more) go postal after their candidate’s loss, it will give the Clinton administration the excuse they need to issue a federal dictat on gun control. Not that they won’t find some other excuse, but still. Dangerous times people. Dangerous times.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • Some apple carts could use a good toppling now and then. How else do you get to the rotten apples at the bottom of the cart?

        • When the democratic process is corrupted he way it is, it loses all legitimacy. At this point, armed revolution or submission are your only options. I will not submit.

        • Armed insurrection is a Constitutionally-protected means. “Being necessary to the security of a free state” ring any bells?

        • Well, the constitutionally provided means is NOTdemocratic. That’s part of the problem. Our system has been misrepresented and has been bastardized over the years. The 17th Amendment destroyed the states “voice” at the Federal level. The congress was the people’s voice and the Senate the States voice now we only have the “peoples” voice (really Corp. And special interests) and the states get no say in Federal matters. Yes, there was corruption of people getting appointed to their seat through bribery and the rich buying seats at the table in their state. All that the 17th amendment accomplished was to transfer that corruption at the state level and compounded it by making the Federal government corrupt. The oft vilified K street lobby which is nothing more than the voice of the interests of the richest global companies/industries is who drives policy issues in DC. We the people of the several states don’t drive any major policy issues. At least not to any measurable extent. Our republican form of government (NOT DEMOCRATIC), only operates democratically in how votes are cast in the chambers of congress. The people voting are meerly representing the voice of the people that elected them to office. Unfortunately, it has become evident that they almost all (few…very few exceptions) represent the companies and large dollar doner individuals that helped get them elected. We the people are way down on the list of their priorities.
          No, the time has come…”When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation….”, “…Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. ”

          I find it nearly impossible to believe that our current government still operates with the consent of the governed. Considering that they have a 3% approval rating and that frankly those that they govern are overlooked for those whom enrich them.

        • We’ve spent generations hoping politicians will give up power, but they keep seizing more. You’re an upstanding example of why the US fell from the #1 spot – because you’re terrified of risking anything and will always insist that we should never fight back. Even if you were put in a cattle car with hundreds of others, you’d still insist that we should keep hoping that the villains will suddenly have a change of heart.

        • No, there is no right of Revolution *in* the Constitution itself. That is absolutely not what the Second Amendment is for. The means for modifying the government is outlined in the Constitution, an once the bullet box is invoked, you’ve necessarily rendered the Constitution invalid.

        • “…you’ve necessarily rendered the Constitution invalid.”

          The Constitution is a failed document with only shadows of it’s former self currently remaining. I believe the reason why so many people have gravitated toward the 2A is because of the successful and plentiful restrictions placed on virtually all of our other “Constitutionally Protected Rights”. Personal privacy is non existent. Laws like Asset Forfeiture, the ACA, the Patriot Act, indefinite detention of American citizens under the NDAA, and the overreaching Regulatory Law structure in this country are just some of the large slices that have left our individual liberties in shreds. Add in the fact that Checks and Balances have been destroyed in the last 75 years and the media is in the tank for a big, corrupt government and you get the recipe for chaos.

          To put it in simpler terms; if those that are in political power don’t even try to appear to follow the law (the Constitution) and the legal system is itself corrupted by the political aristocracy, why would they expect the proles to respect the law?

        • No, the constitution does not provide for an insurrection. It in fact states the Fed. Govt has the right to repel them. However, if you consider the fact that the left has interpreted and re-interpreted the “meaning” or the constitution across vast sections of the document regardless of the fact that no interpretation is needed. Blacks Law dictionary was available and in use as the main legal dictionary. We have both the ability to find out exactly what the founders words means as well as the founders words themselves in support and in opposition To the constitutions ratification at both the federal and individual state constitutional conventions. We know what they meant by the “militia” as meaning the body of the whole people and that every able bodies man was a member. We also know The why behind the 2nd amendment and it was indeed to be used as a check against a growing Tyrannical government. Jefferson himself said that, “the second amendment will not be needed until they try to take it”. Finally, the document that supports the people taking back power when the government has overstepped its authority is not the Constitution, but is every bit as much a part of our birth right and that is the Declaration of Independence. We have been putting up with a long train of abuses and usurpations. The founders were ticked off about taxes and soldiers being in place in their homes among a great many other things, but ask yourself. Why was the constitution able to completely outline our governmental system in fewer pages than any single bill today? Because, we have more regulations and laws than anyone can understand and we have more unelected government run agencies with near complete autonomy to change regulations at will without any additional legislation needed to restrict more and more of our liberties.
          I submit to you, that we have every bit as much reason as the founders to demand that a full shake down of the federal govt take place rooting out all levels of corruption by dissolving many of the agencies established outside of the boundaries set forth within the original intent of the constitution. If they do nothing as they will, well then… the future of what will happen for inaction is on their hands.

        • Firrst off. I could give a fuck what means. If it works. I just don’t see armed revolution being where we are at

          There are plenty of other ways armed citizens can rise up without an old style civil war. We can protest , strike and organize. Of course unarmed protesters can be beaten by thugs and the statistblilice can let that happen.

        • Jsled,

          Yes. The law and the constitution was intended to be followed by the people. Yes the law, the government, etc, was designed to take action against the people (or some people) to protect against foreign (or domestic) threats. And the 2A was added for the people to leverage and gauge the loss of them and their families lives against whether or not the current governmental institutions was worth dying for. The moment that it becomes worth dying for – is the moment the 2A has done its job.

        • The Constitution – and especially the Bill of Rights – is intended to limit the scope of the federal government not to empower it. And while the Constitution may not advocate armed resistance by the public, there is most certainly an implied threat in the Preamble of the Bill of Rights.

          THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.

          Unlike some, I do not consider the Constitution to be a failed document. There is a danger that the People will fail, but that is not the fault of the Constitution.

        • Raul, I agree, the Constitution is not a failed document…we have failed it, in some ways more than others, and over a great period of time. And insurrection is not the answer now; we need Divine Providence. We need Truth. And I believe a convention of states would go a long way to restoring liberty.

        • Constitutionally protected or not, our founding fathers stated 27 specific reasons for separating from their government.

          Of those 27, AT LEAST 22 of them have been directly repeated by our current government. The men that wrote the Declaration of Independence and later debated the Constitution wouldn’t be keeping their powder dry, they’d be creating gun smoke.

        • “The means for modifying the government is outlined in the Constitution, an once the bullet box is invoked, you’ve necessarily rendered the Constitution invalid.”

          Formally, I suppose you can say the 2nd is the clause, that renders the constitution self invalidating under circumstances so grave that it no longer is capable of securing the freedoms it was written to secure. Once even explicitly outlined freedoms from the Bill of Rights are no longer paid heed to by Leviathan, it’s a pretty safe bet that not much in the way of any freedom is successfully being secured by the vaunted paper document anymore.

  1. The reason this garners so much attention is because people actually believe that the system is rigged. And how could you not? After what happened with Bernie Sanders, quite frankly I’d be more surprised if it WASN’T rigged come November.

    • Frightening thought but the evidence does support the suspicion of electoral corruption. I wouldn’t say armed is the way to go though. This is a republic and if the mass of voters feel there is corruption peaceful protest and demand of change is the only route. That and the forced end of electronic voting. Yep it’s quick but the same media reports all the time on how easy it is to alter.

      • Violent revolution is the only way to hold corrupt bureaucrats accountable. At some point, these scumbags need to be stood up against a wall and shot.

        • “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.”
          -John F. Kennedy

        • I pray it never comes to that but we aren’t there yet. Look what our countries founders dealt with and look what we are dealing with. We have not yet reached a point where it is reasonable to resist with force. To answer the question at what point it’s okay is best answered by history. Mostly because it repeats itself and better men than we outlined it quite nicely for us.

        • They went to war with England for a 5% excise tax on TEA. Compare that the the blatant plundering of our income today, and you would realize that the founding fathers would have started a revolution in the 20s.

        • A rather narrow view in the scope of what actually happened. Is there a soldier quartered with you? Are they writing a report to turn you in and have you jailed for treason for writing what you are? Have they shot at you? Seized your land? Taken your freedom of speech, guns and religion away from you? Seized your crops and told you you can’t buy your groceries from anywhere but the federal store? A tax gripe would be legitimate in today’s age but you don’t have the rest. However your still being represented despite it’s not the the level you desire. Nonetheless that’s more than they had. I get it your pist and you don’t like what’s happening. Neither do I but it is not the time for the gun. No matter how you present it. When what I mentioned above and a good bit more happens then you will have earned your place to say as our founders did that it is time to throw off such government. In the mean time put some effort into shining sunlight and openness on the corruption of our government. It’s more than likely your doing nothing except complaining and making the case for a war that may cost you what you set out to preserve in the first place. Think about it.

