Politics

Michael Boldin: Fighting Federal Tyranny in the Coming Dark Age Ep. 152

Michael Boldin: Fighting Federal Tyranny in the Coming Dark Age Ep. 152

Michael Boldin, director of the Tenth Amendment Center and the host of the Path to Liberty Podcast joined me to discuss methods the Founding Fathers prescribed for combating both poor constitutional and blatantly unconstitutional policy. We discuss how these methods are especially important in the current political landscape.

Follow the Tenth Amendment Center:

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com

Path to Liberty

TAC Annual Report

Episode 152 of the Liberty Weekly Podcast is Brought to you by:

Liberty Weekly on Lbry get Patreon Bonuses a la Carte for LBC

SubscribeStar

Liberty Weekly Substack

The Liberty Weekly Patreon Page: help support the show and gain access to tons of bonus content! Become a patron today!

Become a Patron!Liberty Weekly on Flote. Patreon Bonuses for Crypto!

Show Notes:

The Anti-Commandeering Doctrine: An Overview of five major Supreme Court cases by: Mike Maharrey

Federalist 46

Federalist 48

Gonzales v. Raich

TAC: Gonzales v. Raich

George Washington Farewell Address

Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions Text

Joe Biden’s Plan to Repeal the Second Amendment

Joe Biden’s Plan to Repeal the Second Amendment

HR127, known as the Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act introduced by Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18], is, without a doubt, the most tyrannical gun control bill ever proposed. Like all gun control measures, this bill would hit the poor and minority communities the hardest. Its massive scope would also turn tens of millions of legal, law abiding gun owners into felons overnight.

As TFTP reported in December, before Joe Biden took office, his administration has major plans for eviscerating the Second Amendment. Biden has been an outspoken gun grabber and on his campaign website, he’s stated that he will use executive action to enforce gun control.

On the site, Biden states that he will use executive action to “get weapons of war off our streets.” Calling an AR-style weapon a “weapon of war” is laughable given the fact that Biden, under president Obama, aided in the wholesale slaughter of countless innocent civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and Somalia—using actual “weapons of war” like drone strikes, hellfire missiles, and sanctions.

Nevertheless, the new boss—who is the same as the old boss, contrary to what many believe—is presiding over a Congress that will consider the most tyrannical gun control measures in the history of America, HR127.

Former vice presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party, Spike Cohen points out that “HR127 would be most heavily enforced against those with the least ability to defend themselves in court: the poor, and minorities. It will also make things much worse in marginalized communities, where only police and criminals will have guns.”

In a post to Facebook, Cohen narrowed down some of the bill’s most ominous points that would target every single gun owner in the country.

1️⃣ Firearms License required for any new gun purchases or ownership transfers.
▪️Licensee Must be 21, complete a 24 hour gun safety training course, and must undergo a psych evaluation.
▪️Multi-tier license. Individual license for ownership and display of “antique” firearm, standard firearm license, and “military style” license.
▪️Military license requires additional 24 hour safety course.
▪️Licensing is revoked immediately for anyone indicted of a crime in which the sentence lasts longer than 1 year.
This heavily discriminates against anyone who has ever seen a therapist or had to get mental health treatment, such as victims of abuse and people with depression, and veterans seeking care for PTSD. Depression and addiction are mentioned specifically as reasons for licensing denial.
Also, gun licensing is expensive, which makes ownership less accessible for those who need their own protection most.
2️⃣ Requires an $800 annual government insurance fee for all current and future gun owners, to be paid to the Attorney General EVERY YEAR.
There is no grandfather clause, meaning this applies to anyone that owns a gun at all, not just those who purchase a new firearm after this passes.
This fee will certainly go up each year. It’s yet another barrier for those in poverty to be able to defend themselves.
3️⃣ Mandatory Nationwide Firearms Registration & Database
▪️ALL firearms owned shall be registered under penalty of up to $150,000 and 15 years in prison.
▪️Serial, make, model, date, identity of owner, and the location of where the firearm will be stored to be collected and maintained in a database by the US Attorney General.
▪️Names and information of all those who may have access to the firearms shall be collected as well.
▪️This information to be accessible by state, local, and federal police, military, as well as state and local governments.
4️⃣ Ammunition and Magazine Bans
▪️Bans .50cal and larger ammunition outright.
▪️Bans all mags that hold more than 10 rounds
This ammo is mostly used for hunting and is rarely used against people. The most common handguns and rifles use magazines that exceed this arbitrary limit, which makes TENS OF MILLIONS of law-abiding gun owners felons overnight.
Illegal ownership of even a single round of banned ammo will result in up to $100,000 in fines AND 20 years in prison.

This bill was originally presented last year and reinvented this year with a whole new level of tyranny added to it both in the government and out of it. For example, the registration data will be made public. Given the cancel culture mass hysteria-inciting media frenzy as of late, this list could be used by big tech and woke cults to target their political rivals. They could seek out this data and use it to implement blacklists, social media bans, and any other number of ways the cancel culture attacks those with whom they disagree.

As we reported in December, many of these gun control measures are already on the president’s agenda, which go even further.

One of Biden’s most ominous moves in regard to controlling guns is his push for “smart gun technology” that will require biometrics to fire in an ostensible move to “prevent unauthorized use.” In reality, however, this paves the way for bad actors, including the state and hackers, to be able to control, hack, or essentially turn off your gun, making it a paperweight.

Biden also plans to pick up where Trump left off in regard to extreme risk laws, also called “red flag” laws. Under Biden’s plan, which is similar to the many plans implemented under Trump, family members or law enforcement officials will be able to make claims—many which involve no evidence—allowing a person’s guns to be temporarily taken until that person is declared fit enough to get them back.

This attacks on the Second Amendment must be resisted. Please consider calling your representative and peacefully telling them to oppose this bill.

This article was originally featured at The Free Thought Project and is republished with permission.

2020 – The Longest Year of My Life In Review

2020 – The Longest Year of My Life In Review

A Requiem on Facts 

If you’ve ever heard me share my “origin story” you know that it’s a pretty common story for many. I was watching a 2007 presidential debate and this guy I had never heard of before, in the middle of the “War on Terror,” states plainly that the reason the terrorists hate America is because “our” government is over there and has been bombing them for decades. And this was in the middle of the “War on Terror.” Every candidate on the stage took umbrage with that and “Mayor 9/11,” Rudy Giuliani. went so far as to demand this heretic take it back. The man who was brave enough to make that statement, Congressman Ron Paul of Texas, said that even the CIA agreed and used the term “blowback” to describe the phenomena. That FACT was ignored but Congressman Paul stuck to his guns. That wasn’t the first time I noticed politicians, rulers, and/or experts making up their own “facts” but having these “leaders” blatantly ignore the truth on a national stage was such a pivotal moment in my life that it stuck with me. Now I see this ignorance several times a day. It is the default. 

In March of this year, 2020, it was clear to me that the overwhelming majority of the American public’s response to the government mandates in relation to Covid 19 was, “tyranny accepted.” After March 15th most of the world was on “house arrest.” Prior to this, in December 2019 and January 2020, I had done episodes with Mises.org editor Ryan McMaken in which we highlighted the decentralized canton system of Switzerland as the model of liberty for the future. I put out an announcement on Twitter that if anyone following me lived in Switzerland I wanted to talk to them about that structure and what daily life was like. On March 19th I spoke to a listener who lives in Zurich and he informed me that the COUNTRY was on a hard lockdown from March 17th through April 17th. So much for my “utopia” of decentralization within a country. 

On March 27th, a few days before I heard the term used in public, I referred to CV19 as the “Invisible Enemy” on an episode of my podcast with Vin Armani. At that point I started comparing the government’s response to that of 9/11 and stated that CV19 would be more damaging to individual liberty, and the culture in general. Almost ten months later most people agree. 

Sticking with comments made on that March 27th episode, Vin and I talked about how the corporate media was filled with “reports” of asymptomatic “super-spreaders” and that they were the biggest threat to the public. I read that message as “your neighbor may show no signs of being sick BUT it’s better to be SAFE.” “Safety” would become the word “de l’année.” Those of us who asked for evidence of these “typhoid Marys” were met with accusations of “science denial,” a term easily co-opted from the “climate change” cult. 

At this point, information that would turn out to be complete bunk was becoming so “viral” so fast, it was obvious that even local and state politicians found themselves “reacting.” I mentioned in the article I wrote, “I Made A Lot of Mistakes This Year,” that most of these mistakes were committed while reacting to information. All of this misinformation released to the public at once gave birth to the “Karen Meme.” People became snitches. Factions were created. People’s attitude towards the government’s mandates in relation to the virus seemed to be drawn down party lives. The Karen Meme soon burned out as it became the norm and not the outlier. Memes BECAME reality. It was at this time I started to notice apathy and defeat in people’s language and actions. It happened very quickly. The language that was being used was bleak. 

 Time Stands Still 

One thing that became clear to me then was that the information zeitgeist was being bombarded with memetics. Long-term individual unemployment was being spoken of casually in the corporate media. The term “essential worker” was not yet viewed as a slur to most and the fact that liquor store employees were included in that group was yet to be questioned. This new paradigm was still very new and people seemed to be punch-drunk by what was happening. Taking into consideration everything I was absorbing; I began to talk about how this was going to be the perfect opportunity for a trial run on Universal Basic Income. When examining long-term unemployment combined with a society 2 paychecks from being homeless, it just made sense UBI would be rolled out as at least a temporary measure.  

