April 11th – 2021 Presidential Politics – Resistance Day 82

In an effort to keep the Daily Open Thread a little more open topic we are going to start a new daily thread for “Presidential Politics”. Please use this thread to post anything relating to the JoeBama Administration and Presidency.

“This is no small thing, to restore a republic after it has fallen into corruption. I have studied history for years and I cannot recall it ever happening. It may be that our task is impossible. Yet, if we do not try then how will we know it can’t be done? And if we do not try, it most certainly won’t be done. The Founders’ Republic, and the larger war for western civilization, will be lost.”

“But I tell you this: We will not go gently into that bloody collectivist good night. Indeed, we will make with our defiance such a sound as ALL history from that day forward will be forced to note, even if they despise us in the writing of it.”

~ Mike Vanderboegh

This thread will refresh daily and appear above the Open Discussion Thread.

Whenever the possibility presents, throw sand into the machinery…

Source

Sunday April 11th – Open Thread

Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy Name. Thy kingdom come. THY WILL BE DONE, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but DELIVER US FROM EVIL.

For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever and ever. Amen †

Source

A Rebel With a Cause, The Battle of Tinhorn Flats

Friend of the Treehouse, Peter Duke, introduced me to this story and it is blood-boiling, yet awesome.

A young man named Lucas Lepejian is in a battle with Burbank authorities who are trying to run him out of business.  Lucas is the 20-year-old son of Baret Lepejian the proprietor of a long-standing western-themed restaurant called Tinhorn Flats; a well known place to dine in Burbank, California.

Local authorities have attempted to shut down Tinhorn Flats repeatedly.  Each time Lucas defies the orders and reopens.

Lucas has been arrested three times in defiance of the ridiculous COVID shutdown.

The issue now is personal, the authorities are intent on destroying his business… Lucas, and a small battalion of supporters, remain defiant.

TIMELINE & DETAILS: Tinhorn Flats is the oldest bar in Burbank.  In March of 2020 they shut down in compliance with state guidelines.   They reopened in November 2020, and when the second lockdown was announced their defiance began.

Burbank authorities first cited and fined Tinhorn Flats.  Lucas refused to pay and stayed open.  Burbank authorities cut their utilities.  Lucas brought in generators and stayed open.   Burbank authorities Red tagged his restaurant and locked the doors.  Lucas cut the locks and reopened.  Burbank authorities boarded up the doors and ‘red tagged’ again as unsafe.  Lucas sawed off the boards and reopened his business.  Burbank police then arrested Lucas.  Lucas made bail and was released.

Regular protests then began to support Lucas.  Burbank authorities came back and replaced the boards (thicker w/ security nails).  Lucas sawed off those boards and reopened business.  Burbank police then arrested Lucas the second time.  Lucas made bail and was released.  Burbank authorities again replaced the boards on the doors and added sand bags; (police later announced that anyone moving a sandbag would be arrested).  Lucas removed the sandbags.  Lucas was arrested, made bail and was released.

Today the city of Burbank installed fences around the property…. the battle continues.

Lucas and Baret Lepejian are being represented by attorney Mark Geragos [SEE HERE].

[embedded content]

Diana West puts it well:

As anyone can see from the Tinhorn Flats’ Instagram page, the restaurant supports freedom, capitalism and President Trump, and reviles tyranny, socialism and Governor Newsom. No wonder they are in the crosshairs — but no wonder they are in the fight! 

If you can’t show up, you can support the Tinhorn Flats Legal Defense Fund here.”

Source

Narrow Victory, Supreme Court Blocks California COVID Compliance Ministry From Stopping In-Home Bible Study

In a narrow 5-4 ruling the Supreme Court has blocked California from stopping in-home bible study groups from their religious assembly.  Chief Justice Roberts joined the three leftist judges Kagan, Bryer and Sotomayor.   [pdf link here] Apparently the first amendment barely survived this visit by the high court.

♦ Amendment 1  – Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

(SCOTUS BLOG) – […] In an unsigned opinion, the majority wrote that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit’s failure to put California’s COVID restrictions on hold was “erroneous.” The Supreme Court’s decisions in earlier challenges to COVID-related restrictions have, the justices wrote, “made several points clear.” Among other things, the majority stressed, government regulations are subject to heightened scrutiny whenever they treat any secular activity more favorably than religious activity; it doesn’t matter that the state also treats some secular businesses or activities poorly. Moreover, the majority added, a case may remain a live controversy even if the government changes the policy – particularly when, as here, “officials with a track record of ‘moving the goalposts’ retain authority to reinstate those heightened restrictions at any time.”