        • Is there a soldier quartered with you?

          –No, but between spying on my computer, sneaking remote-controlled cameras into every media device they can, and the ability to kick my door in on the slightest ‘oops, wrong house’ pretext…the point’s kinda moot.

          Are they writing a report to turn you in and have you jailed for treason for writing what you are?

          –If you don’t think that just visiting this site got you on a whole bunch of Lists, you really need to wake up and pay attention.

          Have they shot at you?

          –Ruby Ridge or Waco ring a bell?

          Seized your land?

          –Ask the victims of eminent domain abuse, or anyone who’s been targeted by the EPA, BLM or IRS.

          Taken your freedom of speech,

          –Say something critical of Islam, feminism, sexual perversion or any Leftist cause celebre, and watch what happens.


          –National Firearms Act of 1934, Gun Control act of 1968, in addition to the astounding number of other laws infringing my God-given human right to keep and bear. Seriously?

          and religion away from you?

          –Try refusing to bake a cake, take pictures or provide flowers for a ‘gay wedding’ due to your religious principles and see where it gets you.

          Seized your crops

          –Ask a marijuana farmer, and/or refer to BLM, IRS, etc.

          and told you you can’t buy your groceries from anywhere but the federal store?

          –We sure can’t buy our medicines or groceries from anywhere the FDA, USDA and a host of other Federal agencies don’t approve of.

          A tax gripe would be legitimate in today’s age but you don’t have the rest.

          –I just proved you wrong on every level. Oh, that’s right–I don’t grow weed, and I wasn’t at Waco, so I guess all this is perfectly OK as long as it’s not happening to me personally…right?

          Think about it.

          –I did. Your turn.

        • Did you now. Bad government is nothing new. Care to take a history trip into the FBI? You act like since this has happened it’s new to the American government or our way of life. Lincoln jailed people with out trial and suspended habeus corpus. The government kicked the Indians all over the lands for decades. This is the human condition my friend. You can find examples of all of this going back to the beginning of our republic. Admittedly the grand scale of spying is new but it has happened in many cases previously. God help you if you were suspected to be a communist in the 50’s. Or an enemy of Hoover. I’m not arguing that government hasn’t gone too far. I’m arguing that picking up a gun against our government is a terrible idea. I honestly could give less of a damn what lists they generate. I’m not afraid of a list. I’m more concerned with the idea that violence is the answer. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. Oddly enough you didn’t outline what you were doing to constructively fight this mess. You haven’t proven anything other than your lack of wisdom and wanting knowledge of history.

        • “I’m arguing that picking up a gun against our government is a terrible idea. I honestly could give less of a damn what lists they generate. I’m not afraid of a list. I’m more concerned with the idea that violence is the answer.”

          It is a terrible idea. But for the specific reason that it is bound to fail. A bunch of bloodshed resulting in nothing more than giving the tyrants even more of an excuse to act tyrannical. Kind of like Oklahoma City.

          What IS a good idea, is getting more and more people to realize that violence is indeed the answer, the only possible answer, in some circumstances. And that those circumstances are drawing nearer with every single page of law, dictat and ruling written, every single dollar printed out of this air, every single apparatchik hired etc., etc.

          And even more fundamentally, that every form of government will continue to grow until it is either violently overthrown, or faces enough of a realistic threat of such, that it backs down. There’s nothing special about our particular ritual for picking top tyrant, compared to all the other ones tried throughout history.

          Democracy was a useful, fresh breath of air, specifically because power at that time was justified by reference to a different authority. Heredity, Blue Blood, whatchamacallit…. So, democracy served the always useful purpose of delegitimizing the existing power structure. But today, the existing power structure is built around democracy. So now, alternate systems, systems that delegitimize democracy, are the ones that are on the right side of history.

          Most in-your-face obviously these days, those claiming only God and God’s law, to them Sharia, gives authority legitimacy. And those guys are challenging the ruling order, democracy, with violence. With plenty of success as well, since just like hereditary privilege before kit, democracy has reached a stage where the government it delivers is nothing but a pill rotten carcass of the ideals of the Founders who once risked their lives to fight for it.

    • Honestly, I would be shocked to learn that any Presidential election in the past fifty years hadn’t been rigged to some degree or another.

      As you say, the use of no-paper-trail electronic voting means that the integrity of our electoral system will always be in question. It is impossible to do any kind of recounting or forensic analysis of ballots to uncover vote tampering under this system. The ease with which a person with the right skills could undetectably change an election’s outcome is quite alarming. And it wouldn’t take a concerted effort by many people, the way rigging paper ballots would. Just one guy, with the right access in the right place, can completely change the results.

      • Check your math. 1960 was 56 years ago. Conclusively demonstrated JF fing K was fraudulently elected.

        • Good election to take note of. While the fix was not *proven* for years, it was suspected immediately, there was talk of going to court, etc. Nixon recognized the turmoil that would cause, and the likelihood it would not be decided by Inauguration Day, and conceded to save the country the anguish. For those who don’t recall, I think it was around 100,000 fraudulent votes in Cook County, IL, that threw the election to JFK.

    • To me this clearly illustrates the power of the media to play down the negative by under-reporting.

      Hillary had the help of closed meetings in smoke filled rooms. The emails are there proving it and no one is denying yet . . . crickets. Trump said some messed up stuff about women and everybody and their SJW sister defecates bricks. Hillary Clinton lacks legitimacy. Hate Trump all you want but (at least outwardly) he got the ticket against the wishes of the GOP establishment.

  2. The media will take one five-second off-the-cuff remark made by a complete stranger at a Trump rally, and inflate it to three hours of airtime over the course of a 24-hour news cycle.

    They’ll then take 4,000 pages of incriminating e-mails from Clinton and her campaign, and reduce it to 4 minutes of airtime.

    I’m not a Trump defender, but the double standard is absolutely infuriating!

    • ^^ This! ^^

      The media bias is even more overt than usual with reporters shitting themselves trying to get Hillary elected and covering for all of her (and Bill’s) transgressions with no repercussions. The term “rigged” can be applied in many ways, but it is for certain that the media is, and has been, in the tank for Hillary (and pretty much every D candidate) from the start… then Wikileaks came along and proved what we’ve known all along.

      The rage from those that support neither candidate is just as real and valid as as those that support The Donald. Much like the 2A, the media is supposed to also be a check against government tyranny and corruption but they have become complicit those very actions.

      I feel the civil unrest that we have seen is just the first few waves from a fast approaching storm surge.

    • What a bunch of fools. You think you’re going to fight your own government? Stupid. Most of you are more likely to shoot your nuts off. As for the rest of you if the government needs any help I would gladly put my uniform back on and defend my country against all enemies foreign or domestic with pleasure. Dirtbags.

      • The only dirtbags present on this forum are those who would support an obviously criminal and therefore obsolete government.

    • I mean, even when Trump wins.

      The biggest problem with the evil (D) ain’t the candidates [sadly] it’s all the evil POS that vote for them (yes, even the dead ones).

      Long after the election is over, the (D) voters will be waging their war on the U.S.

  3. Not to sound too crazy but it’s possible to rig an election. It’s happened in the past. In fact the company that runs electronic polling stations in most of the swing states, ‘Smartmatic’ does have some loose ties to the democratic party and has been behind polling scandals in the past. I’m not saying it will happen, just that it’s a possibility.

      • It doesn’t take a “large scale” to tip an election. It’s what got Obama into office in the first place. Or do you really believe that certain districts had 120% voter turnout?

      • The author of those tweets, I’ll wager, has no idea how opaque voting machines are. Sure, the process of voting seems on the up-and-up, with poll-watchers and all the other “electoral theater”, but it all breaks down when you get to the machines. Since the software is mostly closed-source, there is no way to independently verify that every vote is counted accurately. A few public tests of a few machines proves nothing. Has every voting machine been through a complete security audit immediately before being put into use? Nope. Is each vote recorded on a paper record and verified by the voter? Nope. You hit “submit” and you hope your vote got counted. There is no possible way to recount votes in the case of a dispute or evidence of tampering.

        There have been examples of voting machines recording more votes in an election than residents in the jurisdiction. How does one square that with the claim that the system is reliable and trustworthy? It obviously isn’t. Even if it’s not malicious, a glitch like that casts doubt on the entire system.

        • Try “has anyone watched all day and verified that the number of people who accessed that machine matches up with the number the machine shows?” Because there may have been 10,000 votes registered by the machine before the voting began. And *somewhere*, all the votes recorded have to be totaled, by a different method in most every state. Anyone who believes any fraud is “impossible” is either a fool or part of the fraud.

