20 Comments

Mr. Davis,

You accurately identify the many wrongs perpetrated upon The People by the corrupt and treasonous Amerikans embedded within federal, state and local governments. However, your belief that Citizens "....will no longer be denied the justice they deserve" is simply a fantasy.

Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama, along with Kamala Harris were anointed to positions of President and Vice-President in direct violation of eligibility standards contained in the United States Constitution. They thumbed their Marxist noses at the document, THE LAW, they swore to uphold. Yet, they were never held accountable by "We the People".

This once great nation is and has been under physical attack by hordes, millions of foreign invaders perpetrating acts of war with their attacks penetrating our once sovereign borders. Yet, where is the opposition to these attacks, by those responsible for security of this formerly great nation ? Instead the fedgov, both the elected and appointed along with the media, electronic and print have condoned these acts of war, by their inaction to protect our nation with deadly force to all enemies foreign and domestic.

Until American Citizens collectively and physically terminate the traitors responsible for the eradication of our borders and thus the elimination of the United States as a nation, we will NEVER earn the justice we deserve.

Sometimes violence is the answer.

Dan, Erie County, Pennsylvania

Expand full comment

Delta3Two, Violence is not the answer. Violence is the power of the State. MLK Jr. was right in promoting non-violence for the cause of Civil Rights and ending the Vietnam War, all wars.

Violence can only be used in self-defense.

Expand full comment

Jefferson might have disagreed with you: "...but when a long train of abuses and usurpations, begun at a distinguished period, and pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to subject them to arbitrary power, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." Declaration of Independence, 1776 at https://www.let.rug.nl/usa/documents/1776-1785/jeffersons-draft-of-the-declaration-of-independence.php

Expand full comment

streamfortyseven, The American Revolution began at Concord when the British soldiers tried to take the arms and ammo of Americans. Shots were fired. Violence became an act of self-defense.

My point is that using violence in an action like bombing the Capitol is counterproductive. As Jefferson writes, "...but when a long train of abuses and usurpations..." i.e., When the State attacks the people, the people can use violence in self-defense.

An example: Timothy McVeigh bombed (I don't buy the story, but...) the OK City Federal Building to avenge the FBI/ATC killings at Waco. Did that action do any good or did the State use it to their advantage?

It is important to only use violence against the State WHEN it is attacking you. Not in revenge.

Expand full comment

The "insurrection" at the Capitol - even a demonstration - was too little and too late. When the election and slates of electors were certified at the various state capitals, at that point, the election became a done deal, the ceremony at the Capitol in DC on January 6th was an empty formality, a pro forma exercise, certifying a government which is itself empty of effective power and operating only in a pro forma sense - but loudly, convincingly, and noisily. The trouble goes deeper than that, if a government were to be the target of an insurrection, the proper target would be the Permanent Government - and that's south of the Potomac. See https://sites.tufts.edu/fletcheradmissions/files/2014/01/National-Security-and-Double-Government-by-Glennon.pdf and https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/open-sedition-by-the-administrative-900 for details...

Expand full comment

streamfortyseven, Exactly. The J6 protesters were naive. A general strike, including the non-payment of taxes, would have been more effective against the bureaucracy than some dumb protest in DC carrying flags and Trump banners.

Expand full comment

The trouble with a non-payment of taxes is that they will just pick people off one by one.

Expand full comment

I started reading the first link, but it just backs up what we've thought for some time: we're ruled by a bunch of unelected bureaucrats. The original three branches are mostly there for show. They do a little something now and again, but look at the clowns like Gowdy, Kennedy, and others making noise about some corruption, but nothing is ever done. I had some small hopes that Trump would do something positive, but those hopes are fast fading. His subservience to israel, his call for more foreign tech workers, and now promising that anyone with $1 billion is welcome to come here and flaunt our environmental laws (yes, some are stupid, but I saw turds in the 1970s being flushed directly into a river that supplied drinking water downstream). I'm starting to regret not just having sat out the election, like I did for a long time previously after reading a biography of LBJ.

Expand full comment

Timmy,

Your remarks written like the democrat/communist you most certainly are. Everything written by Mr. Davis are statements identifying the blistering attacks of Amerikan government traitors against We the People.