In her dissent, Kagan contended that the First Amendment “requires that a State treat religious conduct as well as the State treats comparable secular conduct.” That, she wrote, is what California has done, by adopting “a blanket restriction on at-home gatherings of all kinds.” (read more)

Source

An Insiders Perspective on President Trump’s Claims of Election Fraud From Legal Counsel John Eastman

“What Really Happened? An Insider’s Perspective on Representing the President and Claims of Election Fraud” – an interview with Professor John Eastman, scholar of Constitutional law and Senior Fellow at the Claremont Institute, moderated by Amber Athey, Washington Editor of Spectator USA and Tony Blankley Senior Fellow with Steamboat Institute:

Professor John Eastman was retained as legal counsel by President Trump following the 2020 election to examine possible fraudulent activities that could have influenced the outcome of the election. In this interview, Professor Eastman describes what it was like to be in the Oval Office with President Trump and Vice President Pence during those tense post-election weeks with the election outcome hanging in the balance.

.

Professor Eastman also explains what he learned about possible election improprieties and what facts are available for the general public to know and to gain a better understanding of what really happened.

Steamboat Institute is proud to present this interview with the hope that it will lead to a better understanding of what really happened in the 2020 election and how we, as citizens responsible for defending our republic, can safeguard the integrity of our electoral process.

Source

April 10th – 2021 Presidential Politics – Resistance Day 81

In an effort to keep the Daily Open Thread a little more open topic we are going to start a new daily thread for “Presidential Politics”. Please use this thread to post anything relating to the JoeBama Administration and Presidency.

“This is no small thing, to restore a republic after it has fallen into corruption. I have studied history for years and I cannot recall it ever happening. It may be that our task is impossible. Yet, if we do not try then how will we know it can’t be done? And if we do not try, it most certainly won’t be done. The Founders’ Republic, and the larger war for western civilization, will be lost.”

“But I tell you this: We will not go gently into that bloody collectivist good night. Indeed, we will make with our defiance such a sound as ALL history from that day forward will be forced to note, even if they despise us in the writing of it.”

~ Mike Vanderboegh

This thread will refresh daily and appear above the Open Discussion Thread.

Whenever the possibility presents, throw sand into the machinery…

Source

Saturday April 10th – Open Thread

Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy Name. Thy kingdom come. THY WILL BE DONE, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but DELIVER US FROM EVIL.

For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever and ever. Amen †

Source

Another Tripwire Crossed – Pentagon Orders Updated Screening of Military to Identify “Extremist” Outlooks in Preparation for What is to Come…

Let me be clear…. I fully expect to see the standing U.S. military deployed against any state who stands up against unconstitutional federal demands. I have made this assertion since the jaw-dropping revelations about the Pentagon during the first impeachment effort in August 2019 and the lack of leadership from the military in removing Lt. Col Alexander Vindman from his compromised position.

♦ WHAT: As I look forward the likely origination point for military deployment will be federal COVID mandates, though it could also be state election issues.  ♦ HOW: The hardline leftists are weaponizing the military for political benefit.  ♦ WHEN: As a result of severe federal government intrusion it is only a matter of time before states start to rebel against federal COVID demands. That, in my opinion, will be the inflection point and posse comitatus will be suspended.

The majority of the U.S. military rank and file are patriots; America-first nationalists with a patriotic outlook toward the United States as a constitutional republic.  The majority of the military also come from red states.  This is an identified risk to the Obama objective of fundamental change.  Additionally, thanks in large part to a purge during the Obama era, the majority of the flag officers are not in alignment with the rank and file.   This sets the stage for a problem….

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Friday ordered new steps to tackle the threat posed by extremism in the ranks of the military, including updated screening questionnaires for recruits, a review of the department’s definition of extremism and efforts to prevent veterans from being drawn into violent movements.

The move follows a 60-day stand-down across the armed services that Austin ordered to allow commanders and troops in every unit to discuss how to confront the problem of white supremacist or other extremist ideology within the military. The Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of former President Donald Trump thrust the issue into the spotlight, as some of the mob were former or current members of the military with links to ultra-rightwing groups.

In a memo Friday to top officials and commanders, Austin said the department was still reviewing the results of the stand-down but he had decided to move ahead with “several immediate steps.”

Under Austin’s instruction, the Pentagon’s top lawyer and other officials will review and update the department’s definition of “prohibited extremist activities” for all service members. Critics have said the Pentagon needs to take into account how extremism has evolved in the digital era, and how some adherents engage in more loosely formed networks.