    • And votiing machines in ohio for bush/kerry were owned and controlled by a republican and there are still questions about the outcome in Ohio. Corruption and rigged voting are a bipartisan deal.

      • There were never formal charges brought in Ohio, that was loose (D) talk. There were lawsuits brought in FL, again, those suits were improper, and targeted (against FL state law) certain districts where the evil (D) hoped to turn the tide.

        Idiots spewing the “them too” crap about corruption are merely “spewing the “them too” crap about corruption”. it happens every election cycle when the evil (D)’s problems start getting laundry listed.

        If you vote (D) you are either an evil country-hating POS, or you haven’t been paying attention to current events (and history).

        Or, both

      • The system is rigged, and it isn’t just with Super delegates. Interesting you should use Ohio as an example. Take a look at the voting map of Ohio for the 2012 election. Obama won all 18 electoral votes, the popular vote was indeed with Obama at 50.1 percent. However Romney got 48.2, and yet all electoral votes (the votes that matter) are with Obama. Look at what put Obama over the top, all the large cites overwhelm the rest of the state. 95 percent (plus or minus) is red (Republican) but the cites swing the races. Look at any state in the union and you will pretty much see the same thing. Crying foul because of election way back in Bush days and ignoring the inequities today is why the Democrat party has become the extremist party.

      • The system is rigged, and it isn’t just with Super delegates. Interesting you should use Ohio as an example. Take a look at the voting map of Ohio for the 2012 election. Obama won all 18 electoral votes, the popular vote was indeed with Obama at 50.1 percent. However Romney got 48.2, and yet all electoral votes (the votes that matter) are with Obama. Look at what put Obama over the top, all the large cites overwhelm the rest of the state. 95 percent (plus or minus) is red (Republican) but the cites swing the races. Look at any state in the union and you will pretty much see the same thing. Crying foul because of election way back in Bush days and ignoring the inequities today is why the Democrat party has become the extremist party.

    • In 2002, I was between regular programming work (it was kind of a mini recession for software developers) and I took a contract gig with Diebold Election Systems. I was responsible for all the voting machines in XXXX county (32 I think – the county withheld because the number of contractors and machines was based on population and I was the only 1 in that county.). The system was extremely simple. It took and tallied the votes and submitted the results, unencrypted to the state, via dial up. Once that was done, it printed a paper tape with the results which was sent in by USPS. I loaded the VB 4 program onto the machines for several days prior to the election. The supervisor of my work was the County Judge who was running and iirc, unopposed. He asked me how secure the system was and I asked him how many voters were in the county. He said about 3200. I told him to give me 5 minutes and I worked on a copy of the code that was on my laptop. When I was done, I told him to press the enter key. He did and I told him “congratulations your honor, you just had 100% voter turnout and you won unanimously.” I printed out a tape to show him. That obviously wasn’t the code installed on the machines but there was not one single thing that could have prevented it if I wanted to do so. It was literally 3 minutes of work and a quick compile to replace whatever result set the actual voting produced with anything I wanted. When the 4 week contract was done, I sent a letter to the Georgia supervisor of elections and told him of the systems vulnerabilities.

      • Thank you, Klaus. Now, does anyone believe that problem (or any other) has been corrected since 2002? Because I do not.

  4. The media wouldn’t be so shocked if they actually took the time to understand the true intent of the 2nd Amendment.

  5. Why is the media surprised by this? The Government and the Media created this issue. For example, if politicians do not get prosecuted under the law “HRC”, then the citizens believe the law doesn’t apply to them. If the Governement is lawless then society will begin to reset it self. This is why studying history is important.

    • +10000000000000000000000000000000

      I’ve been trying to get this point across to so many people but the cognitive dissonance is astounding.

  6. Useful responses…

    “Oh, you mean the black lives matter folks?”

    “… or are you referring to the ‘occupy’ movement.”

    “Well, there certainly seems to be a skew in who the IRS chose to scrutinize for non-profit status, and we’ll never really know, what with the erased emails, and Learner pleading the 5th then resigning. In what sense is this legitimate government by the people, or seen to be?”

    “You know, organized, one-time ‘get out the vote’ efforts certainly make it look like the ‘winners’ are whoever can bus the most people in to polling places. If that’s what we want as ‘legitimate’, well, good.”

    Professor Blinkers is not surveying the entire field of play, methinks.

    “The country has not had a presidential candidate from one of the two major parties try to cast doubt on the entire democratic process and system of government since the brink of the Civil War, said Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian at Rice University.”

    Professor Blinkers has missed a few things.

    Former president Bill Clinton, perennial candidate Hillary Clinton, sore – er – gore loser AlGore, half the name-brand federal democrats, and the current president, before, during, and one presumes after his administration, *all* *ran against* the illegitimacy of the prior Bush-the-Younger administration. Didn’t claim there was a problem. *ran against it as illegitimate.* Along with the still present “stolen election” claims, were the crony-capitalism / capture by Haliburton & friends.

    Professor Blinkers should get out of his faculty tea parties more often. This sort of claim is politics as usual. Has been forever. Also, literally excluding The Other Guys from participating is SOP in power politics. Also, has been forever.

    For a more recent example, as soon as the Brexit vote went the wrong way, The Usual Suspects started agitating for “That’s now how we do it.” Now, in their defense, the entire European Project has used “Keep them voting till it comes out the right way.” as a tactic for the last 50+ years.

    Professor Blinkers should tell us some more about “legitimacy.”

    The progs are annoyed that their techniques can also mobilize people with other policy positions. They don’t have a lock on the tech, you can’t patent an idea, and besides, without rule of law, there’s no IP rights enforcement.

    Nothing winds these guys up as much as anybody but the using any Alinsky tactic. Really, for the un-progs there ought to be a 13th rule: “Use these 12 rules every time you can, because it makes the other guys nuts.”

    Going back a bit, Nixon, Reagan, and of course, the entire “revolution” in the 1960s was about armed insurrection against the govt, especially federal. The Port Huron statement may be all peace-y and stuff, but it was also the precursor of offshoots that went for more “direct action.” Like, for instance Bill Ayers, political mentor to the current president.

    • GOTV efforts are in no way illegitimate. There is nothing wrong, in principle or practice, nor is it ahistorical, for parties to get people to the voting booth. It’s literally the job. And it’s why Trump is going to be so thoroughly annihilated in 3 weeks; the DNC has a ground game, and Trump has none.

      • And a week after that, the DNC will be the ones “annihilated”, only literally. No conservative should accept any election result that results in a Clinton White House.

        • Those words actively threaten the very basis of our Democracy: the legitimacy of election results. You should be ashamed.

        • jsled,

          There is no such thing as “legitimate” election results anymore in our all-digital voting system. The system has no integrity or verifiability. Most of the people in various state-level Secretary of State offices don’t really understand how the system works, so when they “certify” the results, they’re just rubber-stamping whatever numbers some black-box computer system shits out. It is impossible to recount or audit results that are obviously erroneous. The results produced may or may not be an accurate reflection of the votes cast, but, given the flaws in the current system, there is no way to know if that’s true or not. An electoral system cannot be run on blind faith.

      • If we accept your rendition as correct, it argues against a mere amendment, and for a constitutional convention to rewrite the whole thing, sort of a Western Brexit.

  7. If I do not agree with a politician’s policies, I can still respect them and support them. Example: a politician wants to build a bridge across a river at location X and I think a better location is 8 miles upstream. I can still support our system of government if the politician builds the bridge at X anyway. (If I cloned myself, even my clone and I might not agree on the best place to build a bridge.) I think it is pretty safe to say that most people have the same mindset.

    What I cannot respect and support is a politician who has committed felonies and evades prosecution because of their political ties and balance sheet. Neither can I respect nor support a politician who intends to imprison or kill us for having self-defense tools. Nor do I support politicians who think government is entitled to take 25% or more of our money.

    If politicians would not commit felonies, would not declare their intention to take a huge amount of our money, and would not declare their intention to imprison or kill us for having self-defense tools, they would not hear people talking about responding in kind.

  8. Sure, we POTG get pegged as domestic terrorists, but I don’t see much press on the GOP campaign headquarters in NC that got firebombed and the building across the street from it that was vandalized calling republicans Nazis. Which one of us is the violence prone group again?

  9. Yeah rigged. I’m not a fan of Al Gore but he should have been president. What’ll happen? Nothing good…on the interwebz there’s a lot of chatter of a nuclear war with the Russkies. And who’s going to loan us money after that…?

    • Al Gore? LOL

      Talk about blast from the past retread of a dead argument. There’s absolutely nothing out there in the realm of facts to justify your claim that Gore should have been president.