Recognizing that we were in the midst of a “health crisis,” I imagined I was someone who wanted to implement single-payer healthcare. As with UBI, I couldn’t envision a more opportune time and am honestly floored a real push hasn’t been made on that front. With an incoming left of center neo-liberal White House, I believe those cards are now fully on the table and the deck may be stacked.   

Returning to people’s reactions at the end of March, it appeared to me that people were in denial and may have advanced all the way to the “acceptance” stage in a matter of a few weeks. There was not a protest to be found. Most people had become docile prisoners in their own homes. The right to “free speech” AND “assembly” were under attack yet, with the exception of a rare few, no one was asking whether this was helpful, or more importantly, how harmful this was going to be.  

Another phenomena people have forgotten was time appeared to stand still.  But was it that? Or was it enormous changes happening in such a short period of time that it felt as such? People were discovering a routine in which the only constant was “sheltering in place” and other actions dressed in dystopian language. The idea of the “panopticon,” where everyone has to be in a position to be monitored was something I mentioned often. Remember, anyone could be infected. We were experiencing our own version of the Salem With Trials except it was the “invisible demon” that could attack at any time. Whenever I looked at Anthony Fauci, I imagined Cotton Mather.   

 The ‘High Priests’ Enter the Game 

I previously mentioned the idea of the panopticon; a prison in which the jailers can see every corner of the structure but prisoners only get a piece of the picture. By the end of March to the middle of April, it became clear to me, and others who may not have recognized it in the past, that we were finally getting the “police state” many of us had been warning of. The veil was lifted and the coming riots – more to be said on that later – helped the scales to finally fall off many an authority-worshiper’s eyes. When Victor Orban declared one man rule in Hungary around this time my Spidey-senses” began to go haywire. I couldn’t help but think that if that happened here, most of the West would be lost, as well as the Far East. 

The myth of “tragedy brings people of differing political opinions together” was shattered right from the start of the government’s response. After 9/11 it lasted roughly a week, which was shocking. No such reprieve was found in this “crisis.” If there is anyone left who believes there is one united culture in this society after witnessing 2020, they’re beyond hope. We are a house divided and we will not stand. The sooner people embrace this, the faster we can start embracing alternatives. 

It was in the middle to the end of April when mandatory vaccinations and tracking (tracing) entered into the daily conversation. “It’s the only way we can get back to normal” was the message. Many people were genuinely excited about the prospects of a vaccine. Contact tracing software started showing up on people’s phones. I noticed you could turn off the notifications, but not the software. 

At this point I started saying that science and medicine were dead. Everything coming from the “experts” in “the Cathedral” were obvious guesses, but these “chosen ones” were not to be questioned. They had achieved “High Priest” status and only they had the ability to interpret these events. “Only our priests speak the truth, the heretics on YouTube must be excommunicated.” This was when my friend Vin Armani started to say we had entered “The Dim Age.” It was a perfect descriptor to me as my maternal grandmother would call people she didn’t consider to be of even average intelligence, dim. It resonated and still does.  

Technocracy became unstoppable. They had their “experts” in place as the “Holy” class, the software to surveil us, and the police to enforce it. And the people weren’t noticing. Most still don’t, even ones who claim to be about liberty. Instantaneous global communication enables all of this. One may ask, “where is the grand puppeteer?” Where indeed?! 

 The Exodus Begins 

Again, where is the “Grand Puppeteer?” So much of what we saw in response to Covid 19 seemed planned (yes, I know, Event 201). But there were “symptoms” that few could’ve predicted. 

In April, we saw de facto borders return to the European Union. The EU was set up to remove boundaries between countries but the response of the participating governments reversed that. In the United States, Florida set up check points at its northern border to stop people from New York and Louisiana from entering. Mises.org editor Ryan McMaken received flak for an article he had written prior to this explaining why open borders between the states may be a bad idea. I had him on my podcast after the Florida Border incident to chuckle at his prescience. That individual states were handling the “pandemic” differently had to make hardcore federalists laugh. 

The concept of the “Covid-Exodus” started to become a reality. Still in April, my friend Vin Armani abandoned California for Saipan in the Northern Mariana Islands. I began receiving reports out of NYC of masses of people moving out. So many were fleeing the city that there were long waiting lists for moving vans. Crossing over into May, the most popular podcaster in the world, Joe Rogan, began openly talking about moving out of California and sans hyperbole began referring to its Governor, Gavin Newsom, as a dictator. When people start uprooting, one must consider that others will finally begin to see the rise in totalitarianism. A noticeable problem is that most of the people from the last generation able to recognize this rise in totalitarianism have died off. There are very few still alive who can see the warning signs. To quote Plato: 

“The people have always some champion whom they set over them and nurse into greatness…This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears, he is a protector.” 

Those of us who point out growing tyranny, or the State’s crimes, are often told by those who call themselves “patriots” that if we don’t like it, we should just leave the country. By May that option, for the most part, had been taken away from us. But as bad as 2020 had been up to that point, it would only get worse when a video was released showing a Minneapolis police officer kneeling on the neck of a man named George Floyd for eight minutes and forty-six seconds, at the end of which, Mr Floyd’s life had expired. 

 ‘I Predict a Riot’ 

In the last week of May 2020, if I had gone in for a diagnosis, I probably would’ve had some form of mild PTSD. The government restrictions due to COVID 19, combined with the culture’s mindless adoption of every one of their baseless recommendations, was making me crazy. Then the George Floyd incident happened in Minneapolis. As someone who has been podcasting and writing about the abuses by police for years, watching that video barely elicited an emotion from me. I was inured to it by that point. However, the majority of the public wasn’t. Sure, there were the typical opportunists who secretly celebrated incidents like Floyd’s in order to push their agenda and grift, but the general public didn’t. Even conservatives were alarmed. Their alarm didn’t last long. 

The day the Floyd video was released “protests” started in Minneapolis. A police precinct was abandoned by the State’s “security force” as “protesters” set it ablaze. Multiple fires were reported. The “protests” then took a typical turn. Many in the streets set their sights on private businesses and even individuals. Any hope that the general public, which is normally supportive of law enforcement, would continue in their newfound suspicion of the police was abandoned. People fear a mob more than they fear the State. And at this point it was understandable as many police were ordered to stand down by local politicians. 

Over the following week the protests spread to multiple cities. The violence against businesses and persons continued. Most local politicians excused it. The corporate media ignored it. It appeared we had entered a new paradigm where street violence was the norm. In Seattle, local politicians allowed the CHAZ/CHOP autonomous zone to be created and remain untouched. News out of Portland painted war in the streets as soon as the sun would set in the evening. It was chaos in many locales. And it was being normalized. Many celebrities set up bail funds for the rioters. Again, politicians along with their comrades in the media and Hollywood were intent on making this into that dreaded phrase, “The New Normal.” CNN ran a chyron under a reporter who was on-scene with a city burning behind him that said that the protests were “mostly peaceful.” 

There was no question in my mind what was happening here. When you combined the government’s draconian response to Covid 19 with their lax response to cities on fire, it was clear the powers that be wanted people completely off balance and ready and willing to accept whatever came their way, whether it was being locked in your house for months or having your business burned down to only receive the canned response of, “they have insurance, stop complaining.” The government declared war on its people in 2020 and most didn’t recognize it. 

 This is the Most Important Election… Yada, Yada 

I will get into the election, but first I believe it’s important to tie everything so far together as it sets the stage for what occurred during the election. I hold the opinion that the riots in the wake of the George Floyd incident would not have been as severe if the government hadn’t put the majority of the population on house arrest for the previous 2.5 months. Combine the riots, skyrocketing unemployment, induced fear of a virus, and another 5 months of lockdowns with the fact 2020 was a national election year, one that was destined to be contentious, it was like pouring gasoline onto a fire that had been ignited by gunpowder. 

When looking back at the election, the best place to start is with the Corporate Press (CP). I find it impossible to believe there is anyone left in this society who doesn’t recognize that the CP was largely in the bag for the democrats. Hell, even FOX News, the supposed bastion of the Rightcalled the race for Biden long before you would’ve expected them to. And if you wanted to look into the background of the candidates? Forget it – move along, nothing to see here. According to the CP, Hunter Biden’s laptop either didn’t exist, or was a Russian plant. Seriously, I think people have forgotten that “Russia,” was invoked yet again. When it came to light that the FBI had been investigating Hunter Biden as early as 2018 for his dealings in China, it was barely a blip on the CP’s radar. 

As we saw, the “mail-in votes” swung the election. Sure, many have criticized Trump for telling his supporters to avoid mail-in voting, but is there anyone out there who wants to make the argument that each of the reported 26,600,000 votes made by mail had the required signature verifications made in only 48 hours? Does that seem realistic? So, when you have a good percentage of the 75,000,000 people who voted for Trump claiming the election was stolen from them, can you honestly blame them? If you were playing football and you looked up at the scoreboard and suddenly there were 42 points unaccounted for on the board, you would probably cry foul. That so many people can’t accept this as even a possibility, or see the point of view of those who believe they’ve been wronged, is incredible. 