The secretary also called for updated screening questionnaires for potential recruits to gather information about current or previous extremist behavior ”to ensure that only the best qualified recruits are selected for the services,” according to the memo. (read more)

It is well known and accepted that most of the rank and file military come from Red States, and/or the Southern U.S. region.   This has been a reality in the military for as long as I can remember.   Again, this is a problem if the government is going to weaponize the military against the citizens.  Hence, they need to quantify the issue in advance.

[HISTORIC NOTE:  This is not the first time the Pentagon has undertaken such an assessment.  In the aftermath of the Chinese regular army refusing to turn their fire on the protesting students at Tienanmen Square (remember, the Mongolian divisions were called in); the world noticed.  The U.S. Pentagon did a similar internal assessment.]

♦ My prior warning with the examples and citations of data to back-up my prediction are HERE and repeated below:

Considering the specific examples over the past few years, I would argue the Democrats are positioning for use of the military in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act -or- by an expressed act of congress.

Following the evidence to its logical conclusion is simple.  The political apparatus of the DC state has framed a fraudulent narrative that “insurrection” against the federal government is an ongoing possibility.

Toward that end the U.S. military national guard troops have been sent to Washington DC indefinitely (current deployment extended through May).

If we consider there is a reasonable argument now surfacing about states choosing to nullify federal laws, it is not a stretch to see the insurrection narrative as a proactive assertion to support the deployment of active military against any state who would be non-compliant.

Would this violate the Posse Comitatus Act? Quite possibly, yes; it would depend on whether congress passed an expressed act authorizing military troops against specific state action.

When we consider that most of the constitutional checks and balances have been deconstructed or usurped by hardline leftist action; including the weaponization of the intelligence community, and specifically the FBI as a federal law enforcement agency; we are left to recognize that any Posse Comitatus violation would likely be supported by a leftist and aligned media arguing that the military is needed in order to stop a rebellion of states.

If my suspicions/predictions are correct, this would explain exactly why there has been a recent uptick in the visual politicization of the military; including empirical examples of emboldened U.S. military leadership openly engaged in domestic political advocacy against Tucker Carlson.

The marching of the U.S. military through the Capitol building to the offices of Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene would be another orchestrated optic sending the same political message.

These are not examples of the military “woke” community advancing political correctness, instead these are examples of advanced politicization of the military (in an open context) in preparation for domestic political use.   The “insurrection narrative” is then considered a seed planted to blossom later in support of the overall agenda.

One of the data-points highlighting future intent was clearly visible and seemingly overlooked by almost all media.  It happened when Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman first became a political whistle-blower against the office of President Trump.

It was not the details of the Vindman accusation that stood out, though that was the aspect the media focused on.  What was more concerning was the lack of action by the Pentagon after Vindman compromised his position as an advisor to the commander in chief.

2019 – When we consider that Lt. Col. Vindman was carrying out what he believed to be his role; and when you overlay his military purpose; and when we accept Vindman was assisting CIA agent Eric Ciaramella in constructing his dossier to remove President Trump; and when we stand back and look at the aggregate interests involved, including Vindman’s divided loyalties toward a foreign power; and when we consider there was ZERO push-back from the ranks of military leadership, specifically the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and when you accept Vindman was simply allowed to return to his post inside the White House – where he remains today; well, the alarming aspect increases in direct proportion to the definition of the word: “coup”.

I would encourage all readers to think long and hard those factual data-points.

Despite his admitted usurpation of President Trump policy, Vindman was sent back to his post in the NSC with the full support of the United States Department of Defense.

The onus of action to remove Vindman from the NSC did not lay at the feet of the White House and National Security advisor Robert O’Brien; upon whose action the removal of Vindman could be positioned as political.  The necessary obligation to remove Lt. Col Vindman resides purposefully with the Dept. of Defense.

The Pentagon could easily withdraw Vindman from his position at the National Security Council; yet, it does not…. and it has not.   WHY?

There is a code within the military whereby you never put your leadership into a position of compromise; ie. “never compromise your leadership”.

In this example, President Trump cannot remove Vindman from the White House NSC advisory group due to political ramifications and appearances… The Joint Chiefs certainly recognize this issue; it is the very type of compromise they are trained to remove.  Yet they do nothing to remove the compromise.  They do nothing to assist.

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman was the majority (#1) source for the material CIA operative Eric Ciaramella used in a collaborative effort to remove President Trump from office.  Let me make this implication crystal clear:

The United States Military appears to be collaborating with the CIA to remove a U.S. President from office.