      If you’re just talking in terms of your personal opinion, as in you think he was the better candidate and should have won, in an abstract sense, then that’s just one man’s preference and his assessment of the candidates relative to his set of values. Can’t really argue for or against that anymore than arguing over which flavor of uce cream is the most delicious. It’s subjective.

      Now, if you mean he should have been president, as in within the realities of that election he was the legitimate winner but was defrauded, then claiming Gore should have been president is just ridiculous. No facts support that claim. It’s so patently absurd that even the liberals don’t make it anymore.

      • NO, he shouldn’t have been President! The whole purpose for why the founders created the electoral college was to prevent us from devolving into a democracy. Remember, each state is equal to another at the Federal level regardless of land mass or pop. Density. The electoral college protects less populous states from being marginalized simply because they have fewer voters. This method ensures the states that may have a minority view are placed on some measure of equality. This is why the popular vote has never and should never be the measure for electing the President. Why would any small state’s people feel they have a vested interest in voting if they believed that elections were decided by the states with big population centers? They wouldn’t and frankly we would likely have seen far more attempts of secession by now without it.

        • “The electoral college protects less populous states from being marginalized simply because they have fewer voters.”

          No, it doesn’t, sorry. Less populous states have fewer electoral college votes, which are distributed proportionally to population. You’re thinking of the assignment of the Senate, where each state has 2 senators regardless of population. House seats are also apportioned on population, and reapportioned after each census so as to remain proportionate.

          • Nope, I’m not mistaken. I know my history! The founders were very, very smart to think about all the variables. They knew that there may be a time in history where even, “We the People” even needed to be protected from ourselves. They knew that that a pure democracy historically always fail. They knew that there may come a time when the masses are seduced by someone like an “Adolf Hitler” style politician who could hypnotized the people with their oratory. I think they gave their posterior to much credit. I don’t think they could have envisioned that we would ever fall to such a point that we would allow ourselves the choices we have in this election.
            As I said, their intention was to protect the less populous states and voters with minority opinions. This is indeed what their intention was as what is good for CA voters may not be good for FL voters etc. and this would still be effective today if we hadn’t adopted a two party system.
            We did not heed George Washingtons warnings that a two party system would have disastrous consequences, but I’ll get back to that.
            This is how the college was supposed to protect the minority voter. When the founders designed the republic, they intended for each election cycle to present multiple candidates from multiple parties with varying beliefs and values. This in practice ensures that from time to time candidates with what might be considered minority positions on policies would be elected. This helps to balance power across the board as no particular party would ever amasse too much power. They knew that, in a pure democracy, 51 percent of the people can rule over 49 percent all the time without question, no matter how ridiculous their demands. In other words “Mob Rule”. The electoral college separates the actual vote that counts for president from the popular vote. The popular vote is actually not supposed to have any bearing on the outcome. The popular vote is nothing more than a guide for the electors and allows the people to feel as if they are having a say in the process. With only 2 parties this is by default what will almost always be as the perceived outcome as the electors will always cast their vote for the candidate from their party and many states have legally bound them to vote for the candidate in their state with the most votes.
            The 2 party system has destroyed the effectiveness of the electoral college That hasn’t always been the case. In the past the electors selected by their respective states cast their vote for whom they wanted to be president and the # of voters that each state had corresponds directly with the number of representative plus their 2 senators.
            Today, as the states are run by the two parties across the board it is in effect the parties that select the electors for the college in each cycle. Therefore, these people are almost always political hacks or activists if some sort whom have likely been connected to large donors that they know will vote the way they have been told when it comes down to it. Unfortunately, as I’ve said, the 2 party system destroyed the intent of the whole process and we are essentially now stuck with mob rule and in effect are no longer a republic and have truly become what everyone thinks we are anyway, a democracy (no wonder we are in the precipice of collapse as the founders knew would happen within democracies)

      • It works BOTH ways dudes…Gore won by 500000 votes. And Floriduh “hanging chads” was BS. Both you fellas’ totally miss the point. And if you know me you you know I think democrats suck-but so do most of the repubitards. LOL indeed. A boatload of dumbocrats will never forget 2000…

        • “Gore won by 500000 votes.”

          Gore lost, and Bush won by approx. *500* votes in Florida, giving Bush all Florida electoral votes…

        • Gore couldn’t even buy (DID NOT EVEN “WIN”) in his home state (TN). He did do remarkably well in liberal_progressive_communist_globalist (D) areas that had considerably higher voting percentages than most of the rest nation [a/k/a: all the people who will be “dis-affected” by a requirement for voter pre-registration / picture i.d. required / election-day-only voting / etc., etc., etc.,, . . . ].


    • FWW, SCOTUS stopped the Florida recount when it became totally obvious that the Democrats were on their way to stealing yet another election.

      And BTW, Gore didn’t lose the election because he lost Florida. He lost the election because he lost his home state of Tennessee. Had he won TN, he would have won the election even though Bush won in FL. You can look it up.

      • I see you’ve missed the point too oldtimer. The left believes Gore won…and they haven’t forgotten. So Algore won by 1 Supreme vote. Bush probably didn’t “win” Floriduh either. But all those elderly Jews somehow voted for W-or Pat Buchanan?…look it up.

        • “Bush probably didn’t “win” Floriduh either.”

          He most certainly, did, and it was reported by none other than Peter Jennings on the evening news.

          This is what happened: After the 2000 election, the major news organizations got together and hand-recounted the *entire* state of Florida.

          *Every* precinct was hand re-counted. It took a number of months to do.

          The recount showed *Bush* won Florida by several hundred votes.

          Since that recount was done by the major news organizations, it took the wind out of the Left’s sails that Bush was ‘selected, not elected’…

    • It’s cute if MSM ignores the fact that one is due despite any election. One of the biggest reasons is simply “globalism”. If the “world” wanted to be one with the U.S., they better be better at being the U.S. than we are or FU2DAT. So, not likely, whatsoever. The U.S. will “go quietly” after we’ve created the vast sea of quiet.

      The evil (D) have done their own version of “anything goes” at every opportunity, and, if we’re going to do “anything goes” everybody is going to want a turn doing their version, and we’re going to do mine first.

      Another really cute thing is that Canada, Mexico, S. America, Europe, Africa, Western, Central and Easter Asia, think that they’d profit from a U.S. Civil War, when they would bear the brunt of it once it played out.

        • I think it would be [in prosecution, not in ‘parties’] “The Pianist”. Not sure which side would be the Pianist’s family, just certain which side I’d make them.

  10. Sorry, but I think Brinkley is a certified, tenured schmo. As far as 1860 goes Lincoln was not even on the ballot in a number of Southern states which didn’t make his call for 75,000 volunteers any more popular. Then again, how about that fevered goat rodeo in Florida all the way back in 2000? I guess only us ol’timers can remember back an entire 16 years to that golden age when in the contested counties there were more dem votes than registered dems and everybody’s favorite crazed sex poodle conceded to Bush and then reneged. If Brinkley could only have injected yet another Trump/Hitler juxtaposition, another long dem tradition dating back to Thomas Dewey.

  11. It’s the same kind of adolescent revolutionary fervor that we saw in the 1960s. And remember the biggest talkers will be the first to run away or are informers or agent provocateurs.

    Real conservatives warned you that nominating Trump would be a disaster but you didn’t listen. The RINO Meme was a DNC false flag operation designed to sow dissention and it worked perfectly. You ought to reap up on Felix Dzersinsky and the Trust Operation.

    • Cucks gonna Cuck.

      It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad that many “Real Conservatives” know little to nothing about conservatism or have read “The Conservative mind”. If they had, they would realize that conservatism is nothing more than intellectual posturing, and not a political platform.

      The WikiLeaks revelations, and people like Ryan, The Bush’s, Romney’s, McCains et al pretty much make your statement complete horseshit.

      • “Cuck” comes to mind and usage too readily for you.

        The next time you think Conservatives or Conservatism needs a liberal to tell it where it came from or for its definition, don’t.

        liberal_progressive_communist_globalist_POS_(D) is synonymy and the description of the gestational life-cycle of satan’s horde.

    • And here we have a classic example of the kind of fool I was talking about. Wikileaks says nothing about Ryan, Romney or McCain yet somehow Bolan makes a connection. Why? Because he fell for the DNC’s version of “Operation Trust.”

      Unlike Conservatives the DNC understands that the Republican electorate is increasingly made up of The same kind of shallow low information voters as the Democrats. The kind of people who have no idea how this Constitutional Republic works. They used that ignorance to manipulate and deceive voters like Mark Bolan into disrupting the Republican nomination process. We still don’t know if the Trump campaign was part of this deception.