The veil has been ripped off “The Cathedral” by those residing in it, yet many still don’t notice. We are truly living in the aforementioned “Dim Age,” where “facts and logic” are no longer viable weapons. Now it is only the narrative that matters. And those who control the narrative, control the people. 

 ‘Don’t Question the Experts!’ 

By February/early-March, I began using the Hayekian term scientism on a regular basis. It was obvious from the start that the State’s preferred scientists were merely guessing (very poorly) when it came to what the public should be doing to protect itself from the virus. I knew they had crossed over from science to religion when doctors presenting alternatives were silenced. Priests of old were seen by the devout as everything from politicians to doctors. The modern-day version of that is the State-approved scientist. White coats have replaced priestly frocks and their recommendations from on high are wrought with just as many appeals to “faith.” Probably the most damning evidence against the “Medical Industrial Cathedral,” was their declaring Hydroxychloroquine anathema after Trump mentioned it as a potential treatment. From that moment on it appeared that every recommendation was coming straight from the pulpit with those who disagreed treated as heretics to be burned at the stake. 

Scientism transitions into the concept of “technocracy” with ease. The best “normie” definition I could find for technocracy is: “the government or control of society or industry by an elite of technical experts.” Whereas many may view this concept as appealing, when you take into consideration the “experts” the government forced upon the public in response to CV19, you start to realize the “expert” part of that definition isn’t their main priority. In my opinion, the public VIEWING them as experts is more important to the powers that be than their ability to actually solve a crisis. Their being able to present themselves as learned and credible is what appears to be of use to the elites. I hope the reader is able to recognize the incredible danger in having a class of “experts” who it is forbidden to question. And I would especially hope the “libertarian” would see this as an assault on the “market of ideas” and, worst of all, a limiting of choices. 

The questioning of the aforementioned priestly class of experts is verboten. How can you, a mere serf, question them when you do not possess the “secret knowledge?” “How can someone like you begin to understand these mysteries?” “Where is your medical degree from – GOOGLE?!” “Are you questioning the stats and data?” Who do you think you are?!” 

I’ll end part 7 with a story I’ve shared on my podcast. When I was preparing for a flight to NYC in September, I received an email from Delta providing detailed information on everything they’re doing to keep me safe (how about not adopting the 737 Max, that would make me feel safe). The email clearly stated that masks slow the spread of CV19 and included two links to the CDC as proof of their claim. The curious fellow I am I decided to click the links. Both links led to pages where the CDC stated they BELIEVE masks help to slow the spread. It appears the “private companies” “libertarians” worship with undying loyalty aren’t above lying to get you to follow the government’s mandates. 

 Facts and Logic are Dead – Long Live Magic! 

When I saw the response by the powers that be to CV19, I determined they were either clueless, or purposefully misleading the public. I quickly realized that both can be true at the same time and that is still my belief. What I wasn’t prepared for was the majority of the public to buy into this charade so quickly. The government presented an ever-changing narrative and the vast majority of people swallowed it whole with no qualms. A narrative is essentially a story which doesn’t have to be true. In the case of how the public accepted the CV19 narrative, it was almost as if by magic. And magic was a big part of my year, and still is.

My closest fellow traveler in 2020 was my friend, Vin Armani. We did several podcasts highlighting and explaining the tyranny we saw the government implementing in the name of CV19. Vin was the first person to mention magic. He noticed people abandoning logic and reason and instead adopting the government “narrative” as their guiding “principle.” Vin quickly surmised that if people were believing in this magic, only better magic could pull them from the thrall of the government narrative. I told him that to do this we needed a better narrative. One that was devoid of logic and reason because we were entering into Vin’s coined phrase, “The Dim Age.” Thus the “magic meme” was born.

Everything became about magic, everything had a magical connotation. When someone brought up in conversation or on social media CV19 vaccines, I referred to it as the magic elixir that would end this demonic attack. If masks were mentioned in a positive way, I talked of their great faith and that totems were part of man’s history. Hand sanitizer became Holy Water. The required six foot perimeter for social distancing was too far for a demon to jump from one human to another. If the narrative is all that matters, and people are performing these rituals “sola fide,” why would I not oblige them by using the language of ritual as well?

It became crystal clear that we were in the “Dim Age” when the riots started after the George Floyd video was released. Tens of thousands of people took to the streets, huddled in masses with few masks, to protest. When people like myself wondered how this “pandemic” was going to be stopped if thousands upon thousands were in the streets screaming to each other in immediate proximity, the “high priests” informed us that the protests were vital and not to worry about the protesters contracting, and spreading, CV19. They were all but declared immune. It was magic. The “Dim Age” was real and the technocrats had this handled. All you had to do was have faith. 

 We’re All ‘White Supremacists’ Now 

So, at this point the protesters and rioters in response to the George Floyd video were magically deemed immune from COVID 19. And it truly was a “selective,” magical immunity for protesters of “institutional racism” because when another group of protesters marched on the Michigan Capitol in early May to decry the stay-at-home orders, they were deemed not immune. In fact, they may as well have been trying to spread the virus on purpose according to the corporate press (CP). These people who only wanted their lives returned were depicted as heathens wanting to “kill your grandma.” 

And, of course, because the Michigan protesters were predominantly white, the CP ran with their go-to in the age of Trump – it was all about white supremacy. This was no more evident than when on August 25th in Kenosha, Wisconsin, a city that was literally on fire, a 17-year-old kid named Kyle Rittenhouse made the decision to tote an AR-15 with the intent to defend businesses that were in danger of being destroyed by “mostly peaceful” protesters. In a scene of utter chaos (listed on Wikipedia as “unrest”) and under assault from multiple individuals, Rittenhouse ended up killing two of his attackers and wounding a third. How did the CP spin this? As expected, Rittenhouse was a white supremacist who traveled to Kenosha to kill black people. The fact that the three people he shot were all white made no difference. The narrative is supreme and if the CP reports it, it is to be accepted as Gospel. 

The cries of “white supremacy,” and recent intimations (it’s actually beyond this) that many of the 74,000,000 people who voted for Trump, or are sympathetic toward him, are white supremacists no matter their skin color, should not be a shock. This is a typical move by the “Cathedral” to consolidate its base unto itself – give their followers an enemy and make them feel like they’re fighting fascists/racists. The problem is that in the past the enemy the CP sold us was overseas. The fact that they are telling the population that these “fascists/racists could be your neighbor, or your mom and dad,” should give everyone pause. Unfortunately, people are buying into this narrative fully. To hear the useful idiot masses talk, you’d think they believed they are like those storming the beaches at Normandy to defeat the Nazis. I wonder what they would think if they were able to go back in time and survey the men taking that beach on what their opinion of non-white people was. 

In my opinion, the accusations of white supremacy are not going to disappear with Trump. CNN, MSNBC and the ACLU have seen record profits (in donations on the part of the ACLU) in the “racist” Trump-era. How is this to be combatted? A better narrative? Mocking and ridicule? At this point we’ve reached the “throwing crap against the wall and see what sticks” method. In any case, we must realize we are experiencing a radicalization of our neighbors that may put us in their crosshairs. We must be prepared for this. I hope this targeting will go away, but it’s too profitable to those benefitting from it to stop. 

 ‘It’s a Private Company, Bro’ 

As mentioned previously, even without government-imposed tyranny in response to COVID 19 or the George Floyd riots, 2020 was destined to be a crap show as it was a national election year where the incumbent was hated by the majority of the population. And what were we given to go up against the “Reality Show Host-in-Chief? Joe Damn Biden. A man who can barely make it through a speech without looking like a completely confused jackass. A guy who likes children to play with his leg hair. A guy who went to war with a “bad dude” by the name of “Corn Pop.” He’s also responsible for the 1994 Crime Bill and has been one of the biggest promoters of the “War on Drugs” but hey, after four years of having a clown show in the White House, no need to talk about actual policy. 

This election was insanity. Let’s start with the mail-in ballots. Seriously, could people not see this was a recipe for fraud (even if as claimed none was committed)? 26.6 million mail-in ballots were submitted and, as mentioned previously, we are to believe each one had a signature verification check done in a matter of days. Impossible. Election observers came forward and signed affidavits saying they witnessed fraud but were told they were lying. My problem with that is bearing false witness is perjury and a crime yet none of the witnesses are being brought up on charges even though there’s a “full-court press” to punish anyone seen as loyal to Trump. It’s like they don’t want to take the case to court as that would allow evidence of inconsistencies and possible fraud to be introduced into the public. 

I know elections have been stolen in the past and that irregularities have occurred in each one, but what we saw out of the tech sector in 2020 is historic. Facebook, Twitter and Google did everything they could to shut down any and all opposition to Joe Biden’s candidacy. When the New York Post – the fourth largest newspaper in the nation – had its Twitter account shut down due to its reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop, I knew the fix was in and there was no way Trump was going to be allowed to win. Twitter made it so any link to that story was forbidden from being posted. Google throttled searches and Facebook took down any mention of the story. Personally, my Facebook account was suspended for 30 days, exactly 29 days before the election and then I was not allowed to post anything in Facebook groups for another 30 days beyond the election. 

