Author: JMW

Getting the drop on modern liberals isn’t so difficult, just think like an evil criminal. Actually, we should import some distinction into the idea. To get the drop on liberal voters, liberalism’s rank and file, one doesn’t have to do any thinking at all. Mindless robots, liberal voters accept and believe whatever their “elite” betters tell them and regurgitate it. Zero intellect involved. 

And that’s not a snarky criticism; that’s what they do. 

Like climate change, for instance. Or racism. Or Donald Trump colluding with Vladimir Putin to steal the 2016 presidential election. “Elite” liberals proclaim it. Liberal voters believe it, sans any evidence at all, incidentally, which shows how vacuous and eager they are to serve. Then they mindlessly repeat it. Until it’s proven untrue, that is, upon which they pretend they were unaware and couldn’t care less.  

It highlights a critical fallacy, that liberal voters don’t know when something they believed and publicly espoused is proven false. It’s an absurd perception. Liberal voters desperately wanted Trump guilty and imprisoned, for example, because that’s what their “elite” betters wanted. Thus, the rank and file followed the news the same as their pro-Trump opponents, and with the same zealous interest in the verdict. Then, waiting with bated breath, they see Special Counsel Mueller’s exoneration, and Trump vindicated. They see Special Counsel Durham testifying the FBI had no lawful reason to investigate or spy on Trump, and that the whole thing was driven by a Hillary Clinton dossier fiction, no less sanctioned by President Obama. And it’s all not only painfully disappointing.  

Liberal voters know.  

Like everyone else, they know the whole thing was a phony, treasonous plot per their “elite” betters; it can’t be anything else. They could organize the implications and map out the conclusions, too, and change their perspectives and beliefs. But that requires scrutiny and intellectual honesty. It requires thinking, which simply isn’t them.  

Mindless servility, that’s the liberal rank and file.  

No? Exhibit A: 

The “elite” betters immediately after the 2016 election: “Trump and Putin stole the election!” 
Liberal voters: “Trump’s presidency is illegitimate!”  

No evidence. No facts. No supporting information at all, actually. Just specious accusation. Yet, liberal voters are all-in, fully onboard. Believers! 

How do people do that, anyway? Jump headlong into a belief without any evidence whatsoever for it?  

Seems rather, mindless. 

So, to get the drop on liberal voters, one need only understand this mindless robot concept. Given they are actual human beings with the capacity for critical thought and analysis, however, one is then obliged to see them for what they truly are: willful ideological prisoners and servile cult members. 

And that’s not a snarky criticism, either; that’s what they are [Ref. Exhibit A]. 

These “elite” liberals, on the other hand, the cult’s leaders, they aren’t mindless robots. No sir! And to get the drop on these people, one must think criminally. Or rather, evilly. After all, that’s what criminality is: evil. Crime and lawlessness certainly aren’t “good” things. They’re acts of evil. Acts with which these “elite” liberals are clearly enamored, too, which then makes liberalism an evil cult.  

Let’s face it, when people create a collusion hoax and knowingly aim to ruin people’s lives with it, use the federal government and national news media to sell it, and people accept and espouse the hoax without any supporting evidence, because they desperately want it to be true, and then ceaselessly repeat the lie, only to learn it was a treasonous plot hatched by people they trust and believe, a fact they then mindlessly ignore, along with their poor judgment and the utter turpitude of their leaders.   

Why, that’s just a big ol’ bursting bag of evil, folks. 

A cult of evil, one might accurately surmise. 

So, to get the drop on these “elite” liberals, one must think criminally, or like evil people think, which is a completely foreign concept to lawful, moral people. Moral people can’t relate at all. They think, How could people create a hoax and carelessly ruin the lives of others with it? And, How could people learn that such careless people were involved in a hoax, and not acknowledge the evil and criminality, and their own poor judgement? 

How? They’re evil. The entire lot. And in all this careless ruination and defiance, they aren’t just shameless and unaffected. They feel righteous! Feel they’re doing God’s work, which they are: the work of their human betters and their own political gods. 

It’s delusional, of course, but these are people of utter darkness. It’s hard not to be disoriented and delusional living in utter darkness. Meanwhile, there’s the blazing light of truth: the collusion hoax and the treasonous fraud of liberalism, of the cult, bright as the sun. And there are liberals one and all: shielding their eyes and running as fast and as far away as they can from it, like vampires. Evil vampires.  

“Crossover, children. Go into the light; there’s peace and serenity in the light.” 

Eh, they’re out of earshot. 

In every dispute, all anyone has to do is step into the light of truth, and into the subsequent understanding and peace it so graciously affords. Rank and file liberals may not like it that Trump didn’t steal the election, and that their “elite” betters are evil, plotting criminals. But it’s nonetheless true. Simply accepting the truth, the rank and file can enjoy understanding and peace, instead of utter darkness, endless acrimony, and misery.  

Seems like an easy call. 