      • Clearly you have not read let alone comprehended the entirety of the Podesta trove of emails. “Conservative” collusion with the Hilary campaign is very real and very obvious. Talk to your pal Paul Ryan about his releasing the “Pussygate” tapes and how he coordinated it with Hillary. He is in your home state after all.

      • titweena Not Wii,

        You’re not from here. Of all the failures of America, you count. Thanks for playing.

    • I’m a “Real conservatives” and the guys I’ve supported and gotten elected in the last 3 general elections haven’t gotten diddly done to stop Obumer and the progtards. Boner and McConnell have NOT been caned nor kicked in the nads by ANY member of the House or Senate. All sitting around singing kumbya wait until…. So the RINOs/demtards continue as before and leave us where we are with WIDESPREAD thoughts of the 2nd American Civil War. If it happens the 1st will pale.

      Wait for the demtards to pull out the commie bastards in Russia as the distraction/common enemy. They will happily send of youth and patriots to fight/die in a Sinorussian conflict. And while gone revoke the 2nd (among others). They are already targeting the Kremlin POS for outing Hellery. May you live in interesting times. Standby

    • “Real conservatives warned you” “I’m a “Real conservatives”

      Here we go again! What is a definition of a “real conservative”? My definition of a conservative, for 50 years now, is an advocate for smaller government, lower taxes, less regulation, and on and on. There are *no* candidates filling that bill that I can find. So who are you talking about and what are his/her qualifications for being referred to as a “real conservative?” I dare you.

  12. I think the FBI decision to protect Clinton from the law, combined with the clear evidence that she sold her office for cash have pretty well de-legitimized the executive branch of the US. The pair of ObamaCare decisions & the Obergefel have pretty well de-legitimized the judicial branch. The behavior of the R & D parties over the last couple years and especially with the primaries have done the legislative branch.

    So, what’s left of the government? It is not legitimate. So now what?

  13. We have food and shelter and entertainment. We will do Nothing. We will see bans on new mags and new “assault weapons”. NEW. We will stock up, and do nothing but bitch.

    • Sadly, I’m in agreement with stateisevil. Bread and Circuses will (probably) keep the revolution from happening.

  14. Sheriff Clarke believes it is the right course of action.

    It’s incredible that our institutions of gov, WH, Congress, DOJ, and big media are corrupt & all we do is bitch. Pitchforks and torches time

    — David A. Clarke, Jr. (@SheriffClarke) October 15, 2016

  15. Even if there are improprieties, the election is not being stolen. Trump is losing because he is a monumental doofus. Almost ANY other Republican would have a large lead over Hillary by now. Therefore, how about everybody calm down, have a cup of the refreshing beverage of your choice, and have the revolution AFTER the government actually starts getting draconian on gun rights?

    Over the past several years, gun rights have expanded greatly. Unless Clinton controls both the House and Senate, it will be difficult for her to force anything through Congress that significantly impedes further progress on that front.

    Don’t worry, I haven’t forgotten about the Supremes. Lots of folks wonder “What if the Supremes overturn Heller?”

    That is not a sure thing. Most jurists would consider Heller to be settled law. Heller is a relatively recent development, which had no effect whatsoever on my home state of Idaho. It did have a profound effect on other states with draconian gun laws. Instead of wasting our political capital by calling for revolution, we should strive to make as many advances under Heller as we can while we can, so that rolling back gun rights established under Heller becomes increasingly difficult politically.

    • Given that Hillary is already on record as willing to use dictatorial powers to violate Heller, me thinks you’re delusional. If she wins, violent revolution is the only remaining option. The GOP establishment has sold out to the same people that are backing Hillary. Just look at their inaction since 2010 on Obama’s rule by decree.

      • Serge, Have you noticed any unmarked vehicles outside your residence? It sure seems like you are openly calling for violence which is of course illegal and may get you some justifiable glances from law enforcement.

        Second, like most of you keyboard commandos, we all know the chances of you doing anything but whining and talking big on the internet are pretty minuscule. I wish you no luck in your ill-informed revolution.

    • Almost ANY other Republican would be curled up in the fetal position right now. That is way Trump demolished the rest of the Republican field.

      • This is exactly how we ended up with Trump. He may day things people don’t like, but he must say a few things that are pretty popular to have won the primary. Consider this: All the crazy shit both candidates are saying appeals to large portions of the population. The real problem might be that government has become illegitimate, but if so, it’s because the citizenry have abdicated their traditional responsibility to be well informed. Then again, we’ve been lied to so many times from so many directions, only a fool thinks they really know the truth anymore.

    • IdahoBoy – you REALLY need to pay attention before spewing BS.

      There is not a GOP candidate that would not have already quit if they had been the nom. ALL would have rcvd a variant of what Trump has rcv. But ALL would have folded. Bushy Har, Rubion yeah. I supported Cruz and he folded under a warm breeze and he was the best of the lot in standing up in the Senate to the progs and Rinos.

      • None of the GOP candidates folded. They were beaten in primaries and caucuses by Trump.

        If any one of those candidates had been the nominee, they would have carried through just fine. Remember that crossover Republicans and Independents are only voting for Clinton as the lesser of two evils.

        You could always wish for a Trump victory, followed by the inevitable Trump meltdown and impeachment within six months, leaving Pence in office. I think that’s what most Republicans who still back Trump are counting on.

        • If something happens to Trump between now and November 8th (quits or dies), would Pence be the nominee and would he win?

    • Correct! The election is not being stolen, until it is being stolen. If it *IS* stolen, we can talk about it then. Until Chavez announce 100% turnout with himself receiving 100% of the vote, the election had not been stolen.

  16. “I haven’t seen it since 1860, this threat of delegitimizing the federal government, . . .”


    Trump is NOT EVEN IN GOVERNMENT YET. It's funny how we can ignore a sitting (D) president's and (D) presidential nominee's actions in government as delegitimizing, but the ignorant Rice (D)bag can claim that Trump has had greater effect.

    Hillocrap will likely enjoy great turnout on Nov. 8 (and has already in early voting). It is projected that she has already received votes from 310% of the eligible (D) voters out there and we have not yet even started (double, or if need be, treble) counting of the illegal alien and "refugee" vote [you know, the "refugees" that had to flee their country but states like MN have paid for them to return to their home countries to "vacation"

    IF YOU LIVE IN A BLUE STATE, YOU MAY BE PART OF THE PROBLEM (but the problem for you is those coming against the evil (D) in a civil war won't have time to differentiate).





    • Man I hate democrats as much or more than your average Republican but “It is projected that she has already received votes from 310% of the eligible (D) voters” is some real tin foil hat shit.

      Can you provide a source for this tidbit of information?

      • No, that was sarcasm, but the truth is stranger than fiction (but not as strange as the people who don’t believe it when they see it).

  17. If a bunch of State Governments decided go their own way and tell DC and the Fed alphabet agencies to pound sand I would support it. Maybe large, peaceful protests for State sovereignty are a good start. Also normal citizens should use all legal means to resist all Federal agencies. Just drag your feet and make it as difficult as possible to get anything done. Socially shun all federal employees, let them know they are part of the problem. Lots of things to do before resorting to force.

  18. Why should the media worry about insurrection? They just finished telling me that only 3% of the population own all the guns.


  19. Revolution is just politics writ large, and as we all know, all politics is local. Nobody out there is going to take up arms to storm either Houston City Hall or the Capitol building in Austin. The problem is the federal government, not state and local. Yet, neither is anybody going to assemble an armed contingent and march on D.C. The feds would disrupt the organization of that effort long before anyone even got on the road. Those that did get on the road, would meet federal roadblocks. So would-be revolutionaries would be all dressed up with nowhere to go.

    What is plausible, is that secessionist elements act up in their own states, led by current state office holders, and make demands of the feds. That would have to be backed up by something, like refusal to remit taxes to Washington, or else it would just be ignored. Hold onto the money, though, and you’ll get a legal response followed by a show of federal force response in those states.

    THAT’S when and where things get dicey. Then you’d have armed agents of the feds on the ground. They’d play it smart, too, and use our own state national guard so as to divide the people and confuse the issue.

    Bottom line is that without your own state elected officials leading some effort, either to constitutional convention or secession, then nothing will get traction. You’ll just be killed or imprisoned.

    • You are quite right and expose secessionism for what it is — the rejection of Constitutional republicanism by the losers. If it is legitimate for Texas, for example, to reject the outcome of a national election, it is also legitmate for areas in Texas that reject seccession to leave the Texas Republic.

      Rothbard’s neo-Conferatism was exactly this. He did not believe that Confederacy was any more legitimate than the Union. He saw it as a mechanism for the withering away of the state. Every loser would opt out until only small groups would be left. The actual Confederacy made no provision for seccession and as can inferrref by their attempts to keep what became West Virginia in Virginia. Succession based upon loser anger cannot provide the basis for government.