And that’s what I want to end on. The “Cathedral” is using alleged “private companies” to censor dissident voices. And this is where “Libertarianism” fails every time. The Libertarian worship of business puts them in the position of excusing, and in many cases, cheering on this censorship. In the past three days three officers in the Mises Caucus of the Libertarian Party have had their Facebook accounts eliminated. Groups are being taken down. Even a milquetoast, left-libertarian group full of people some of us call the “Loser Brigade” had their group taken down. And they excused it by saying that they would rebuild but at least they got the Mises Caucus guys. Imagine being defeated in battle and excusing it by celebrating that your perceived adversary was destroyed as well. The government is using “Big Tech” to silence dissident voices and the people who identify as anti-government and pro-rights, are some of those same people cheering on “Big Tech’s” actions. Mind-boggling! 

 The ‘Debates’ Were a Sh*tShow 

With “Big Tech” declaring war on anyone to the Right of Bernie Sanders and a portion of “Libertarianism” cheering it on, I was perplexed. I thought it would be beneficial to return to two events that happened this year that were vastly different in content, but highlight in my mind politics in the modern age. These events were the two 2020 presidential debates that I know a lot of you didn’t watch. Summing them up for you is going to be fun. 

The first presidential debate could’ve been a Jerry Springer episode. It was a couple hours of two crotchety old men talking over each other. From the get-go it was clear that interrupting and drowning out his opponent was Trump’s strategy, Biden just followed suit. I’m not one to argue that presidential debates – with the exception of ones where someone like a Ron Paul is participating – will answer any questions about what a candidate will actually do when they get in office, but it is nice to hear some hint of policy agenda. However, the first debate wasn’t about information. It was akin to two dogs pissing anywhere they could in order to mark their territory. This was cheered on by the Right. And I would be lying if I said I didn’t enjoy it. The reason I relished what many would consider “disgraceful” behavior by “Royalty” is because anything that will de-legitimize the presidency is alright by me. The Trump-Right just wanted to see him attack people, and while I enjoyed that too, it’s not pushing the public in the direction I want them to go – to have disgust for the State apparatus and their apparatchiks. 

The second presidential debate was more civil, and therefore, boring. My notes for this debate had a huge heading in capital letters- CONSPIRACY THEORIES. Honestly, I barely remember anything Trump said in this debate but Biden should’ve been wearing a tin-foil hat. Biden continued the Left’s Russophobia by not only regurgitating the debunked Russia-gate narrative (this time adding that Iran interfered in the election as well which is amazing since these are the two countries the Neo-liberal center wants war with), but he also brought up another debunked report that Russia was paying “bounties” to Afghanis to kill Americans stationed or working in Afghanistan. Of course the moderator of the debate, Kristen Welker of NBC, was not about to fact-check anything coming out of the “Cathedral’s” preferred candidate’s mouth, so these blatant lies went unchallenged. In my opinion, Trump lost that debate solely because he never once challenged the lies coming out of Biden’s mouth. 

I’ve spent a good amount of time recently, here and on social media, talking about “red-pilled” vs “blue-pilled.” Michael Malice would say being red-pilled is knowing that the corporate press and academia have the same agenda and it’s not a coincidence (forgive me Michael if I’m off a bit on that). I believe another part of taking the red-pill is acknowledging that the Federal bureaucracy can’t be fixed mainly because of the aforementioned media and academic class. Curtis Yarvin would go so far as to say that the press and academia are the guiding force behind national politics. Once you get it in your head that the State is a Leviathan that cannot be stopped by joining it and then fighting it from the inside, hopefully you come to the conclusion that the only thing to do is either ignore it and drop out, or educate as many people as possible on its nature so that they may begin to either ignore it, or educate others. If it sounds like multi-level-marketing, that’s because effective messaging always has been. 

 Hard Questions and a Reality Check 

I’ve reached the end of my history review of the God-awful year 2020. Now questions need to be asked and solutions devised. First question: ARE there any solutions to the crap show we just experienced? That’s a good starting query actually. Let’s proceed. 

How does individual liberty win in a world where logic and reason have been abandoned by the majority of its inhabitants? How do you have a conversation when the person on the other end is repeating a narrative they’ve been fed? Remember, narratives don’t have to be true they just have to sound plausible. Having them come from so-called experts – technocrats – is vital. The COVID 19 response should be our first teacher on this point. 

I believe I’ve made it clear in this series that Americans are not a people who plan. They react. If you’re constantly reacting to challenges that are coming at you, it’s easy to make mistakes. Stepping back and taking in all of the information available is key to being able to work your way out of a negative situation. When it came to the government response to COVID 19, it’s obvious they failed to fully understand and address the situation. An individual making mistakes in judgment for themselves, and their family, is vastly different than a group of technocrats making mistakes that affect 330,000,000 people. 

Have you heard the term “The Great Reset” (GR)? How about “Build Back Better?” The GR is a plan by the World Economic Forum (WEF) similar to the “Green New Deal” with the stated goal of fundamentally restructuring the world’s economies around climate change reforms and equality of outcome for individuals. WEF has a website and a podcast. They are not hiding their intentions/goals/plans. Almost every world leader has used the term “Build Back Better” since June 2020 including Joe Biden. What does it mean? Do you think you should find out? 

Allow me to finish part 12 with this thought. I’ve heard people say that the totalitarian action and language we’ve experienced in the last year is a struggle between “authoritarianism and libertarianism.” Really? When has libertarian ideology been an option? I’m talking about a real option not just theory. In the grand scheme of things, yes, those are two options, absent of any nuance. However, what we have seen is a struggle between real totalitarianism and a soft fascism. Libertarian ideology isn’t even on the board. 

I started this by saying questions need to be asked and answered. Along with the question of ARE there solutions, we should also ask: given the current choices between totalitarianism and fascism, how is the libertarian message supposed to be pushed forward/made an option? 

Finally, the End! 

The largest, most powerful companies in the world – “tech companies” – are openly collaborating with governments around the world, and when you point this out to certain people, they accuse you of wanting the government to get involved. Is binary thinking so prevalent that they can’t read the first sentence and realize that’s not the solution but the problem? There are more than two choices. A month ago I probably would have defaulted to torches and pitchforks as my answer but after watching the glorious actions of WallStreetBets, it appears people are developing solutions on their own. People are learning how to weaponize their autism beyond “meme wars.” 

Once again, I feel the need to mention that common refrain idiot lolbertarians have now managed to get even progressives to repeat; “It’s a private company.” Very cool. When the Walmart-owned boxcars show up to take you to the Amazon-run re-education camps, make sure to leave both companies a good Yelp review, you double-digit IQ twits. 

Logic and consistency are dead. I don’t know how many times this must be said before people accept it. And if you refuse to understand that because of some egoistic principle, you’re useless. Enjoy being logically consistent in a corner by yourself because you refuse to adapt. 

When Vin Armani and I realized that facts and logic were dead, we were forced to get uncomfortable. I talked about hijacking narratives. Vin went further and said we had to start “practicing magic” as well. He illustrated this point by painting a scenario in which the “Priests in the White Coats” explained to the American people how burning sage and chanting would make the virus disappear. But Vin, knowing the ‘lolbertatian’ mind, mentioned that if there was a libertarian at said ceremony, he or she would inevitably try to point out that this solution was not in accordance with science, at which time almost everyone in the room would tell this worshiper of “facts and logic” to shut the heck up! Why are libertarians always trying to screw things up? 

What we are experiencing is not new. In history people have always been willing to trade safety for liberty and the response to COVID 19 is just another marker in humanities’ march toward totalitarianism. We all knew the day was coming when the powers that be would figure out a way to get people to acquiesce to tyranny. The day when liberty would become an afterthought in the minds of the people was inevitable. People have faithfully believed for two centuries that they were entitled to the liberties laid out by the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, but have never been willing to put themselves at risk to preserve them. How long did they think it was going to last with no effort on their part?? 

The Declaration of Independence references rights as being endowed by a “creator” and never seeks to explain what he, she or it is. Does it really matter? The most important thing is that the rights promised by the Founders are endowed from a “magical realm” that cannot be explained. To me, even the concept of natural rights makes no sense outside of the realm of the spiritual. No, this country’s “Great Experiment” was started on magical ideas by people using magical language. And if you use that language in reference to the founding with the average American today, they accept it. This language, that to many is devoid of “logic and reason,” may just be our journey back to a path of individual liberty and flourishing. What have we got to lose? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Macabre ‘Normalcy’ of Joe Biden

The Macabre ‘Normalcy’ of Joe Biden

The laughable campaign sales pitch the American people were suffocated with over the past year and before was that Joe Biden, apartheidIsrael’s man in Washington” as well as the de facto author of the Patriot Act, was going save us from President Donald Trump’s fascism and restore “normalcy.”

We were endlessly told that the Trump era’s racism and authoritarianism were an unfortunate, ugly aberration, a hiccup, in the long, progressive arc of history. An arc we are all encouraged to simply love and adore. Of course, all of this is ludicrous.