In any event, evil guides evil people. Thus, if good people want to get the drop on the liberal hierarchy, evil thinking is compulsory, if completely unnatural. So, let’s practice … 

One of the hot topics currently is whether Joe Biden will run for president in 2024. Listening to conservative pundits discuss the matter, I suddenly realized the modern conservative punditry’s lack of vision. Rush Limbaugh dies and the whole enterprise goes to scat. If the punditry wants to be on the “cutting edge of societal evolution,” then they’d better find the baseline in political matters.  

No one was better at reading liberals than Limbaugh, who knew them like “every square inch of [his] glorious naked body.” Well, Limbaugh had a secret that made his analysis superior. A faithful man with “talent on loan from God,” he understood that liberalism was evil, and that members were fierce and determined opponents of everything good and righteous, despite their façade, their sheep’s clothing, of dogooderness. Thus, Limbaugh was able to read liberals with mind-boggling astuteness and accuracy—which isn’t so mind-boggling, really, but a simple good v. evil read. The baseline in all matters, political and otherwise. 

In other words, Limbaugh understood liberals were criminals, arrogant and evil human beings with no respect for not just the law, God’s or man’s, but for human beings, either. Liberals not only exploit people, which is evil. They enjoy it! Hence, political analysis is made easy: whatever is good, whatever morally binds human beings and societies together, liberals aim to not only destroy it, but to control the slavish, evil hell on the other side—like, communists. 

It is to say, there is nefariousness in every single thing liberals do, specifically these hierarchical “elites.”   

These “elites” don’t do things willy-nilly. They are organized, driven by purpose. Question: if God and morality piss them off, and if they despise the current law, God’s and man’s—the constitution, and reject both openly. Then what is their political objective?  

The objectives are many, but the driving force behind them all is destruction and evil. It would be one thing if liberals were trying to persuade voters and bring about societal change in the voting booth: if the citizenry wants evil, then they can vote for it and choose us. But liberals are executing treasonous coups, rigging elections, and trying to enforce change, instead—like, communists. 

A quick note about Marxists/communists: it’s not that people belong to some Marxist club, where they gather every Friday to encourage each other and discuss world domination over brie and merlot. It’s simply people who subscribe to evil and the destruction and misery that accompanies it. Misery they want spread to everyone, incidentally, so that everyone feels as despairing and wretched as them. Despite having a club headquarters, the Democrat National Committee, these people don’t need weekly gatherings. Unified by darkness and misery, members each know their function—even the mindless robots. 

And liberals know something else, too: free people don’t relinquish their liberty to misery and evil so easily. Hence the lies, treasonous plots, and sheep’s clothing. 

So, “elite” liberals are organized criminals driven by evil. Listening to the conservative punditry, I wondered why they didn’t get that, why it wasn’t driving their analysis, why it wasn’t the baseline from which their analysis was fashioned. Is a good and evil basis too religious and thorny for them? Too, uncool? Too, Billy Graham and Joel Osteen? It isn’t clear. What is acceptable is the same old benign, tired strategic political analysis of yesteryear: I don’t see how Joe Biden can run, which leaves Kamala Harris, who can’t win because nobody likes her. My eye is on California governor, Gavin Newsome.  

And this wasn’t the analysis of Tik-Tok’ers; these were prominent conservative voices. Meanwhile, Biden and his fellow traitors are up to their ears in crime, er, evil deeds.  

So, why doesn’t the conservative punditry understand? Why don’t they get it?  

They don’t get it because they aren’t thinking like evil criminals. Thus, they lack the vision and baseline wisdom necessary for accurate, compelling, top-shelf political analysis. Getting the drop on evil criminals demands thinking like them, which is not only compulsory, but in fact divinely instructed. Christ advised the world’s good people to be “wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” He meant: you’re sheep among wolves. Be kind and compassionate, but deftly understand the evil world in which you live and the evil people who long for your demise.  

How many serpents do you see in the open and vulnerable? How many doves? 

Acutely aware of their environment, serpents are cautious, and wise. 

Thinking criminally, evilly, is more natural than people might realize, however. Why do people explore their homes for weak defenses and add locks, chains, deadbolts, and alarm systems? To prevent easy access for thieves and theft of their stuff, of course. Why are Californians leaving their car windows down and “nothing of value” notes on their dashboards? To keep crooks from smashing the windows and searching for merchandise. Watching crime shows on television, criminally savvy viewers are rather quick to deduce, It was the professor, in the conservatory, with a candlestick.  

So, criminal thinking and evil aren’t unfamiliar to people. Perhaps the problem in this case is that they just aren’t used to viewing politicians and their own government that way, when they most certainly should. Biden’s 2024 presidential run offers the perfect case study. 

— 

The Obama administration executed a treasonous coup; an established fact now beyond dispute, the lack of punishment for the crime notwithstanding. Involving the entire liberal establishment, the crime has been the governing factor in every establishment action since. Important to our case study, however, the crime also involved our subject: then Vice President Joe Biden.  

Biden was right there, in the thick of things, a central player in this crime of crimes.  