The Pentagon has done nothing, absolutely nothing, to countermand this implication. The Secretary of Defense has done nothing to remove the conflict that Vindman represents within the National Security Council.  The Joint Chiefs of Staff have done nothing, absolutely nothing, to diminish the appearance of an agenda toward the removal of President Trump.

This is not a complex issue.

No-one in the foreign policy group is going to take any advice or opinion from Vindman.  No-one is going to allow him to engage in material of a sensitive or confidential nature.  Lt. Col. Vindman has compromised himself; and therefore eliminated any usefulness to his prior assignment.  Yet his command does nothing? (more)

That was the alarming lack of action from the Pentagon everyone seemed to overlook.  Why did senior military leadership not remove Vindman from his post at the White House once he clearly compromised his ability to carry out his duty?  Their lack of action was stunning when you consider their primary obligation.

Fast forward to 2021 and now a very political military officer, General Russel Honore’, is appointed by Nancy Pelosi to be in charge of the military deployment around Washington DC.  When you consider the political ramifications of the military supporting a false narrative, this is more than just another data-point.  Then the military openly attacked the position of Tucker Carlson based entirely on political ideology.

The increased frequency of the military being politicized is what leads me to believe this phase is all just a public relations pre-positioning.  I fully expect to see the standing U.S. military deployed against any state who stands up against unconstitutional federal demands… the likely origination point will be federal COVID mandates.

The leftists are weaponizing COVID mandates for a political agenda.  It is only a matter of time before states start to rebel against federal COVID demands.  That, in my opinion, will be the inflection point.  That will be when the U.S. military is held as a compliance activation against any rebellious state.  It could be another issue that activates this triggering of the military (ex. state election laws), but as it stands right now federal COVID compliance seems the most likely trigger.

Bottom line… The American electorate are being positioned to accept deployment of the U.S. military against U.S. citizens, under the guise of insurrection and/or a public threat.  That is why we are seeing so much willful politicization of the military.

If you live in a region or state that values individual liberty and/or freedom, you are likely in a location that leftists consider a risk to their ability to execute their agenda.  You are likely right now being defined as a ‘dissident’, or possibly a “domestic terrorist.”  As a result, get ready to see this type of activity in your neighborhood.

Source

JoeBama Turns His Eye of Chaos Toward The Supreme Court

Leftist ideologues from the Chicago school have a typical playbook they pull from.  One of their strategies is to flood the zone of politics to create chaos that allows them to act under cover of the distracted nature of their plan.  JoeBama turning his eye toward the Supreme Court while pushing COVID crisis, the Border crisis, promoting infrastructure and simultaneously advancing on the filibuster rule is classic Chicago, aka Alinsky.

The deployment of a commission to study reform in the Supreme Court, while simultaneously having a plan to install Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson (50) to replace Justice Stephen Bryer, now 82-years-old, is all part of that chaos approach.

The existence of the commission -and the potential recommendation to pack the court with additional voices- has another benefit; it can be viewed by the existing court as a threat to retain the status quo…. or else.  The leftists will use the commission to mold the courts decisions. Chicago is often subtle as a brick through a window.

WASHINGTON – President Joe Biden signed an executive order on Friday empaneling a commission to examine possible reforms to the Supreme Court and federal judiciary, making good on a campaign trail promise sparked by his predecessor’s tilting of the federal bench.

[…] The 36-member commission will be co-chaired by Bob Bauer — who led the Biden campaign’s legal strategy — and Cristina Rodríguez, a Yale Law School professor and former deputy assistant attorney general. (read more)

As customary, the far-left will pretend not to know this SCOTUS strategy, and the compliant media will ignore it as it rolls out; however, we can clearly see it and discuss it here.

Source

Black Lives Matter Co-Founder Receives Backlash for Buying a $1.5 Million House in a Predominately White Neighborhood

Photo by Taylor Jewell/Invision/AP

Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors is once again receiving backlash after purchasing a $1.5 million dollar home in a predominately white LA neighborhood.

Kahn-Cullors created the Black Lives Matter hashtag in 2013 after George Zimmerman was acquitted in the 2012 shooting of black teenager Trayvon Martin.

The movement grew even more following George Floyd’s death in May 2020.

After facing pressure, the Black Lives Matter organization revealed that it had raised $90 million in 2020.

Kahn-Cullors has been called out multiple times for what some say is grifting off black tragedies.

Kahn-Cullors published a book in 2018, titled “When They Call You a Terrorist: A Black Lives Matter Memoir,” and in 2020 signed a deal with Warner Bros. TV to create programming to amplify black voices on TV streaming services.

Her purchase of the $1.5 million dollar home has resulted in her receiving even more criticism.

Facebook Comments

Source