Biden, as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, along with his right-hand man and now Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in their role overseeing hearings on whether or not to invade Iraq lied the American people into the second of almost four American wars. For thirty years, since this January, the U.S. has been bombing Iraq. As a result of the Iraq War, more than a million people were killed.

In his new book covering the sordid history of U.S. interventions and wars in the Middle East, Enough Already: Time to End the War on Terrorism, Scott Horton tells the story of Biden’s role rolling America into the invasion of Iraq:

Biden did not just support the war. He served as Bush and Cheney’s Senate gatekeeper and whip, guaranteeing a majority vote for the war in the upper chamber while controlled by the opposition party. If Biden had any moral courage at all, he would have stopped that war. All he would have had to do was bring in real experts like former UN weapons inspection chief Scott Ritter and former CENTCOM commander General Anthony Zinni to debunk the case that Iraq was stockpiling banned weapons of mass destruction or had programs that necessitated that war. The senator could have asked Gen. Scowcroft to testify. He could have held up the authorization vote and refused to support an aggressive war. Instead, Biden conspired with the White House to force the authorization through.

His red baiting, ‘National Security Democrat’ Vice President Kamala Harris (formerly California’s top cop) has manically cackled while discussing how she imprisoned poor people for non-violent offenses. She also told us that “very smart people” say the controversy around American cops killing black people, and popular support for Colin Kaepernick’s kneeling protests, really “wasn’t a thing” and was artificially boosted by “Russian bots.”

Blinken, along with Biden’s National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and Samantha Power, Biden’s pick to head the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), helped engineer the disastrous wars in Libya and Syria. Power served on Barrack Obama’s National Security Council at the time, before being promoted to be UN ambassador, and was one of the main players advocating for the Libyan war.

As Dave Decamp, news editor at Antiwar.com, reported,

Power argued in favor of U.S. intervention in Libya under the guise of protecting human rights and preventing genocide. She was joined in her crusade by then-Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and Susan Rice, who served as the UN ambassador at the time.

Reports from 2011 say the pressure from Power, Rice, and Clinton is what led Obama to intervene militarily in Libya, even though his other top advisors were against it. Then-Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates would later say that in a “51 to 49” decision, Obama decided to bomb Libya.

The U.S.-NATO intervention in Libya that led to the brutal murder of former Libyan ruler Moammar Gaddafi was an absolute disaster. Destabilizing Libya turned the country into a haven for al-Qaeda-linked militants, resulted in targeted killings of black Africans, sparked a refugee crisis in North Africa, and even led to the creation of slave markets.

Additionally, the aforementioned Rice has been tapped to be Biden’s Director of the Domestic Policy Council.

Half a million people were killed in Syria as a result of the CIA’s proxy war against the Bashar al Assad government. The main beneficiaries of this treasonous policy in this case were the former CIA director John Brennan’s proxies, al Nusra, the Syrian variant of al Qaeda in Iraq. In the early stages of this war, Sullivan boasted to his boss, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, that, in Syria, al Qaeda was on “our side.” In fact, the whole Benghazi scandal, and its partisan war of words, was a cover up over this policy and its true cause. Susan Rice lied and said the embassy was hit over an offensive internet video. The attack was actually blowback, encouraged by al Qaeda leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, after a U.S. drone assassination in Pakistan. In the early days of the Syrian operation, under the auspices of Secretary of State Clinton and then CIA director David Petraeus, guns were being run from that embassy to al Qaeda linked militants to aid them in their war against Damascus.

Just over a week into his term, a spokesmen from Biden’s State Department said the administration intends to continue Trump’s policy of an indefinite occupation of northeastern Syria. Of course, instead of saying it’s to ‘take the oil,’ like Trump, the Foggy Bottom spokesman said this is now about supporting the Kurds.

Blinken, and the Obama/Biden administration, deliberately took the side of the Saudi/UAE coalition in its war against the people of Yemen, the Middle East’s poorest country. By January 2015, the Houthis, north Yemen’s Zaydi Shi’ite tribesmen, who seized the capital from the Saudi backed puppet government there in late 2014, had an active alliance with CENTCOM  against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). This was when General Lloyd Austin, Biden’s pick for Defense Secretary, led the Middle East command. The Houthis were then betrayed by the likes of Blinken, then Deputy Secretary of State, and John Kerry, then Secretary of State now Climate Czar. The U.S. backstabbed the Houthis in favor of their enemies AQAP and the Islamic State, both of whom fight for and alongside the Saudis’ coalition. Austin oversaw the double cross and while he gossiped about how he was displeased about it behind the scenes, he never resigned and did what he was told. Before being recently confirmed as ‘War Secretary,’ Austin left CENTCOM and found a seat on the Raytheon board, so he could profit off the war’s countless civilian deaths. The U.S. Navy and Air Force, along with the Saudis, launched effectively a full blockade of the country, where, even prior to the war, 90% of food was imported. The country has since been decimated with conservative UN estimates of nearly a quarter of a million dead, about half due to violence and half from mass starvation, as well as widespread disease, and malnutrition. For years human rights groups and UN agencies have declared this war to be the “world’s worst humanitarian crisis.”

In his Senate confirmation hearings, Blinken promised the Biden regime would end U.S. support for the Saudis’ war in “short order.” Some arms sales have been paused and are under review. The war continues, Yemeni children are still being starved to death and bombed. When will they get to have some “normalcy?”

In 2014, when she was Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, Joe Biden infamously teamed up with Victoria Nuland, to put the finishing touches on a US multi-billion dollar coup launched in Ukraine. The street putsch managed by Nuland and the National Endowment for Democracy enabled a coalition infested with fascists and Nazis to take power in Kiev. A proxy war between the coup government and Russian backed separatists in the east has taken the lives of more than 10,000 people. Trump then sent Ukraine anti-tank missiles from Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, a move even Obama wouldn’t make.

During the early years of the Iraq War, Nuland was Dick Cheney’s National Security Advisor. She’s the wife of Robert Kagan, the arch neoconservative, ardent Russia hawk, and cofounder of the notorious Project for a New American Century. Kagan was a longtime advocate of “arms shipments to Ukraine.” During her 2016 campaign, he advised Hillary Clinton to do so. Biden has nominated Nuland to the number three position at the State Department. Her appointment, in and of itself, is a major escalation with Russia. Putin detests Nuland. She is an avid proponent of regime change in Moscow.

In the words of the great Ron Paul,

More than anyone else she is the face of the US-led violent coup against a democratically-elected government in Ukraine in 2014. Nuland not only passed out snacks to the coup leaders, she was caught on a phone call actually plotting the coup right down to who would take power once the smoke cleared.

Unlike the fake Capitol “coup,” this was a real overthrow. Unlike the buffalo horn-wearing joke who desecrated the “sacred” Senate chamber, the Ukraine coup had real armed insurrectionists with a real plan to overthrow the government. Eventually, with the help of incoming Assistant Secretary of State Nuland, they succeeded – after thousands of civilians were killed.

All of the above cannot be accepted as any kind of normal. The American people can neither afford this “normalcy” financially nor morally. Empire costs trillions of dollars. The debt is skyrocketing, just a shade under $30 trillion, and growing every second. Interest payments on the wars alone will cost multiple trillions. The cost is in lost lives and liberties will be catastrophic. We are all now in the crosshairs of nuclear annihilation as well due to our government’s unprovoked aggressions. America’s new Cold Wars with Russia and China are rapidly warming. The American Empire is the most dangerous, destructive, and cruel entity in the world and we must stop its rampage.

From the genocide in Yemen, to Israel’s apartheid regime that Palestinians suffer under daily, to the myriad regime change operations, the NATO drills on Russia’s borders, the American aircraft carriers sailing in the South China Sea, the U.S. warships in the Black Sea, the B-52s flying over the Persian Gulf, etc.

Empire always comes home, which is why we are now seeing a burgeoning domestic terror war, as well as the hideous spectacle of Biden’s fascistic, taxpayer funded militarized inauguration. The wars are coming home to terrorize the Empire’s host population. At home and abroad, let us permanently break from these norms immediately.

The Prosecutors Are Coming

The Prosecutors Are Coming

The violent protest at the U.S. Capitol on January 6 has long been over, but the upcoming Biden administration’s response to it is likely to do greater violence to the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law than anything the worst of the protesters could have accomplished. Thanks to the response of the George W. Bush administration and Congress to the 9/11 attacks almost two decades ago, Joe Biden’s prosecutors will have plenty of legal ammunition to go after their political enemies. It won’t stop with prosecuting people who broke into the Capitol.

J.D. Tuccille writes:

After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, horrified Americans were ready to embrace virtually any proposal that promised to keep them safe. Government officials, for their part, were eager to curry favor with the fearful public and saw an opportunity to promote legislation and policies that had failed to win support in the past. The result was a surge of authoritarianism from which the U.S. has yet to recover. Now—with the public understandably concerned after the January 6 storming of the Capitol—we should brace ourselves for another wave of political responses that would, again, erode our liberty.

We are in very uncertain and certainly perilous waters. In the post-Trump era, Democrats want revenge and they want it now. I fear for my friends that worked in the Trump government, with Democrats calling for them to be blacklisted, harassed, and ultimately “canceled.” Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who continues to shed any perception that she wants anything less than a soft totalitarian country, has publicly called for a “media literacy” initiative that reminds one of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth.