      • Although I do believe that secession by definition is provided for in the constitution it is a last resort method. If the Federal gov’t was created by a compact entered into and agreed to by several INDEPENDENT and SOCEREIGN nations as it was and as King George III recognized at the conclusion of the revolution than by definition if one of those states no longer believe the others are adhering to the compact as agreed upon than as an independent and sovereign nation they are well within their rights to separate from such compact, but only after all other possible remedies have been exhausted first.
        I agree with you that it is not the best plan and should never be used as an idle threat. I do believe that the principals of nullification when applied properly can be far more effective and lead to better long term outcomes. Not only has nullification been used by the founders such as Jefferson and Madison in the KY/VA resolutions, but it was also used widely during the fugitive slave act years. Currently, there has been a great deal of success with states applying these principals when it comes to Federal marijuana laws. Regardless of your personal beliefs on the matter, the states that have nullified Fed. Law with regards to marijuana laws have been very successful in rendering the laws null, void and have no effect or force of law when the states refuse to cooperate with federal officers to enforce the laws.
        These principals should be adopted and applied against any former and future federal Firearms laws or regulations. The states themselves can apply whatever they believe is necessary for their state, but the Feds have no authority.
        So, in summary. Secession is not bad and I believe by definition of any measure of severability applied to the constitution as practiced in current form is a valid and legitimate option, but only as a last option after every possible legal and or other means necesarry to avoid use of force.

        • The Constitution provides no mechanism for seccession. I have heard it argued that a state could leave Union the same way states come in, I.e., through a vote in Congress. I can accept that but for all practical purposes that makes seccession virtually impossible.

          • So, let’s do a mental excercise. If the people of the states are who the sovereign entities are and we Know that to be the case. We also know that the states were and still are technically each independent sovereign entities. Look up the difference between a national government (what we don’t have) and a Federal government which is what we do have. A Federal government is subordinant to the states. A national governnt the states are subordinant to the national. A federal government is made up of a collection of several independent nation states that enter into a compact to serve their mutual interest, but remain independent of one another. The constitution is just this type of contract. With that said, although the document itself does not provide for a mechanism to secede which it does not, if an independent and sovereign entity that entered into the contract believes that their interest are not being served any longer by this compact or believes that the compact is not being applied as it was intended than as a sovereign entity can act in its best interest.
            The federal government only came into existence when the 13 independent nations created it. Yes, they are and we’re considered independent sovereigns as recognized by King George III in the treaty to end the revolution.
            If they were able to create it by entering into a compact they can leave that compact.
            You can argue that the states created outside of the 13 original colonies and TX and WV might not have the same authority as the states outside of these applied to the union or were carved out of existing territories states. TX was already a sovereign republic and therefore entered Into the compact just has the colonies that preceded them. However, other than WV the rest were territories and. It sovereign. WV was illegally (by all co stitutional standards) created by the Federal Gov’t and was carved or of VA without VA’s permission by Lincoln in during the Civil War. So VA could claim back that territory which would be legal had it not been drafted in a port of the concessions at Appomattox. This doesn’t change the fact that the federal govt created that state illegally to start and the constitution is very clear that this cannot be done.
            I’ll doubt you’ve heard this argument, but it is indeed legitimate. Investigate the differences in government, who is subordinant and it can only lead to one conclusion. Unfortunately, Sam Adams nailed our current legislatures and Federal judges with this quote, lHow strangely will the tools of the tyrant twist the plain meaning of words”!

        • There are two organizations that provide a death sentence for secession — the United States and the Mafia. And sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference.

        • TFL:

          It is myth that each colony was a separate sovereign entity. They were all chartered by the Great Britain and were dependent sub entities. They took collective action to replace sovereignty in London with a new sovereignty in North America hence they were never independent of each other. Texas is the only state that can claim independent sovereignty because they existed as independent nation before joining the Union.

          Your argument that the creation of West Virginia is illegal means that you don’t believe in the principles of the American Revolution where an portion of nation cannot set itself free from what it sees as unjust government. So not only are you wrong about the nature of state sovereignty, you have undermined the justification the justification for the Revolution itself.

        • “for all practical purposes that makes seccession virtually impossible.”

          Not advocating anything, here, but you might want to investigate the effects of a constitutional convention. Kinda looks like if you don’t agree with the end result, you don’t have to sign on to it, as in, you would be a separate nation. Even more so concerning Texas, since it was a sovereign nation before joining USA. But it looks to me as though *any* state could refuse entry into US, just as any country could refuse entry into EU. Working to eliminate differences seems obvious, but if your objections are being ignored ala current political correctness, the “kiss my ass” option seems to be there.

          Does change the concept from one state to agreement by most states, but that does leave a possibility.

      • Those terms are too stark to reflect reality. It isn’t simply a matter of the losers taking their ball and going home. After all, secession, revolution, civil war, etc. are monumental events occurring maybe once per century. They aren’t taken lightly.

        Moreover, this constitutional republic, as founded, no longer exists. Most of the federal government today has no legitimate constitutional basis. Secessionists aren’t destroying the republic, whose obliteration of the constitution has long since transformed it into a tyranny of the welfare-taking majority. Rather, they’re just acknowledging the self-immolation of the republic and its having breached the constitutional contract.

        • That is exactly the same argument made by the secessionist in 1860-61 after their candidate lost the election. Elections are collective decision points and the results speak for all regardless of how they voted. Your argument can easily be turned against you by anyone who refuses to accept that collective decision.

          Let say Texas hold referendum and secession wins but Austin and Houston vote to stay. They can claim that the Texas Republic no longer exists and they prefer to stay in the Federal Government. If you enforce your decision on them you, like the previous poster have undermined the rational for the American Revolution. Once you go down this road there is no turning back. That is something that Murray Rothbard understood.

  20. For the record, I’ve heard the same rumblings out of leftists; talk of revolution if Trump wins. Either way, there will be some people who view the results of the election as literally intolerable. Whether they act on it…history would suggest that the chances of active violence would be higher if it is the far left who feels their backs are against the wall.

    • The chest pounders here are just the mirror image of the Low kiddies. I remember them claiming that Bush was going to declare martial law in 2004 and 2008. They inhabit the same fantasy world. It is laughable that they would be discussing their revolutionary designs on an open forum. From my perspective that’s just. fine. They are just identifying themselves as low hanging fruit for The Feds to take out.

      • The first amendment and Brandenburg v. Ohio are still things. If the feds “take out” people who merely advocate violence rather than commit violence, they would prove those very people right and kick off the revolution they were trying to crush.

        • I am not talking about words. I am talking deeds. If you are serious you aren’t talking. If you are running your mouth on an internet forum I have assume they you are engaging in fantasy talk.

        • Well titweena not Wii,

          Talk is cheap, but we did leaflet the sh_t out of Japan before (both times) we knuked it. I think we did radio broadcasts every fifteen minutes around the clock.

          Dresden was the same.

          We’re determinists, not intentional monsters (excluding the POS (D) & Planned Parenthood doing satan’s work daily selling dead kids for food).

          You label it jawing, some might call it a PSA. wtf ever.

    • “chances of active violence would be higher if it is the far left who feels their backs are against the wall.”

      Yeah, they will be trying to beat us up with their lily pads. That would not last long, before they were begging for PotG to rescue them. Which damn well better include conditions.

  21. Yeah, well, the left is actually the ones more prone to violence. Has there been any right wing political attacks this election? No. The liberals have already tried to assassinate Trump once, fire bombed a campaign office, and killed police officers. Sounds to me like people aught to be more afraid of the violent, loony, left.

  22. Homeland Security purchased some 2400 MRAPS armored vehicles. Various federal agencies purchased several billion rounds of 9mm ammo. Federal agencies who have traditionally had little need for this kind of muscle, now have their own SWAT teams. Obama has issued executive orders giving the government expanded abilities to declare martial law. The Conservative Treehouse has begun describing the political establishment as the “GOPe (e=establishment) and “Uniparty” signalling an uncharacteristic unity of interests and issues among establishment oriented elected Republicans and Democrat national office holders.

    Most people think that the term “progressive” means someone interested in social justice and equality when, in fact, the Progressive political movement has long had a very close relationship with Fascism (in the 30’s FDR’s advisors thought Mussolini and Italian Fascism was the wave of the future). The driving force behind Fascism is a partnership with business interests where the state controls the “means of production” but, unlike Marxism, private property remains in private hands. Although we now politely call such a arrangement “crony capitalism” it is actually a indication of progressive political ideology’s attraction to Fascism. Fascism is a form of socialism and, with its concomitant attraction to central planning finds authoritarianism and totalitarianism to be essential tools for furthering its goals and protected its vested government/industry partnerships.