Like the communist you are you declare when Americans can take action against the Amerikan governments. Violence against traitors and their treasonous actions is JUSTICE.

As I've written here and elsewhere sometimes Violence IS the answer.

Expand full comment

Delta, I am not a communist or a Democrat. If you really want to go after the traitors who attack the American people, hit them where it hurts: in their wallets.

Violence can only be used in self-defense. If you use violence against the leeches of the State, they will kill you and spin the narrative so that you are the terrorist/murderer. Starve the leeches. Don't give them money or obedience.

Expand full comment

I say, don't give them time or opportunity to do so. The above awards the tyrants authority to write the rules and set the schedule for our demise.

Sometimes hard actions, as hard ideas, rely on spontaneous thoughts and actions. These can also have the greatest impact.

I submit that rather than violence inflicted on the proxy in the street, carry the violence to inflict agony directly on the tyrants and their families.

Precisely what the entire gubmint/health care/media/educational system has imposed on "Muricans and their families with J6'ers, scamdemics, jabs, crimigrants, transformers, etc......

Onward, Christian soldiers!

Expand full comment

Guido, The IRA attacked the Black and Tans in Ireland directly. It worked.

Expand full comment

As always, Dan, holding the line to the truth. Of course, we will not ever get the justice we deserve, it was more a term of art, but there is some justice to be had for the J6ers, even though their debt can never be paid in full. Investigating Colorado for its election rigging and freeing Tina Peters are another degree of justice. If however, we do not recognize the few instances of some justice, there is no way to build momentum. In Texas Ken Paxton has been at the forefront of pushing back against a lot of things and has had success, though the border is a constant fight. I'll take whatever I can get right now, but as you rightly point out, eventually it comes down to a real battle.

Expand full comment

Great article. The last sentence about MSM is perfect, "...put down like a blind, ailing dog." Indeed!

D.L. is right. The people who voted for and support Trump will not put up with another four years of failure to fulfill their demands. Trump has no honeymoon in office. He has no grace period to "learn the ropes" of being president. He's already had four years in the Oval Office.

This time, Trump had better not put new curtains in the White House but work full-time to help the people who voted for him.

Expand full comment

This bit about the Senate and Congress and ignoring the will of the people goes back to the early days of the government created by the Federalist Constitution of 1787 - the Anti-Federalist Bill of Rights was an attempt to rein in and curb the excesses and usurpations of that government on the liberties of the people:

"As a majority of all societies consist of men who (though totally incapable of thinking or acting in governmental matters) are more readily led than driven, we have thought meet to indulge them in something like a democracy in the new constitution, which part we have designated by the popular name of the House of Representatives. But to guard against every possible danger from this lower house, we have subjected every bill they bring forward, to the double negative of our upper house and president. Nor have we allowed the populace the right to elect their representatives annually . . . lest this body should be too much under the influence and control of their constituents, and thereby prove the “weatherboard of our grand edifice, to show the shiftings of every fashionable gale,”-for we have not yet to learn that little else is wanting to aristocratize the most democratical representative than to make him somewhat independent of his political creators. We have taken away that rotation of appointment which has so long perplexed us-that grand engine of popular influence. Every man is eligible into our government from time to time for life. This will have a two-fold good effect. First, it prevents the representatives from mixing with the lower class, and imbibing their foolish sentiments, with which they would have come charged on re-election.

2d. They will from the perpetuality of office be under our eye, and in a short time will think and act like us, independently of popular whims and prejudices. For the assertion “that evil communications corrupt good manners,” is not more true than its reverse. We have allowed this house the power to impeach, but we have tenaciously reserved the right to try. We hope gentlemen, you will see the policy of this clause-for what matters it who accuses, if the accused is tried by his friends. In fine, this plebian house will have little power, and that little be rightly shaped by our house of gentlemen, who will have a very extensive influence-from their being chosen out of the genteeler class … It is true, every third senatorial seat is to be vacated duennually, but two-thirds of this influential body will remain in office, and be ready to direct or (if necessary) bring over to the good old way, the young members, if the old ones should not be returned. And whereas many of our brethren, from a laudable desire to support their rank in life above the commonalty, have not only deranged their finances, but subjected their persons to indecent treatment (as being arrested for debt, etc.) we have framed a privilege clause, by which they may laugh at the fools who trusted them. But we have given out, that this clause was provided, only that the members might be able without interruption, to deliberate on the important business of their country." Antifederalist Paper 9 – A CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT IS A TYRANNY by “MONTEZUMA,” regarded as a Pennsylvanian, wrote this essay which showed up in the Independent Gazetteer on October 17, 1787. From https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/just-for-the-record-antifederalist