In an interview with MSNBC (surprised?), former CIA head John Brennan declared that the Biden administration agencies

“are moving in laser-like fashion to try to uncover as much as they can about” the pro-Trump “insurgency” that harbors “religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians.”

Not surprisingly, there was zero pushback on his statement from the mainstream media, and one suspects that probably most mainstream journalists today would not mind seeing large numbers of people they dislike being hauled off to prison or just plain disappearing at the hands of the authorities.

For that matter, the Trump presidency was hardly the Libertarian Moment, and Trump gave one the sense that if he could control the flow of news, he would gladly do so. Whether or not one believes he was cheated out of office in the last election, for him to claim he “won in a landslide” and to call for official election results to be overturned can hardly leave one surprised that the DC “rally” turned into an out-and-out donnybrook.

Unfortunately, the violence that followed has given the Biden people the fig leaf they need to move against the Constitution and rule of law on many fronts—all the while claiming they are “restoring democracy.” The United States could well be at a tipping point at which whatever pretenses we had toward constitutional government are cast aside for a “pragmatic” state that addresses the so-called needs at hand and is not bound by legal niceties. For now, my guess is that Biden will unleash federal prosecutors who will face no constraints whatsoever, and that means a lot of innocent people are going to have their lives ruined.

Before going into more detail, I explain why the Bush administration nearly twenty years ago made Biden’s job much easier for him than it ever should be under the rule of law. In the early 2000s, I began to write about the abuses that accompanied the expansion of federal criminal law and published (often with Candice E. Jackson) in a number of outlets including Regulation, Reason, the Independent Review, and the Mises page. Because of what Jackson and I called the “highly derivative” nature of federal criminal law (the actual charges are compiled from actions that usually are only prosecuted under state law), it is easy for federal prosecutors to draw up a list of charges that are hard to fight, have draconian penalties, but often involve criminalizing actions that harmed no one, and certainly did not do harm that is up to standards of criminal conduct.

In the hysterical aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, Congress rushed through the PATRIOT Act (which Joe Biden claimed to have written almost single-handedly—probably an exaggeration), a law that even at the time legal experts doubted would be effective in preventing acts of political terrorism but that allowed federal prosecutors to throw other “crimes” under the umbrella of “terrorism,” thus permitting them to box in defendants and force them to plead out to lesser charges and receive substantial prison time.

At the time, civil liberties groups like the American Civil Liberties Union along with media entities such as the New York Times served at least a semieffective role in blunting the more outrageous attempts by prosecutors to expand their powers. (The NYT had not shown the same restraint during the 1980s when Rudy Giuliani abused his powers in the infamous Wall Street prosecutions, instead allowing Giuliani to break numerous federal statutes in the paper’s crusade to “fight capitalism.”)

This time, however, it is highly doubtful that either the ACLU or the media will do anything but be cheerleaders for the Biden DOJ, given that the government says it will specifically target what it sees as threats from the right, something the NYT recently praised. A couple of recent incidents regarding the media and the so-called conservative threat are instructive.

Shortly after the January 6 Capitol riots, a number of mainstream news outlets breathlessly reported that the leaders of the protests actually were planning on kidnapping and assassinating a number of political figures. Not one mainstream news outlet questioned the feds’ claims. Shortly thereafter, however, CNN (which gave the original charges massive coverage) reported that the Department of Justice was walking back its original statements.

Not to be outdone, the Associated Press on January 11 presented the specter of armed uprisings all over the country:

The FBI is warning of plans for armed protests at all 50 state capitals and in Washington, D.C., in the days leading up to President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration, stoking fears of more bloodshed after last week’s deadly siege at the U.S. Capitol.

The dispatch continues:

An internal FBI bulletin warned, as of Sunday, that the nationwide protests may start later this week and extend through Biden’s Jan. 20 inauguration, according to two law enforcement officials who read details of the memo to The Associated Press. Investigators believe some of the people are members of extremist groups, the officials said.

As we know, there were no armed uprisings, no right-wing armed mobs storming capitols and no massive protests. Now, on Inauguration Day, there was mob political violence and lots of it, but the mobs were leftist and the cities were Portland and Seattle and the national media saw little reason to publicize the protests, as they did not fit The Narrative.

Even the January 6 riots, as bad as they were, did not fall into the category of a coup, no matter what journalists and other political pundits were claiming. David French went even so far as to claim it was a “Christian insurrection” because some of the protesters said they were Christians and someone played Christian music on a loudspeaker. While it was an ugly scene nonetheless, does anyone (at least besides David French) really believe that the vast government regime known as The United States of America was in danger of being overthrown by a mob led by someone in a buffalo costume?

Yet, the same journalistic and political elites who excoriated Donald Trump for sending some agents to protect the federal courthouses in Seattle and Portland from Antifa mobs apparently had no problem with Biden dispatching thousands of federal troops to turn Washington, DC, into an armed camp. It is the same kind of overreaction that leads the media and political elites to demand that the government engage in massive surveillance of half the country.

Not all who are considered to be on the left are good with Biden’s internal spying plan, including Tulsi Gabbard, the former member of Congress who angered fellow Democrats with her appeals to civil liberties during her appearance in the presidential primary last year. National Review reports:

“What characteristics are we looking for as we are building this profile of a potential extremist, what are we talking about? Religious extremists, are we talking about Christians, evangelical Christians, what is a religious extremist? Is it somebody who is pro-life? Where do you take this?” Gabbard said.

She said the proposed legislation could create “a very dangerous undermining of our civil liberties, our freedoms in our Constitution, and a targeting of almost half of the country.”

“You start looking at obviously, have to be a white person, obviously likely male, libertarians, anyone who loves freedom, liberty, maybe has an American flag outside their house, or people who, you know, attended a Trump rally,” Gabbard said.

Even more eye-opening is the missive that the hard-left publication Jacobin has launched against this round of surveillance. Now, the publication that is openly nostalgic about the former East Germany hardly is going to champion civil liberties or even basic freedoms, but the people there are politically astute enough to know that a government with vast surveillance powers isn’t going to stop at going after political conservatives:

However such legislation may be justified with liberal-sounding language, there’s absolutely no reason to believe authorities wouldn’t use new powers to target groups that have nothing to do with Donald Trump or Trumpism. Police almost certainly infiltrated Black Lives Matter protests last summer, and American law enforcement has a long and ignominious history of targeting progressive groups—not to mention socialists, trade unions, and civil rights activists. As this history suggests, the premise behind any new anti-terrorism law will also be wrong on its face: the American state hardly faces excessive restrictions on its capacity to surveil, discipline, and punish. (The FBI, to take an obvious example, already possesses considerable power to investigate groups suspected of extremist activity.)

The problem is that the traditional gatekeepers of civil liberties that we once had in the media and in political and academic circles has disappeared into the maw of political tribalism. Matt Taibbi, a former writer for Rolling Stone and now an independent journalist, sees mainstream journalism as little more than an echo chamber for progressive politicians in which journalists seem to pretend they are players in a version of The West Wing:

West Wing was General Hospital for rich white liberals, a seven-season love letter to the enlightened attitudes of the Bobo-in-Paradise demographic. If that’s the self-image of the national press, it’s no wonder they make people want to vomit. The coverage of Biden’s inauguration, another celebration of those attitudes, was an almost perfect mathematical inverse of late-stage Trump reporting, a monument to groveling sycophancy.

John Heileman at MSNBC compared Biden’s speech to Abe Lincoln’s second inaugural, and suggested that the sight of “the Clintons, the Bushes, and the Obamas” gathered for the event was like “the Marvel superheroes all back in one place” (this was not the first post-election Avengers comparison to be heard on cable). Rachel Maddow talked about going through “half a box of Kleenex” as she watched the proceedings. Chris Wallace on Fox said Biden’s lumbering speech was “the best inaugural address I ever heard,” John Kennedy’s “Ask Not” speech included. The joyful tone was set the night before by CNN’s David Challen, who said lights along the Washington Mall were like “extensions of Joe Biden’s arms embracing America.”

Journalists who are going to claim that a bunch of lights in paper bags symbolize a Joe Biden group hug are not going to be intellectually or professionally capable of taking a hard look at the government’s attempt to arrest and imprison political and religious conservatives and libertarians, since they already have convinced themselves that these people constitute a dire threat to what is left of the republic. They more likely will serve as the publicity arm for the DOJ—as long as prosecutors stick to going after men in buffalo suits waving Trump flags.

To be depressingly honest, the only barrier to the Biden administration’s launching of an American version of the Stasi against dissenters on the right would be the individual consciences of those in charge of the spying and making arrests. Much of the Democratic Party and most of mainstream journalists seem to have no problem with criminalizing speech and launching a regime of mass arrest and imprisonment.

As I see it, we no longer are looking at threats to our liberty in the abstract. For years, I have launched missive after missive at federal (and sometimes state) prosecutors and not feared for my own safety and liberty, save a few death threats I received when I aggressively wrote against Michael Nifong, the dishonest prosecutor in the infamous Duke Lacrosse Case, and I didn’t take those seriously.

