Behind Biden’s Domestic Terrorism Rhetoric By Charles Taylor (Florida)
Brandon Smith has given a precise analysis of Beijing Biden’s domestic terrorist rhetoric. It is an ideological device based upon Big Lies, to declare war upon his political opponents. It is about time Trumpers realised that they face cultural and physical extinction. What does it take for conservatives to move ? Are they so sleepy to conserve energy ? For what purpose ? And, why did Word indicsate that every single word just typed, was an error ?
“The federal government is a kind of self-perpetuating blob; a cannibalistic creature that must continue to feed on the public and the systems around it in order to survive, but it also must create reasons for its existence so that it may go on feeding uninterrupted. Now, don’t get me wrong – I realize that the apparatus in Washington DC is nothing more than a tool for the power elite to grow their scope of control as well as grow their wealth. That said, without a large federal government the establishment oligarchy would have no ability to project the force they need to compel the population to comply with their agenda.
There are only two real mandates for the government, only two reasons for its existence in our republic: To secure America’s borders from invasion and to protect the freedoms of the citizenry. That’s it. It is not the job of the government to compel you to take an experimental and questionable covid vaccine over a virus that 99.7% of people will easily survive. It is not the job of the government to create artificial “social equity” by favoring one group or ethnicity over another. It is not the job of the government to spy on millions of Americans because they do not agree with the leftist ideology. It is not the job of government to make war on the very people it is mandated to protect.
Yet, this is exactly what the government is doing today while its totalitarianism is disguised as “humanitarianism”. In other words, they are essentially arguing that they must make war on the people in order to protect the people from themselves.
One of Joe Biden’s first actions upon entering the White House was to initiate a 100 day review of the government’s domestic terrorism policies, and I think this says a lot about what path his presidency is bound to follow. Yes, the media continually argues that the Capitol protest on Jan 6th was a vast conspiracy on the part of conservatives to “overthrow” the democratic process and commit insurrection. In fact, all it really amounted to was a large protest which was less violent than the majority of Black Lives Matter protests across the nation over the past year.
The media also incessantly mentions the five deaths that occurred on the day of the protest while continuing to ignore the fact that NOT ONE of those deaths has been attributed to the direct actions of protesters, and at least three of the deaths were due to natural causes.
Why does the mainstream media keep lying by omission? Because they have to keep the narrative alive that the capitol protest is a sign of some underlying conservative “evil” that must be contained or destroyed. We don’t really give them much to work with, so they have to create reasons out of thin air to convince people to hate us.
Biden’s review of domestic terrorist policy was finally released last month and the propaganda has been building ever since. It has now culminated in Big Tech conglomerates like Facebook calling for people to report family and friends that might be exhibiting “signs of extremism”. This is the Soviet Cheka or the East German Stasi all over again.
Two of the administration’s primary findings in their report included the assertion that domestic threats are “motivated by racism and white supremacy”, and that they are driven by anti-authority. For many this might sound like bizarro world.
What the hell does racism have to do with the capitol protests or anything else that conservatives have been fighting for the past year? Biden is a white guy, after all, so protesting his entry into the White House is hardly race motivated. And, if you ask the majority of patriots why they are angry you will find that most of them have grown tired of the pandemic restrictions and medical tyranny, which they know will only continue to get worse under Biden. Is this viewpoint “anti-authority”, or just anti-authoritarianism?
Keep in mind that these days almost anything can be labeled racist or extremist. The interpretation is wide open and arbitrary. This is how informant culture works. Anyone can be a target for any reason and one is treated as guilty until proven innocent.
Obviously Biden and his handlers are not concerned with what is ACTUALLY causing Americans to rebel by the millions. They already know that THEY are the real cause, along with their attempts to undermine American civil liberties. What this is really about is gaslighting.
Yes, that classic strategy used by narcissists and psychopaths; the method an abuser uses to make his victims think they deserve the treatment they are getting. The establishment takes away your freedoms and abuses your rights, then if you react to defend yourself they call you a racist and a terrorist. It’s a tried and true maneuver.
First, I would point out that the racism issue is irrelevant at its core. No one except crazed social justice warriors thinks that institutional racism is a legitimate issue in America in 2021. There’s no proof whatsoever to support the incoherent ramblings of critical race theorists. By extension, it’s also not illegal to be a bigot. In America, you are welcome to dislike any group of people you want and the government cannot punish you for it. There is no such thing as “hate speech”, there is only speech which some people hate.
This is a strategy by leftists to create a weakness in the armor of free speech laws and grind them down. If they can regulate some speech, they can eventually regulate ALL speech. Biden is merely acting as a conduit for the critical race theory agenda, and he is attaching it to every single policy in the hopes that it will stick somewhere.
Second, let’s all be honest and acknowledge who the real target of Biden’s domestic terrorism policies is: Conservatives in general. And, it’s not just because of the capitol protests.