    Like all centrally planned socialist models, however, Fascism’s built-in internal contradictions make it inherently unstable with the result that the state becomes increasingly worried about policing “enemies of the state” who threaten the established order. We are a hell of a lot closer to Fascism than most people think.

    What we’re seeing right now is something that social psychology refers to as “frame alignment” and “labeling”. For obvious reasons, the progressive hard-left in America has worked assiduously hard to label guns and gun-ownership as deviant, and hence immoral, behavior. The Bundy Ranch protest and the rise of groups like the militias and the Oath Keepers, along with the rapid expansion of gun-ownership, the expansion of concealed and constitutional carry laws at the state level (and, yes, the growth of sites like TTAG) are not surprisingly seen as threats to the progressive state’s establish order. As a consequence what we’re now seeing is a frame-alignment between the statist economic interests of progressivism and the Gun Control movement’s interest in overturning the 2nd amendment and prohibiting private ownership of guns. The progressive Unipary and the Gun Control movement now have a common purpose: we are now their targets.

    The threat of an armed insurrection is not coming from gun-owners and people who support the 2nd amendment, it is, instead, coming from our own government. Oh, yeah. Douglas Brinkley is a progressive shill. He would have found Mussolini’s government of the 1930’s a very comfortable place.

    • I’ve long posited the frightening similarities between this country and Nazi Germany in the 1930’s; however you described it much better than I ever could have. Well said.


  23. it is the peoples choice when the AG and justice Department are a joke, a deadly joke, We have the most corrupted Government in the History of the United states, we have a media that condones it and is in love with their perverted opinion’s everything is so the rich get richer at the expense of the people! Personally I was born a free man and did not give away my right to remain so! when the law is corrupt and can not deal fairness it is time to change, first by vote then by Arms! granted the might of the Government is overwhelming, just look at the Islamic movement and the terror they have caused the US! multiply that by a thousand fold, a lot of the 3% are name only when the SHTF they will be Quislings and act like the SS, the Federal’s already have the information from the NICS check, ATF goose steppers would like nothing better than to go house to house killing as they go for headlines! Of course the US will sign a treaty with the UN illegally giving away our rights, there by passing the blame too the UN and let them do the peace keeping! {confiscation of Fire arms}, shooting males from crib to ancient, and sending women to the comfort houses! when it happens friends will turn on you but you have the right to self defense no matter what the law says by any means available! The Nazi Democratic party along with it’s Rhino brothers want this so we become surfs,
    Non Sibi Sed Patraie

  24. Sure the system is rigged. Diebold election machines are in most all polling booths. Diebold is a huge contributor to the RNC and GOP. Trump is sure to win the election.

    • That explains why Romney won in 2012 – all those Diebold machines! And that explains the McCain landslide in 2008 too! It all makes sense now.

      Look, I’ve been leery of electronic voting machines since they first appeared. And unlike the MSM, I do think voter fraud is a thing. But if there was anything to this Diebold theory, wouldn’t it have played out in 2008 and 2012?

      • I don’t know who Diebold supports but as a former contractor (see my other post about it) I know it could be done.

  25. “Trump is trying to say our entire government is corrupt and the whole system is rigged . . .”

    And water is wet.

    Oh, and the last time somebody complained that the system was rigged was when the Democrats were rending their clothes after Bush won Florida.

  26. Honestly… just how much corruption do we really need to be subject to before it becomes too much? Do we actually have to see people loaded into cattle train cars before we can finally fight back? To do you start when you read you start reading about people fire bombing local RNC officers… which has now happened. Honestly, I don’t have that answer. Nor do I ever advocate for violence as a way of political change, just as a hard moral rule. But at the end there will be a breaking point for at least some people. And just ignoring that fact isn’t good for anyone. :/

  27. We are entering the era of the sniper. At first it will be impossible to challenge the state directly. As the fight unfolds sides will be taken and the military will split. Name me a revolution where the soldiers did not split when the fight was truly engaged.

      • Honestly there’s people seem to think that it’s hard to built weapons. PL Ludy taught us that we can make 9mm SMGs out of spare pipes. There’s all kinds of old military manuals that can teach you how to make improvised mortals and recoilless rifles. Hell, the Cartels down in Mexico have taken it even further by making their own light armored vehicles and even narco-submarines in jungle ‘factories’, using nothing but whatever old old junk they can scrounge up. If THAT’S not good enough for you we have reports that ISIS are strapping bombs to commercial drones and using them to bomb military positions!

        So basically… anyone that thinks that we can just use the police and military to prevent an insurrection is woefully ignorant of the reality of the internet age. Where anyone can build an armory out of junk and an internet connection.

  28. The media will play BOTH sides – It’s just a money-grubbing business, after all.

    Big talk from both sides but we’re too complacent to back it up.

    I don’t advocate for instability or violence. I would just as soon vote for someone other than the two choices available.

    • The media suffered greatly this election. Hillary ran essentially un-challenged (Bern-ing Man was a false flag so that she didn’t have to go 2+ years of the election with nothing to talk about but her own positions on anything).

      Trump was the one that the Media initially pushed because they thought he would have the least appeal / best to run against. Trump was his own media collection agency so he didn’t spend a ton of $$$.

      Now (within 23 days)(without the 4th-year bumper-crop of $$$), media will be be going into a near nuclear winter of no $$ excelpt / til the next Senate / Congressional elections. Your going to see a lot of the $5 Billion of missing state dept. $$ going to soften that blow, hopefully it doesn’t work.

      Lots of “HD pretty” Communists hitting the bricks and working at McDonalds.


    • Either way, history will fail to record the exact moment that the entirety of the (D)heads went bye-bye.

  29. Could this be why the presstitutes are worried about people becoming …. ‘ upset .’ ?
    James O’Keefe / Rigged Election

    • I just finished watching the video.

      Some cliffnotes for those of you who can’t watch it right away: Nasty guy Scott Foval, National Field Director at Americans United for Change, is recorded on camera discussing a number of unethical (and perhaps illegal) activities conducted by the liberal advocacy group Americans United for Change, in conjuction with various PACs and the DNC

      Seems to be evidence of Democrat organizers sending instigators to Trump rallies in efforts to make Trump supporters look bad. [2:18] Foval also says that agitators are trained to instigate confrontations “in the line” rather than inside the rally where “they’re under Secret Service’s control.” [7:30] He also directly says that the agitators must receive “central agitator training” before they are sent to rallies. He also describes various agitator training programs in various states [8:50] If agitators are injured or arrested, Foval has their medical and legal bills paid for. [11:30]

      Pretty evident that there is collusion between super PACs and the DNC. He describes having middlemen who circumvent the law in order to collude. [3:10] [5:34] Scott Foval is recorded saying “The thing that we have to watch is making sure there is a double blind between the campaign and the actual DNC and what we’re doing. There’s a double blind there. So they can plausibly deny that they knew anything about it.” [6:50]

  30. The reason Trump is losing to Clinton right now is not because the election is rigged, it’s because he’s an amoral individual who says and does stupid things all the time. It’s unbelievable that he’s the GOP nominee in the first place! Wasn’t it obvious to my fellow republicans that this was going to happen? Are we seriously this dumb to think that he didn’t have any skeletons in his closet? Hillary is probably the easiest candidate to beat ever, it was a gimmee, all we had to do to beat her was to nominate someone other than Trump. The only revolution that needs to happen is within the republican party because some of you all are seriously starting to get crazy.

    • I hate to break this to you, but Trump was the only candidate on that stage that had a prayer against Hillary’s terrorist tactics. Her attacks on Trump are based on things he allegedly did decades ago and have nothing to do with the issues. It’s why her internal polls show she’s losing and why the left wing media is getting desperate.

    • Trump’s not losing to Hillary, even with all of the imported illegals and the “refugees” who get $$$ from their host states to vacation in the lands that they’ve “escaped” oppression from.

      Hillary and the broke (D)1<k media has to claim it's close or efforts to steal the election through false voting will seem to cover too great a gap. If you think she's not hated more than Trump [even by her own party] you ain't paying attention. Her party wants her to lose, because other (D) candidates can't get past her in an election, and they can run against Trump.

    • Hillary is the chosen one, it doesn’t matter who she ran against (except maybe Jeb), the money wants Hillary in the game because her base supports the enslavement of America and the money knows Hillary is down for anything.

      Regarding Hillary winning in the polls, the polls are an illusion used to manufacture consent so that when they rig the election it can look “close” and the losers will hang their heads and say, “awww shcuks, I guess we will try again in 4 years”.