This situation is different because those who were the gatekeepers of liberty now have decided that liberty itself is a threat to our well-being. When the New York Times comes out against free speech and when journalists call for the power of the state to be used against other journalists they don’t like, we have turned the corner and are headed for the abyss.

No, I don’t expect to be hauled off to a concentration camp because I have written articles critical of federal prosecutors, but this country now is building a critical mass of journalists, college professors and administrators, and political figures that well might see concentration camps and other “reeducation” devices as being legitimate political tools. We are not as far away from such a dystopian future as one might think.

Federal criminal law provides these antiliberty groups the kinds of devices that can be used to criminalize speech and turn garden-variety dissenters into criminals. We should not be surprised if ambitious US attorneys in the Biden administration, cheered on by the likes of the New York Times and MSNBC, decide it is time to do just that.

This article was originally featured at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and is republished with permission.

Tulsi Gabbard: Don’t Bring the ‘War on Terror’ Home

Tulsi Gabbard: Don’t Bring the ‘War on Terror’ Home

The January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol shocked the nation. Now, as so often occurs in the wake of tragedy, some Washington politicians are using the opportunity to push for an expansion of their power—hoping Americans are too shell-shocked to object.

A bipartisan group in Congress has introduced the so-called “Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act Of 2021.” It would expand the surveillance and police powers of the national security state in the name of combatting dangerous extremism.

“America must be vigilant to combat those radicalized to violence, and the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act gives our government the tools to identify, monitor and thwart their illegal activities,” Congressman Brad Schneider, one of the bill’s lead sponsors, said. “Combatting the threat of domestic terrorism and white supremacy is not a Democratic or Republican issue, not left versus right or urban versus rural. Domestic Terrorism is an American issue, a serious threat that we can and must address together.”

We all surely agree that true domestic terrorism is reprehensible. But many progressive lawmakers are speaking out against the hasty push to expand government power and warning of the threat it poses to civil liberties. They warn these powers will undoubtedly be used against many more people and disfavored groups than just violent radicals like those who attacked the Capitol.

Former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, a progressive Democrat, called this push “so dangerous” in a Fox News interview.

“We don’t have to guess about where this goes or where it ends,” Gabbard argues, “When you have people like former CIA Director John Brennan openly talking about how he’s spoken with appointees and nominees in the Biden administration who are already starting to look across our country for these types of movements… that in his words make up this ‘unholy alliance’ of ‘religious extremists,’ ‘racists,’ ‘bigots’ … even ‘libertarians.’”

“So, when you look at their process as they’re building this profile of a potential ‘extremist,’ what are we talking about?” she asked. “Are we talking about evangelical Christians? Somebody who is pro-life? Libertarians? People who attended a Trump rally?”

“[This would] lead to a very dangerous undermining of our civil liberties… and a targeting of almost half the country,” Gabbard concluded.

The concern is that government powers authorized ostensibly for use against “domestic terrorists” would wind up being wielded against much broader swaths of society.

letter signed by 10 progressive House Democrats, including Representatives Rashida Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, and Ro Khanna, calls on leadership to “reject reactionary demands to further erode the rights and liberties of the American people.”

“History is littered with examples of initiatives sold as being necessary to fight extremism that quickly devolve into tools used for the mass violation of the human and civil rights of the American people,” the letter warns.

There is simply no need to expand the government’s police powers. According to New York University’s law school, “existing statutes have long provided substantial authority for the federal government to investigate and prosecute acts of domestic terrorism.”

Indeed, at least 150 people have been charged with crimes related to the attack on the Capitol. The government already has vast powers to surveil, pursue, and prosecute Americans who commit crimes or plot violence. After all, law enforcement already knew from intelligence that the planned demonstration at the Capitol could turn violent. Their failure to adequately prepare for it was not due to a lack of information or authority.

Some might wonder, well, how could it hurt to give them more tools? Better safe than sorry, right?

This is an understandable impulse but deeply naive as a permanent conclusion. There’s good reason to think that “domestic terrorism” government powers would wind up targeting many Americans—because we’ve seen the same dynamic play out before, time and time again.

Passed in the wake of the tragic 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Patriot Act gave the federal government enormous surveillance powers.

For example, it authorized “sneak and peek” searches, allowing government officials to search someone’s home or office, take pictures, and even sometimes confiscate property, yet only inform them after-the-fact. According to the ACLU, 76 percent of sneak-and-peak searches have occurred in drug enforcement cases, with less than 1 percent actually happening in terrorism-related-cases.

The Patriot Act also created a new pathway for FBI agents to access Americans’ personal information, such as phone records, computer records, credit history, and banking information. Per the ACLU, of the 192,500 such records examinations the FBI made from 2003 to 2006, only one led to a terrorism conviction. (And the ACLU says that conviction would have been obtained without Patriot Act.)

All of this doesn’t even touch on the way post-Patriot-Act mass surveillance caught up millions of innocent Americans, as exposed by National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden.

There’s plenty of precedent that suggests these abuses can be explicitly political, too.

“Government agencies—including the FBI and the Department of Defense—have conducted their own spying on innocent and law-abiding Americans,” the ACLU reports. “Through the Freedom of Information Act, the ACLU learned the FBI had been consistently monitoring peaceful groups such Quakers, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Greenpeace, the Arab American Anti-Defamation Committee and, indeed, the ACLU itself.”

We might give the government vast new powers to fight “domestic terrorism.” But it’s inevitable that these same powers will eventually be used against millions of Americans who have nothing to do with such extremism.

There’s a lesson here that extends beyond the specific debate over surveillance powers and the War on Terror. In times of crisis and emergency, enterprising politicians will always seek to exploit the situation to expand their own power. Too often, scared citizens go along with these power grabs.

This is the danger economist Robert Higgs identified in his seminal work Crisis and Leviathan as “the Ratchet Effect.”

Higgs showed how throughout history, crises have been used to excuse government power grabs. After each crisis, the government lets go of some of the power, but never all of it. As a result, the federal government’s power (the Leviathan) has “ratcheted up,” crisis after crisis, throughout the last hundred years.

Progressives, conservatives, and libertarians alike must stand firm against the latest push to infringe on civil liberties in the name of combating “domestic terror.” Otherwise, sweeping powers granted amid crisis will undoubtedly be used against millions of Americans who did nothing wrong on January 6.

This article was originally featured at the Foundation for Economic Education and is republished with permission.

How George Washington Responded to ‘Insurrectionists’

How George Washington Responded to ‘Insurrectionists’

The recent protests and storming of the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6 produced a hysterical reaction from both pundits and the federal government. This contrasts wildly with the response to an actual rebellion during the Republic’s early days.

The new federal government didn’t respond to the so-called Whiskey Rebellion with crackdowns on civil liberties to “prevent another rebellion” as many seem to want to do today.

In 1794 Kentucky and Pennsylvania farmers took up arms in opposition to a federal whiskey excise tax. The Whiskey Rebellion concluded with President George Washington calling up the militia to suppress the rebels, who dispersed before any real fighting occurred.

Interpretations of the rebellion vary. Some view Washington’s decision as a vital move to preserve the then-fledgling federal government’s legitimacy after Shay’s Rebellion eight years prior had prompted the founders to replace the Articles of Confederation in favor of a stronger central government. However, others consider the rebels as patriots resisting an unjust tax on whiskey, which was frequently used as a means of exchange in frontier areas where coinage was scarce.

To be sure, Washington reacted initially in a manner utterly restrained compared to what we could expect today. Even after invoking the Militia Act of 1792 allowing him to call up state militiamen, he sent state officials to the rebels and tried to reach a peaceful resolution, without success.

However, a separate issue to look at is the aftermath of the rebellion. Roughly 150 men were arrested and tried for treason. Yet only two men were found guilty, and they were later pardoned by Washington himself.

In his seventh state of the union address Washington defended his decision:

For though I shall always think it a sacred duty to exercise with firmness and energy the constitutional powers with which I am vested, yet it appears to me no less consistent with the public good than it is with my personal feelings to mingle in the operations of Government every degree of moderation and tenderness which the national justice, dignity, and safety may permit.

As historian Carol Berkin noted in a 2017 lecture, “not a single person really ever served a jail term. Everybody was given amnesty. Nobody was cruelly beaten or destroyed. But the power, the authority of the federal government was upheld.”

Perhaps Washington and other Founders holding office realized the appearance of hypocrisy for condemning men as traitors who acted as they had just a few decades earlier.

At the same time, it’s not so much what Washington and Congress did as what they didn’t do or even propose to do. Reading through diaries, letters, and correspondence from founders ranging from George Washington and Alexander Hamilton to Thomas Jefferson written during the rebellion, there is no instance I could find in which they advocated or suggested the civil rights restrictions such as firearms ownership or freedom of speech and assembly. There was no call for a permanent standing army. This is on top of the fact that nothing was actually proposed and then enacted.

In fact, Jefferson wrote sympathetically of the rebellion in a Dec. 28, 1794 letter to John Adams, calling the whiskey tax “an infernal one. The first error was to admit it by the Constitution.”

