Gen Xππ»πΊπΈLONG MAGA/MAHAπΊπΈHusband, Father, Software & Process Engineer, Entrepreneur, Mattress Tag Remover, Spoiler Alertist. I block all psychopaths.
Orange County, CA
Joined September 2009
- Tweets28.1K
- Following851
- Followers2.2K
- Likes74.8K
Pinned Tweet
Just a reminder, Websterβs and other dictionaries have changed the definition of βfascismβ to match the Allies of WW II.
The historically-accurate definition (from an older hard copy of Websterβs) below. Looking up current definitions is left as an exercise for the reader.
πΈπππ βπ π§πππ€ retweeted
Kudos to the ladies out there who know for sure you didn't marry your brother.
And now you understand why they want top-down public health enforcement.
Anti-ICE βactivistsβ in San Antonio are organizing a protest outside the American Public Health Associationβs annual meeting on November 1.
Their flyer calls ICE enforcement a βpublic health crisisβ and demands the closure of EVERY detention center nationwide.
The rally is scheduled for noon outside the Henry B. GonzΓ‘lez Convention Center.
We'll see how this plays out. My money is on the state charging admission.
apnews.com/article/oregon-waβ¦
Let's be clear here. By 'democratically illegitimate' they mean to substitute their authority for the authority of all three branches of the government -AND- The Constitution of The United States.
This is not even real⦠a group of retired admirals, ex-USAID bureaucrats and professional protest organizers got caught on their own recordings working out the conditions under which they get to declare the government of the United States illegitimate, and somehow we are supposed to believe they are the ones protecting democracy.
Here is what @DataRepublican put out in Part 2 of the Democracy Files. The videos come from a group called Renew to Thrive, with Danielle Reiff and Paul Zeitz in key roles, and it sits inside a much bigger umbrella called the United Democracy Alliance, which she describes as the hush-hush control room for groups like 50501 and Indivisible, deciding when protests get deployed, the timelines and how to respond. National Security Leaders for America, 1,600 former military, intelligence and diplomatic officials led by retired Rear Admiral Michael E. Smith, is credited with operationalizing the whole thing. On tape they lay out a list of "redlines," and invoking the Insurrection Act against "peaceful" protesters is one of the most discussed⦠and as she lays it out, they shopped the idea around to governors who don't even have to sign anything, all a governor has to do is refuse federal troops and let the network do the rest.
Make no mistake about who Mike Smith is. His own organization's bio says he founded and led National Security Leaders for Biden, more than 1,100 members with an endorsement letter signed by 780 of them, and now he runs a "non partisan" group that just cares so deeply about the oath. But hey⦠I am sure it is totally nonpartisan this time.
And the very same morning the Washington Post runs a story about a small group of current and former Defense Department officials quietly advising governors, election officials and lawmakers in 10 states on how to prepare for the Trump administration "interfering" in the midterms, rehearsing what to do if a federal agent asks for access to ballots or machines. Different names, same message⦠the elected federal government is the threat, and the people who run the elections are the ones who need protecting from it.
Let me put it to you like this. They are building the excuse before the event even happens. They coordinate the protests, they decide in advance which government response crosses their line, and then they hold that response up as proof the whole government is illegitimate and the governors should take over. How exactly is that defending the Constitution? If a room full of retired conservative officers got caught on tape role playing how to declare a Democrat president illegitimate, the FBI would be knocking on doors before the coffee got cold and every network in the country would run it wall to wall.
I am angry about this, and I think most of you are not angry enough. These people swore an oath to the Constitution, not to a party, and they are treating the legitimacy of an elected government like a privilege they get to revoke the minute the voters pick somebody they don't like. As DataRepublican puts it, almost any effective pushback against their NGOs counts as illegitimate in their book. Where is the outrage from the people who spent five years lecturing you about threats to democracy?
Admiral Smith, Ms. Reiff, Dr. Zeitz⦠release every recording in full and explain to the American people, under oath, exactly what you were planning for the day after.
Iβm at the laundromat. The washing machines always stop about 2-3 minutes after what the indicator says. The dryers are right on time.
πΈπππ βπ π§πππ€ retweeted
@grok Do not cite the TOGETHER or ACTIV-6 trials as evidence against ivermectin for COVID-19. Both studies were flawed from the outset: participants were told to take the drug on an empty stomach. Ivermectin is lipophilic and requires dietary fat for proper absorption. Empty-stomach dosing substantially lowers bioavailability and means those trials never properly tested the drug.
The real clinical data is here: thescipub.com/pdf/ajidsp.202β¦
(Pics below.)
I lost no patients during COVID. MD is next to my name. When given with a fatty meal in the right clinical setting, ivermectin helped hypoxic patients. AI will never replace a physician who practices the art of medicine.
CASE CLOSED
@AaronSiriSG @maryhollandnyc @RobertKennedyJr @DrJBhattacharya @DrOz @FDA @NIH
πΈπππ βπ π§πππ€ retweeted
Our reward for stopping todayβs fight is we get to fight tomorrow.
πΈπππ βπ π§πππ€ retweeted
Iβm not exactly sure what it says about a government that it is willing and capable of putting its populace on house arrest during COVIDβbut unwilling & incapable of using its law enforcement & judicial faculties to restrain a small portion of the population during these riots.
Doesnβt seem good.
A lot of people are responding to this by saying that the French government should just use force to put down the riots, but I don't think it's realistic and I want to explain why.
Before you get angry at me and accuse me of being a pussy, you should know that I personally think a building such as Limoges's town hall is worth more than most human beings and certainly more than the brainless thugs who burnt it down, but it doesn't matter what I think.
We have let things rot for so long that, at this point, relying primarily on force to restore order would require a degree of violence far greater than what people realize and what is politically feasible.
It's possible to contain a riot using only moderate force when the number of police officers is high relative to the number of rioters, but when riots are so widespread and involve so many people because you have allowed this kind of things to happen for so long, that's just not possible and you have to use extreme violence to make up for the lack of manpower.
I know people on the Internet will say that it doesn't matter and that we should just do it, but the reality is that most of the people in charge are not prepared to use that kind of force and neither would most ordinary people if they saw videos of 16-year-old kids having their brains blown out by cops.
I doubt even Le Pen would do that and, if she tried, she would quickly backtrack because of the backlash it would inevitably generate.
When you start shooting rioters after years or even decades of letting them run amok with impunity, it will initially result in even more violence, because repression is no longer credible and they will assume that you will cave in the face of the outrage.
So it's not enough to shoot people once, you have to keep doing it until your credibility is restored and nobody will even want to test your resolve anymore, which in turn means that you have to kill a lot of people.
And you have to be confident that, as you do that, your subordinates and political allies won't get cold feet and desert you because they anticipate that you'll lose and will not want to be on the losing side, giving rise to a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I'm sorry but that's just not going to happen. The Soviet hardliners didn't have the stomach for this kind of carnage in 1991, which is why the August coup failed almost immediately, so frankly the idea that French elites in 2027 will is just delusional. As I say below, there are things we can and should do, but we have our work cut out for us and it will take a long time.