      So lets say the election turns out to be such a landslide for Trump that they can’t even rig the election because the exit polling data would raise the alarm that a world class fraud has taken place. The Obama Mafia will just do some hacking and plant some evidence claiming Russia tampered with the election and Trump was fraudulently elected with the help of foreign governments.

      If Trump is a true outsider, which I think evidence suggests that he is, and he is not willing to play the Globalist’s game, then they will stop at nothing to stop him. Trump will never be elected even if he has the votes.

      • “Obama Mafia will just do some hacking and plant some evidence claiming Russia tampered with the election and Trump was fraudulently elected with the help of foreign governments”

        That sounds a lot like the crazy shit keeps going thru my mind, except not carried to the logical conclusion, that the President in his extreme devotion to our country has determined the only way to rectify this is for him to declare the election null and void, and remain in office indefinitely while his people search for a means to allow a free and fair election which will give the presidency to his chosen successor. Maybe 15-20 years from now.

  31. The RIGHT of a people to throw off a repressive Govt isn’t GRANTED by the Constitution..but neither are any other rights…they are all God Given and all human beings posses them the minute they are born. So who cares if the Constitution doesn’t say you can rebel(I happen to think it does via the 2nd Amendment)?. And more to the point…if the Elites in this country and those in the Govt don’t follow the Constitution…and basically laugh in our faces when we demand they do…then why should we?

  32. Hillary was already “chosen” for the office of President about three years ago. She will not “win”, she has had a lock on it for years when the Repubs couldn’t field a viable candidate even in the last election cycle, when the Dems are able to rig elections with stuffed ballot boxes, dead people voting and all kinds of other forms of trickery. The electoral college system also rigs the election, in my state, California, my vote, unless I am voting for whoever the Democratic nominee, doesn’t count. All 55 electoral votes go the Dem, period.

    Yes, she is an evil, corrupt, morally bankrupt, female Frank Underwood. Yes, she will completely screw the future of America by stacking SCOTUS with horrific choices for the justices. There will be a lot of grumbling but no revolution, I don’t see modern day, soft, spoiled, distracted Americans overthrowing the government. They would have to give up their Starbucks, safety of their kids and families, football, and video games to stage a revolution. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions would die. There would be no clear victor because there is no clear enemy, other than her. But what about her cabinet? What about the two houses, are they the enemy too? What about the military and law enforcement, would they be the enemy? There will be some isolated protests and acts of insurrection, but nothing so drastic as even a tiny revolution with her regime being overturned.

    Lot of keyboard fantasizing but the bottom line is, even though she sucks, it is the fault of the electorate for giving us no viable, quality choices for President. It is the fault of the electorate that they have let corrupt, career politicians with no term limits make a joke of the government at all levels, federal and state. It is the fault of the electorate for allowing our public servants to become our masters, our tyrants, instead of our errand boys. Americans who have bought into Statism for the past 100 years are the downfall of this nation, not the idiots who will “elect” Hillary President. Since America seems to be devolving into Euro Socialism, that is our bed we made, we, and our children and grandchildren will lie in it.

  33. It would not be an easy task because a majority of people must agree but, by State, and at the Federal level we vote out any and all Democrats. Do we have enough voting power as gun owners? This would collapse the Democratic machine, put Republicans on notice and send a shock-wave through big business that we the people will destroy any politician that tries to use their office for power or for an agenda that is not consistent with the needs of the people that they govern. This would work and in extending the thought, we would need to make sure that this itself does ont morph into a power hungry organization, but at least at the outset it would be a catalyst for change. –IMO

  34. Let’s travel down the rabbit hole a bit. Let’s assume the election is rigged. Who is doing the rigging?

    Elections are run by the state. The Federal Election Commission only exists to enforce election finance laws. There is no federal election control entity. In order for the election to be rigged, enough of the 50 state leaderships would have to be complicit in the fraud to bring about a decisive change. Possible yes, probable no. Especially not probable since a whistleblower has not come forward yet from any of the previous elections.

    Let’s also look at who is running most states. 31 of the states have Republican governors. So, if there is rigging, then it should probably be in favor of republicans? Especially when the gerrymandering is so blatant already.

    Finally, what about hacking into the various electronic voting tools. Possible and the NSA could pull it off. But again, that’s something of a whistleblower’s dream!

    • “In order for the election to be rigged, enough of the 50 state leaderships would have to be complicit in the fraud to bring about a decisive change.”

      Nope. Rigging an election doesn’t require rigging every vote everywhere. It takes only small changes in diverse counties to change the result of an entire election.

      It would have taken only a few hundred votes in one county in FL in 2000 to flip the entire election.

      It doesn’t take a vast conspiracy to change an outcome. The counters make the results. Not the ballots. The counters. It’s the oldest rule of the rigged game.

      • Yep, that’s why I said “enough of the leadership to make a decisive change”. Enough of the leadership could mean just one polling center in the swing district in a winner take all state.

        But that’s what, two dozen community volunteers plus a handful of state gov representatives and monitors? You could not keep a secret like that if George, Sr. or Gertrude talked about what happened at bingo night the next week. The counters are watched.

        Also, you’d have to have conspirators waiting in every swing district of every swing state ready to place their thumbs on the scales in the off chance that their district turned out to be the deciding district. You wouldn’t want to tell all of them to pour on the votes as that would raise red flags. You’d have to be precise.

        So, even if all you needed was one or two people to rig the election, you’d have to have one or two people in a lot of different places, lead by a cadre of leadership in a location where you could get the correct information about which sleeper agents to activate within enough time to make a difference (very difficult). I really doubt something like that wouldn’t have emerged before now.

        That’s on the small, location specific scale. What if the State reporting agencies were crooked. So all the polls counted correctly and reported in but the state reporting agency lied? The polls are reported separately so all they would have to do is double check the numbers and would certainly raise the alarm if the numbers didn’t match.

        The counters are Judith or Evelyn down the street. If they are miscounting ballots then that’s on them, it’s not a conspiracy but a lone wolf that could be pushing for either party and there are several people who’s job it is to double check Judith’s counting.

  35. If something does happen I would be highly suspect of the legitimacy of it. I smell a false-flag a brewin’. there are plenty of useful idiots out there that would make a good patsy. *puts on tinfoil hat*

  36. We already know it’s rigged. How many chief executives of the Democratic National Committee had to resign for unethical behavior by colluding against Bernie Sanders? Four or five ?

    I just finished watching the Project Veritias / James O’Keefe undercover investigation he just posted… tell me if you don’t call it “rigged” after watching it:

  37. No need for violence.

    We can vote and exit like the UK. Violence is only needed if they don’t respect our decision.

  38. should a Trump supporter (or two or more) go postal after their candidate’s loss, it will give the Clinton administration the excuse they need to issue a federal dictat on gun control.

    That would be a mistake. That would only exacerbate the situation more. People would see validation for their claims and double their efforts against the administrations actions.

      • And if any state(s) were actually able to succeed, I’d expect the left to revise the Anschluss of Austria scenario. One that still particularly pisses me off.

  39. It is simplistic to propose that some single “corruption” of our republican form of government will trigger a rising-up of the militia to overthrow our Federal government. Something akin to shelling Ft. Sumpter and Lincoln’s defense of same.
    What the elite ought to be genuinely concerned with is the consensus forming that the Federal government is no longer legitimate. Taxpayers feel they are unjustly taxed and will be left holding the bill for the national debt. Entitlement recipients are unjustly served. Students are left uneducated. Defendants are convicted unjustly; and so forth.
    The problem is NOT that some particular incident – whether it be the 2016 presidential election or the Freddy Grey death – will light the match. Instead, it is that the magazine has accumulated so much powder. The political environment is akin to a forest that has accumulated dry tinder. Some source of ignition is inevitable; it matters not whether by act of God (lightning) or man (arson). The resources available will be insufficient to quell the conflagration.
    The most likely scenario is an outbreak of civil unrest under which normal activity – in particular commerce – can’t continue. Government(s) fail to restore order. Tax collections plummet and government(s) are seen to be incompetent. Political institutions cease to function. What might arise out of such a mess is difficult to imagine; but whatever it is, it will be chaotic and the political establishment will not be in the driver’s seat.

    • That’s why Trump’s rhetoric is so dangerous because he is actively using the largest pulpit that exists in this country to de-legitimize the federal government.

      Yes all those underlying issues are real and exist, but so long as the population feels that the peaceful, constitutional tools are adequate to fix the issues then we can all live peacefully. He is telling his supporters to stop trusting those peaceful tools without offering any peaceful alternative. That leaves what exactly? Anarchy?

      • Well, as they say (they don’t yet but they will after this post) that ‘if you don’t care about the problems, you can’t claim to care about the fixes’.