So the system which you regard as Communist or Marxist actually expresses the intent of the Federalist Party, of John Jay and Alexander Hamilton and others in the Wall Street speculator clique of which they were a part. The preamble to Anti-Federalist #9 expresses this in language which reflects the attitudes of the Democrats and RINOs, the latter-day Aristocratic Party: "We the Aristocratic party of the United States, lamenting the many inconveniences to which the late confederation subjected the well-born, the better kind of people, bringing them down to the level of the rabble-and holding in utter detestation that frontispiece to every bill of rights, “that all men are born equal”-beg leave (for the purpose of drawing a line between such as we think were ordained to govern, and such as were made to bear the weight of government without having any share in its administration) to submit to our Friends in the first class for their inspection, the following defense of our monarchical, aristocratical democracy." Ibid.

The rest of that paper is well worth reading as well, as is this: https://streamfortyseven.substack.com/p/rules-for-changing-a-limited-republican - another Anti-Federalist article in John Freneau's National Gazette, from 1792 - "The whole tone of Washington's administration was aristocratic, favoring as it did the educated, the wealthy, the clergy, and the press, who were fearful of "mob rule" and preferred to see what Hamilton called "gentlemen of principle and property" in command. As Hamilton had at his service a newspaper - John Fenno's Gazette of the United States - to support his policies, his opponents, led by Jefferson and Madison, decided to establish a rival newspaper, the National Gazette"

Expand full comment

Delta3Two and streamfortyseven have brought up the use of violence against the State. I believe violence can only be used against the State in self-defense. Let's look at the case of Ashli Babbitt, killed in cold blood by Lieutenant Byrd of the US Capitol Police on January 6th:

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/12/why_are_dems_appeasing_the_cop_who_killed_ashli_babbitt.html

What is the correct action in this case? Obviously, the State is protecting Byrd. So is the media.

Should Byrd be hunted down and killed? IMO, Byrd should have been killed at the scene when he shot Babbitt, but of course, the protesters were unarmed. Still, I've seen people beat a man to death, even cops, who do acts of violence against an innocent person.

My point is that there is a time limit for self-defense. When the State attacks you, you can attack the State in self-defense. But you can't wait for days, weeks, or months to make an act of revenge.

Americans should arm themselves and know how to use those arms in self-defense.

Expand full comment

T.L., I sincerely hope I'm wrong on this but, I believe the machine held back on the steal for POTUS because the people were much closer to the cartridge box than they liked to see. The squirrel that was put down, "Peanut", was a rallying cry all over X and other social platforms (used as a focal point for the anger and edginess of the conservative right). Only Trump's win could quell the "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH" should he have lost again due to election fraud.

I have a strong sense that Trump, and Vance, were (s)elected to further the move towards the digital ID's and CBDC's that have been promised. Events will transpire in 2025, and beyond, that will eventually bring the US to that destination. Unless this 4th Turning is different than all the others since this nation was birthed, there is some very hard pain on the way.

I want to be wrong and hope like heck that I am but, it has been way too quiet on the Homefront since the election. Something wicked this way comes...

Expand full comment

Always cautious, I feel the same. I'm very attentive to the CBDC's and any sniff of that puts me on a razor's edge. We'll see, because we'll be watching.

Expand full comment

Comments today have brought up some important points to think about. Governments, from time immemorial, always seek ever more control over those it governs. Historicly our (America) form of government is/was one of the least intrusive to the domestic population. However since the end of WW2 it has been increasingly meddlesome both domesticly & overseas.

Arrogance & greed are in my opinion to blame. There are those who through arrogance believe the american form of government must be exported to every corner if the globe through force if nessessary. This creates and facilitates those whose motivation is greed.

The shining city on the hill has been tarnished no whitewash can hide the truth of it.

Expand full comment