The Purge. The Cleansing. Whatever you want to call it-has begun. Given the last four years, it was predictable, if not inevitable. The Culture War, and make no mistake, our country is in a culture war, took a turn in favor of the Left. With the Democrats now controlling both the Legislative and Executive branches of government; the Left’s already iron grip on Hollywood, traditional and social media; coupled with the riots that took place last week; the board has is set for a final offensive against all those deemed undesirable in America.
Over the weekend, Big Tech began a mass purge of The President and any users who have been adjudicated as supporters or enablers of Trump’s so-called despotic regime. Trump has been permanently banned from Twitter, which is Twitter’s right, but when the option of free markets was exercised, Big-Tech, in a move that can only be described a monopolistic, colluded to exert a show force that has chilled our god-given right to freedom. Apple, Google, and Amazon all worked in concert to remove people’s access to another social media platform, called Parler because Parler doesn’t share their censorship values.
This move, as most atrocities committed by authoritarians are, was done in the name of safety and security. Our tech overlords, all of whom are unelected, have decided what is safe and what ideas are worthy of discussion. Empowered by so-called journalists, they decided not just what we can say, but what is true. Journalists and politicians crafted a narrative based on what President Trump and his supporters did, and judged them guilty in a digital-kangaroo court. Therefore, it is important that there is information, no matter how hard to find, that shows accurate countervailing evidence to the narrative.
First, it is important to remember, as cliche as it may sound, we are a nation of laws. The Law is the standard for what conduct is permissible and what is not. That is not to say that the law is perfect, but it is the objective standard to which we are governed. I say this because during and after the events at the Capitol, you probably heard words like Treason, Sedeiton, Insurrection, and Incitement. These words are often used colloquially and have entirely different meanings in the legal sense. However, you’ll often see in the news and social media using the terms colloquially, along with their assumed definitions. I’m not going to speak to what the rioters can be charged with because I do not possess all the facts. The only facts accessible to me, are the same facts that are accessible to you. I have no special access to information, but then again neither does anyone else who isn’t part of the investigation. As such, the purpose of this part of the post is to speak to what we currently know and to let the facts form their own narrative.
To begin, let’s state the first fact. President Donald Trump did not win the election. He did not, in court, which is the only place that matters, demonstrate that the election was stolen. That does not mean it wasn’t. It means that he did not satisfy the burden of proof required to prove this accusation. We might not like this threshold in this instance, but remember that the threshold isn’t there just for you, but also, your enemies. To be clear, personally, I think the election was stolen. I think there are enough suspicious incidents that happened prior to and on election night, to raise legitimate concerns. Add in the absolute bad faith actors involved, and I believe it is entirely likely that election maleficence occurred. However, this is essentially just a story. I have no physical evidence to present that would substantiate my story. And that is the burden of proof required under the law. If we only follow the law when it suits us, we can’t expect our opponents to follow it either.
Now to President Trump and his remarks just prior to the riot. Every single one of his opponents has said in one form or another, that he incited the actions of the protestors. This of course, is wrong. Incitement to violence is a legal standard. According to Black’s Law Dictionary:
Incite: To provoke or stir up (someone to commit a criminal act, or criminal act itself)
So what kind of rhetoric exactly meets this definition? Is saying something like, “Hey I really wish someone would kill my boss.”, enough? What about, “Bob, I’m ordering you to kill my boss.”? This where you would look at the law, breakdown its elements, and compare it to the current fact pattern and to similar previously decided court cases.
Examine a Federal Statute that might be used to charge Trump and compare it with Trumps actual remarks. 18 U.S. Code § 373 — Solicitation to commit a crime of violence:
(a) Whoever, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against property or against the person of another in violation of the laws of the United States, and under circumstances strongly corroborative of that intent, solicits, commands, induces, or otherwise endeavors to persuade such other person to engage in such conduct…
“Republicans are constantly fighting like a boxer with his hands tied behind his back. It’s like a boxer. And we want to be so nice. We want to be so respectful of everybody, including bad people. And we’re going to have to fight much harde r. …
“We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them, because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”
There are two operative words in the Federal Statute that would make this incitement: Intent and Engage. The question is: Did Trump intend to have his supporters engage in violent conduct at the Capitol? We know that they engaged in a felony with physical force, but what was the Trump’s intent? Can it be discerned from his remarks that he was intending to provoke or stir up his supporters to commit a crime? He uses rhetoric that is closely associated with violence, but that can also be metaphors. The fact is, this is the “Bob, I’m ordering you to kill my boss.” scenario from earlier. From this example, we know the clear and plain meaning of the statement and what the speaker’s intent is. Unfortunately for Trump critics, the intent of his remarks is ambiguous at best.