He wrote further that hatred of the law in those states was “universal, and has now associated to it a detestation of the government; & that separation which perhaps was a very distant & problematical event, is now near, & certain, & determined in the mind of every man.”

Not surprisingly, Jefferson would later repeal the excise tax when elected president.

Even federalists like Alexander Hamilton in ways sought to avoid violence that might have demonstrated the power of the new government, albeit he did advocate hanging some of the rebel leaders. In an Aug. 29, 1794 letter to Maryland Governor Thomas Lee, he wrote of avoiding “the necessity of using force now & at future periods” by keeping the militia deployed in good morale.

In all the correspondence Hamilton had with George Washington, not one advocated for the confiscation of firearms from the regions where the rebellion had occurred. Nor was there a call to restrict firearm ownership of any type among the general population to prevent similar rebellions in the future. The federal government didn’t use the “crisis” as an excuse to enlarge itself, as some sought with the Alien and Sedition Act passed four years later

While Washington’s best opportunity to make himself a military dictator occurred just after the War of Independence ended with him still in charge of the continental army, the Whiskey Rebellion theoretically could have afforded him another chance – one that he likely never even contemplated.

The comparatively restrained response by Washington to the rebellion demonstrated that it is not necessary to take away liberties to maintain civil order or “keep us safe.”

Writing in reaction to Shay’s Rebellion, Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to James Madison saying rebellions were a “medecine necessary for the sound health of government” and that “honest republican governors” should be “so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much.”

What many people fail to grasp is that rebellions and insurrections aren’t always found in physical confrontations, and the “medicine necessary for the sound health of government” can be applied just as effectively through the nullification of unconstitutional federal acts. Incidentally, Jefferson referred to nullification as the “rightful remedy.”

The histrionic and totalitarian rhetoric coming from the federal government today over a handful of people storming the U.S. Capitol demonstrates how fragile its perceived legitimacy is today. It is a government that overreacts to minor incidents because deep down its members are terrified of any meaningful defiance or resistance to their rule.

They realize how easily D.C. tyranny could end if the American people were united in common opposition to unconstitutional actions in a manner that reduced their power, rather than give the largest government in the world the further pretext to expand it.

This article was originally featured at the Tenth Amendment Center and is republished with permission.

Meet Rachel Levine, President Biden’s Disastrous Response to COVID

Meet Rachel Levine, President Biden’s Disastrous Response to COVID

On January 19 it was announced that Joe Biden planned to nominate Rachel Levine, the Pennsylvania (PA) secretary of health, for the position of assistant secretary of health in the Department of Health and Human Services. This is potentially good news for Pennsylvanians, who will finally be rid of her after having had to endure her disastrous covid lockdowns and restrictions for nearly a year, but is likely bad news for the rest of the country.

News coverage of Levine’s nomination is focused almost entirely on the fact that if she is confirmed she will be the first transgender official to be confirmed by the Senate and barely mentions or completely glosses over her handling of the pandemic in PA. NPR doesn’t mention her track record at all other than noting that she, unsurprisingly, called for more federal funding to deal with the virus. The Morning Call at least reported that Levine has faced criticism over her handling of the virus response but failed to mention that under Levine PA nursing homes were forced to accept covid-positive patients.

After the announcement of her forthcoming nomination, Republicans began to attack Levine on social media, especially concerning her nursing home policy. In response, Newsweek published a laughable excuse of a “fact check,” asserting, “There is no evidence to support Greene’s [a Republican representative from Georgia] claim that Levine placed coronavirus-positive patients in nursing home facilities, thus likely contributing ‘to the thousands of elderly deaths in Pennsylvania.’”

However, the author, Julia Marnin, seems to have failed to adequately research PA Department of Health guidelines. She cites a guideline issued in March of 2020 that states that nursing homes “must continue to accept new admissions and receive readmissions for current residents who have been discharged from the hospital who are stable,” and that “This may include stable patients who have had the COVID-19 virus.” Marnin then argues that this language didn’t mean that nursing homes had to accept positive patients but that “they can” and that there is no evidence that Levine’s policy “placed coronavirus-positive patients in nursing homes or contributed to thousands of elderly deaths in the state.”

This absurd claim completely falls apart, since later Pennsylvania Health Department guidelines make it explicitly clear that nursing homes must readmit covid-positive patients and continue to accept new ones even if they are covid positive, as well. Guidance issued on May 12, 2020, states that “A positive test result is not a reason to refuse readmission to a resident” and that “An NCF [nursing care facility] must continue to take new admissions, if appropriate beds are available, and a suspected or confirmed positive for COVID-19 is not a reason to deny admission.”

Until the late fall/early winter surge in cases and deaths, roughly 70 percent of all covid fatalities in Pennsylvania were among nursing home and long-term care facility patients. Since the latest surge, that number has dropped to roughly 50 percent. Yet, even with the latest drop, it is clear that the state government’s nursing home policy has been a disaster, and the media does a great disservice to the country by sweeping a discussion of that record under the rug.

Perhaps even more disturbing than forcing nursing homes to accept covid-positive patients is Levine’s policy goal of social justice–based rationing of covid treatments that was released by the PA Department of Health under Levine’s leadership.

As I have written about previously, this guidance, entitled “Ethical Allocation Framework for Emerging Treatments of COVID-19,” states that “a core goal of public health is to redress inequities that make health and safety less accessible to disadvantaged groups—we show equal respect for all members of society by mitigating the structural inequities that cause certain communities to bear the greatest burden during the pandemic.” In other words, according to Levine’s department of health, public health isn’t just about medical health issues, it is about using the response to medical health issues to engineer society to promote “social justice.”

In this scheme, the state recommends that healthcare providers use a weighted lottery system to ration care and encourages hospitals to weigh a patient’s entry based on his or her socioeconomic status as determined by old data aggregated from census blocks. You would think that promoting “equality” would mean that whether you receive life-saving medical treatment wouldn’t depend on where you live, but some patients are apparently more equal than others.

The fact that someone who apparently subscribes to such a radical egalitarian agenda is likely to soon be one of the most powerful healthcare bureaucrats in the country does not bode well, as calls for the federal government to nationalize healthcare continue unabated. Levine’s radicalism, combined with the incompetence she displayed by forcing nursing homes to accept covid-positive patients and other heavy-handed lockdown measures, will hopefully at least lead to a serious analysis of her record during her Senate confirmation hearing. But don’t hold your breath.

This article was originally featured at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and is republished with permission.

News Roundup

News Roundup 2/25/21

US News YouTube removed a Consortium News video that covered election suppression in the Georgia Senate runoff. [Link] Facebook plans to invest $1 billion in the news industry over the next three years. Facebook invested $600 million in the industry since 2018. [Link]...

Blog

Tom Woods’ Show

The great Tom Woods had me on for another Scott Horton Week on his show to talk about the new book. War's Roots Iraq War II Syria War All the Time Iran's nuclear program

Cop Kills Man

Father of tiny helpless children gets in a car wreck, calls 911, cop murders him to death so now he can never be there to protect his family. Cop wins "Officer of the Year" award.

The Scott Horton Show

Free Man Beyond the Wall

Conflicts of Interest

Don't Tread on Anyone

Liberty Weekly Podcast

How 2021 Could Be Better Ep. 149 ft. Jose Galison

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2oCgFf2cLs&feature=youtu.be I joined Jose Galison on "No Way Jose" to finish up a belated recap of 2020. We discuss the 2020 campaign trail, allegations of election fraud, Hunter Biden, internet censorship, "trusting the experts,"...

Year Zero

Reporting The Revolution w/Erik Sawyer

Erik Sawyer, formerly of the Revolution Report, joined Tommy to discuss current events, culture, and the Libertarian Party. They cover r/wallstreetbets, Doug Mackey, identity politics, the multi-front war against the cathedral, and how the culture of the LP has been...

Techno-tyranny And Subversive Technologies w/Ryan Bunting

I asked Ryan to join me on the show once again. We wanted to chat about the tech tyranny and subversive technology that helps to keep your information safe, secure, and uncensored. ryanbunting.com for any of your graphic design needs Paypal.me/tommysalmons...

Ideology And The Death Of Nations w/Coop

Tommy invited Coop onto the show to discuss the parallels between modern culture, relativity, objectivism, and how nations enter the period of their ultimate demise. https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/strangerencounterspodcast/coopfinal.mp3

Red, White, and Clear; An Interview With Me

Last Friday Mike Korbel asked me to be a guest on his podcast, The Invictus Mind. I’ve known Mike a few years and happily agreed to appear. We have a laid back informal chat about the growing technocratic state and how people may find avenues to free themselves from...

Our Books

Shop books published by the Libertarian Institute.

Libertarian Institute Merch from Libertas Bella

Support via Amazon Smile

Enoughalreadyproof

Enough Already: Time to End the War on Terrorism

by Scott Horton

Book Foolssm

No Quarter: The Ravings of William Norman Grigg

by Will Grigg

Book Foolssm

Fool’s Errand: Time to End the War in Afghanistan

by Scott Horton

Book Foolssm

Coming to Palestine

by Sheldon Richman

Book Foolssm

The Great Ron Paul

by Scott Horton

Book Foolssm

What Social Animals Owe to Each Other

by Sheldon Richman

Pin It on Pinterest