Here is my concern: Whenever psychopathic regimes are about to pursue an egregious action that will degrade freedoms and enrage the public, they have a tendency to preemptively demonize (and often disarm) the people they are about to abuse. To put it another way, Biden is obsessed with attacking conservatives as “racists” and “extremists” not because of what we have done (we haven’t done anything), but because of what we are ABOUT TO DO.
And how does Biden know what we are going to do in the future? He knows because he is going to take actions that he and his handlers know will piss us off. Biden is clearly planning to enforce more policies which will directly violate the constitutional rights of Americans and he is preparing in advance for the fallout by making it appear as if conservatives and patriots are the aggressors.
As I have noted in previous articles, this is the common mantra of the tyrants:
“Those that disagree with me are wrong because I will never allow them to prove they are right. Those that defend themselves against my attacks are evil because if they fight back they might harm me. Those that demand the truth do not understand how important my lies are to the stability of the world I have built for them. Why would I engage in battle when I can get others to fight my battles for me? When people are free, it means they are free to criticize or ignore me, so I must take away their freedom, so that they are made to revere me and recognize my importance. Morals are relative and principles are for suckers. The ends justify the means, and the greater good of the greater number is paramount – And as long as I am the one that determines what the definition of the “greater good” is, then I am the one that controls everything else.”
It is hard to say what Biden is about to do that requires so much preemptive demonization of liberty minded people. Forced vaccinations and vaccine passports are a hard line in the sand for the majority of conservatives, and we simply won’t allow such policies to remain. We will fight if we have to in order to stop them.
Disenfranchisement of conservatives from the economy or from the internet is another line that we will not back away from. The leftist mob is already attempting to make it acceptable to “cancel” conservatives on social media simply for being conservative, and by extension they are also seeking to normalize the punishment of conservatives for their views by threatening them with joblessness. This sort of ideological cleansing of America is not going to end well. Eventually, yes, conservatives will go to war over this because if we don’t our values of freedom, individualism, voluntarism and meritocracy will be erased from the public square and there will be no meaningful future for generations not yet born.
New gun control measures and gun bans are not going to fly, either. There is no chance that conservatives will comply with a Biden gun control plan, red flag gun laws, gun buybacks, etc. It’s not going to happen. Biden and the establishment knows this, so perhaps gun confiscation is next on the agenda?
Finally, it is possible that the establishment will go for broke during the next crisis event and Biden will seek to implement martial law. It might be an economic crash or a crash of the dollar. It might be a major cyberattack (look up the World Economic Forum’s “Cyberpolygon” event happening this week). It might be a new “variant” of covid that they use as an excuse to bring back nationwide lockdowns. Whatever the case may be, any attempt at martial law by Biden will be met with immediate and explosive resistance from conservatives, and frankly, I doubt that the Biden Admin would survive the duration.
So, yes, in a way Biden is right. The biggest threat to the system today is a domestic conflict, IF the system intends to attack the citizenry and their liberties. That said, the establishment is not sacrosanct, and when a government violates the rights of the people the people have a duty to overthrow it. We would only be “terrorists” in the eyes of the people who started the conflict to begin with.
At this point we have to ask ourselves, “Who does the federal government actually represent when they do these things?” Do they represent us? Or do they represent special interests, such as globalists and career Marxists? Are they tearing away our freedoms at record pace for our benefit, or the benefit of people with malicious intentions? If they are acting in the interests of evil people, then isn’t rebellion inevitable? And who is to blame for that inevitable conflagration? Them, or us?”
Relevant to this theme of an on-going war against conservatives is the murder of Ashli Babbitt, the unarmed ex-service woman, executed in the Capitol building on January 6, as a lesson to Trumpers. Only after the departure of Emperor Jared, has Trump said her name. Here is some information updating this crime.
“Most police departments — including Washington, D.C.’s Metropolitan Police — are required to release an officer’s name within days of a fatal shooting. Not the U.S. Capitol Police, which is controlled by Congress and answers only to Congress. It can keep the public in the dark about the identity and investigation of an officer involved in a shooting indefinitely.
Which is what happened with the Jan. 6 shooting of Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed protester in the U.S. Capitol riot who was fatally wounded by a plainclothes police lieutenant as she attempted to breach a set of doors inside the building.
... and then shooting, hitting Babbitt, above, as she tried to climb through a smashed window, Trump flag on her back. The fatal gunshot blew her backward.
For the past six months, as Congress has proposed legislation to reform police departments across the country, the Capitol Police has stiff-armed government watchdogs, journalists and even lawyers for Babbitt, who have sought the identity of the officer and additional details about the shooting. The USCP still refuses to release his name, in stark contrast to recent high-profile police shootings around the nation.