If Trump isn’t legally responsible for inciting violence, why ban him from Twitter? Why ban supporters not involved in the riots? The answer is because it fits the narrative. For four years, we’ve been told Trump is the worst man in history. A Russian spy. A racist. A Nazi. Hitler’s twin. Therefore, if you supported, voted for, or defended Trump it’s because you are all these things too. Do you condemn the riots at the Capitol? Doesn’t matter, you support Trump and therefore, are responsible for the riots.
The facts, as they stand currently, are that this was a group of misguided people who decided to take the law into their own hands and attack the Capitol. If there is anyone to blame at this moment it’s the rioters themselves and the The Capitol Police. Can you imagine if this had been an actual terrorist? As easy as it was to break into the Capitol, Isis would have slaughtered every single person. Of course, that fact isn’t of any concern to the Media. They created two narratives to deflect from The Capitol Police’s failure, racism and gaslighting.
MSNBC’s resident brainiac, Joy Ried, made the case for the first:
The reason that these people were so unafraid of the cops… the reason they could so easily and casually with their cameras on film themselves throwing things through the walls of our Capitol, our property, going inside the Capitol, sitting in Speaker Pelosi’s office… they know that they are not in jeopardy because the cops are taking selfies with them, walking them down the steps to make sure they’re not hurt,” she said. White Americans are never afraid of the cops, even when they’re committing insurrection and engaged in attempting to occupy our Capitol to steal the votes of people who look like me, because in their minds they own this country, they own that Capitol.
Oh, so it was the Capitol Police going easy on the mob because they were white. Kindly disregard the fact that five people died, one of whom was an unarmed white women. No, we must believe that racism was the key factor in the events. Black people would have been slaughtered on sight.
Well this is awkward because it sure looks like the first guy on the FBI list of suspects is a black guy.
Oh well. For the Media, if the evidence contradicts the narrative, just gaslight with a “fact check”. Here’s one from PolitiFact:
Question: “Did Capitol Police let a mob of Trump supporters into the building?” Answer: PolitiFact didn’t find evidence of that. Instead, we discovered that some online video is getting misinterpreted. Many officers had to abandon their posts and barricades because they were far outnumbered and overwhelmed.
So you see, they didn’t let them in, they just abandoned their post.
Clearly, by abandoning their post, Politifact means mingle with criminals.
Here is the narrative the known facts form. Donald Trump was not responsible for what happened at the Capitol. Donald Trump is responsible for raising the temperature. The Capitol Police failed in their mandate. All of this should not have happened.
But this isn’t about what actually happened. It’s about the future, power, control, and destroying your enemies. For The Left, the Government is God. It is how we achieve the utopia of equality of outcome. Or has it was previously known-communism. Big Tech, which leans Left, now has what it wants, a reason to impose censorship in accordance with Leftist values. In communism, the dirty secret is that someone must decide for everyone else. Therefore, those who have scaled the heights of success are inherently better human beings and better suited to be those that decide. Or as Orwell once said:
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others
It’s the Left’s perceived moral certitude that allows to them disregard their obvious hypocrisy. They are better than others. If you follow them, you may not be better than them, but you are certainly better than the people who don’t. The non-followers are morally deprived sub-humans to which violent action and censorship is necessary. After all, what moral person would argue with punching a nazi? Or banning them from employment? When waging the war against evil, do not the ends, justify the means? Perhaps instead of asking themselves these questions, the real question they should be asking is:
For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?
Update: CBS News has confirmed a timeline that the riot and pipe bombs began before/during Trumps speech.
#CapitolBuilding TIMELINE: Critical window Wednesday is coming into focus 1230–1315. While POTUS addressed the rally + before he concluded, a group was already pushing onto the grounds of the Capitol building + first pipe bomb discovered (1245p) at RNC + second pipe bomb at DNC pic.twitter.com/iBpLW8nEyo
- Catherine Herridge (@CBS_Herridge) January 12, 2021
If you liked this post, it really helps if you give this page a like or follow on social media and share it with other people. Thanks for reading.