In February, USCP issued a press release promising to “share additional information once the investigation is complete.” But Justice Department investigators closed their probe in April, clearing the officer of criminal wrongdoing in Babbitt’s death, which the medical examiner ruled a homicide. And last month, the D.C. Police — which shares jurisdiction with the Capitol Police and has led the investigation into Babbitt’s shooting — concluded its own internal review of the shooting without making any findings, according to spokeswoman Kristen Metzger.Still, USCP continues “stonewalling the public," according to the head of the police union.
“That’s my department’s attorneys for you,” United States Capitol Police Labor Committee Chairman Gus Papathanasiou told RealClearInvestigations. “There is definitely a transparency issue. The department needs to answer those questions. They are stonewalling the public.”
Withholding the name of the officer who fired the fatal shot — the only round fired by anyone during the four-hour siege — has bred speculation on the Internet and led to the mistaken identification of at least one officer. USCP Special Agent David Bailey was wrongly fingered as the shooter on social media and conservative news sites.
After RCI called attention to the false rumor in an email to USCP, followed by a story on the issue, USCP's communications chief officially knocked it down as “misinformation.”
Lt. Byrd was investigated for leaving his department-issued Glock-22 firearm unattended in a Capitol restroom. A Glock-22 was used in the Babbitt shooting.
Now a new name has surfaced in the Babbitt imbroglio — Lt. Michael L. Byrd — and while USCP Communications Director Eva Malecki won’t confirm he is the shooter, in this case she isn’t denying it.
In a little-noticed exchange, Byrd was cited by the acting House sergeant at arms during a brief discussion of the officer who shot Babbitt at a Feb. 25 House hearing. Both C-SPAN and CNN removed his name from transcripts, but CQ Transcripts — which, according to its website, provides “the complete word from Capitol Hill; exactly as it was spoken” — recorded the Capitol official, Timothy Blodgett, referring to the cop as “Officer Byrd.” His name is clearly audible in the videotape of the hearing (see video embed further below).
Byrd appears to match the description of the shooter, who video footage shows is an African American dressed that day in a business suit. Jewelry, including a beaded bracelet and lapel pin, also match up with photos of Byrd.
In addition, Byrd’s resume lines up with what is known about the experience and position of the officer involved in the shooting — a veteran USCP officer who holds the rank of lieutenant and is the commander of the House Chamber Section of the Capitol Police.
Following the shooting, Byrd’s Internet footprint was scrubbed, including his social media and personal photos.
“Officer Byrd” is named in a videotape of House testimony (around 39:20).
Phone calls and emails to Byrd, who lives in Maryland where he remains on paid administrative leave, went unanswered. His attorney would neither confirm nor deny that the 53-year-old Byrd is the shooter, and warned that disclosing his name poses a safety risk to the officer.
The Babbitt family is frustrated USCP won’t release any information about the incident other than the terse and vaguely written statement it issued on Jan. 7: “[A] sworn USCP employee discharged their service weapon, striking an adult female.”
Because Congress has exempted the USCP from Freedom of Information Act requests, the family is suing the D.C. Police “for documents that identify the officer who shot Babbitt ... as well as notes and summaries of what the officer said regarding the shooting and the reasons he discharged his weapon.” (The D.C. Police has led the investigation into Babbitt’s shooting.) A hearing before a judge is scheduled for Sept. 3. Washington-based watchdog Judicial Watch also is suing for the records.
“They sit back and they completely refuse to release the name of their own police officer that was involved in a shooting of an unarmed woman,” said Ashli Babbitt’s husband, Aaron. "It’s ridiculous, it’s absolutely ridiculous.”
Babbitt has hired a Maryland lawyer specializing in police-abuse cases who plans to file a wrongful-death lawsuit against USCP and the officer, seeking at least $10 million in damages.
The attorney, Terry Roberts, said he has received no information from USCP about the case, even though he contacted the department's general counsel in May. But he said an investigator in his office has positively identified the shooter from a “painstaking” analysis of photos and videos taken by journalists and witnesses inside the Capitol, as well as from tips from citizens and other information.
He said a key witness is Taylor Hansen, a freelance journalist who films protests around the country and was outside the Speaker’s Lobby with Babbitt, a 35-year-old Air Force veteran, when she was shot. Hansen claims to have identified Byrd as the officer who opened fired on Babbitt, striking her in the lower left shoulder.
"Hansen was present when Ashli was shot,” Roberts told RCI. "He has spoken with my investigator. He provided a reliable and accurate account of what he saw; he also made a video recording, which proved useful."
Roberts said he is not ready to name the officer as a defendant in the lawsuit until he meets federal regulations for filing personal-injury claims against government agencies and employees, which could take several more weeks. However, he told RCI, “He’s a guy who left his service revolver in a bathroom.”
I hope that the Babbitt family clean them out.
Comments