Here, for efficacy, let’s utilize the bullhorn. This is a critical point in the examination, and people can’t help but pay attention to bullhorns: 

High-frequency whistling<<<: THESE PEOPLE ARE CRIMINALS, FOLKS. NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER! PRESIDENT, VICE PRESIDENT, SECRETARY OF STATE, DIRECTORS OF THE CIA, FBI, DOJ. THE PRESTIGIOUS TITLES ARE MEANINGLESS. THESE ARE EVIL CRIMINALS, PURE AND SIMPLE.  

Okay, let’s continue … 

In response to criminal exposure, the entire establishment did its best for four years to destroy Donald Trump, the Exposer In Chief, but failed. In 2020, the criminals needed desperately to control the presidency, a necessary tool on its own, so they could control the attorney general appointment—the deciding authority in all legal matters and controller of the criminal’s fate.  

Now. If you’re an evil, treasonous criminal prior to the 2020 election, who do you need in the White House? Bernie Sanders? Kamala Harris? Or any one of the other 20 or so primary candidates vying for the democrat nomination? 

None on that list will do. They aren’t original, core conspirators. Aiders and abettors, perhaps, but not core conspirators. You can’t control outsiders who aren’t party to the consequences.  

In selecting a candidate, think: mutually assured destruction. 

If you’re a treasonous criminal, you need an original, core conspirator in the White House, an insider with skin in the game. In the entire democrat primary field, there was only one such necessity: Joe Biden. 

Who, amazingly, won the democrat primary and nomination. 
Who, amazingly, won the presidency, too. 

In the primary’s beginnings, Biden was basically roadkill. In Iowa he finished fourth. In New Hampshire he finished fifth, the choice of only one out of every 12 voters. And in Nevada he finished second, with but a paltry 20% of the vote. Then, the Biden magic suddenly took over.  

South Carolina’s James Clyburn, congress’ highest-ranking black member, stepped-up to tell the party’s African American voters that Biden was their man. Clyburn’s support all but guaranteed Biden would carry the Black vote, or so they said. But it did more than that—it created a groundswell of energy for Biden’s campaign. The following weekend, Biden got half the South Carolina vote and thrashed the competition. After South Carolina, Clyburn’s super-galactic persuasive power clearly spilling over to the rest of the nation, longtime front-runner Bernie Sanders won but four of the remaining primary states, and Biden took ten, becoming the democrat nominee and ultimately president. 

Now. Let’s look at this scenario criminally … 

James Clyburn was a man of such powerful political persuasion that democrats in 14 different states and in all the cities, counties, and towns therein, suddenly said, Well, if James Clyburn says it, then Biden must be our man!  

Is that what we’re saying? And believing?  

It’s a guarantee that most democrats in the remaining 14 states had never even heard of James Clyburn. The fact is voters were soundly rejecting Biden in early primary voting. And now, for “James Clyburn’s” super-galactic reputation and public support, Biden becomes the premiere candidate to voters who’ve never heard of Clyburn?  

It defies belief, obviously. So, thinking criminally, what was Clyburn’s role in this farce?  

Try this: 

Approached by Hillary Clinton or Obama—Democrat Party leaders and original, core conspirators, remember—or solicited by respective surrogates, Clyburn was told he could make a real difference for Biden and the party if he’d issue his support, which, the ever-faithful liberal, Clyburn, was more than willing to do.  

Question: why Biden?  

Well, we know why. Biden is an original, core conspirator. A fellow traitor whose coconspirators needed in the White House to: (a) fill the ever so critical attorney general position and (b) to continue the destruction of America and complete the communist takeover intended via the original plot, which most assuredly took place.  

The criminals weren’t going to expose themselves or their crime to outsiders, weren’t going to compromise themselves, the mission, and provide political leverage to Clyburn or anyone else. It’s Treasonous Coup 101: no one outside the circle can know!  

Thus, Clyburn was almost certainly being used—a patsy, a useful idiot. The criminals needed a way to conceal their impending crime: rigging the upcoming primary and general elections, same as they did in 2016. Sold to the news media and public would be: Why, the venerable Jim Clyburn’s support marshaled democrat voters nationwide! Democrats know who they can trust: Jim Clyburn and Joe Biden—our next president!  

Of course, no democrats outside of South Carolina knew who Clyburn was, but that isn’t the point. Clyburn was cover. His support would be the reason for Biden’s inexplicable rise from the primary ashes and electoral victories, not the upcoming crime, which had to be committed for obvious reasons. 

Biden had to win, had to secure the democrat nomination and the White House. Victory was imperative for the criminals’ survival and the ongoing plot. So how did the criminals—Obama, his FBI, CIA, DOJ, DHS—rig the 2020 primary and general elections?  

If American law enforcement and intelligence agencies are doing their jobs, and given the tools that they possess to do those jobs, which General Jack Keane said “would make the American people’s eyes water” if they ever knew the capabilities. It would be impossible to rig an election, just as Obama himself said. Yet. we know the elections were rigged and, to that, two key questions: 

(a) with whom are these agencies ideologically and incontrovertibly aligned? Liberals.  
(b) who did the agencies conspiratorially assist in the ongoing treasonous coup? The Democrat Party. 

Thus, alliances confirmed. 

While Obama and his FBI were criminally spying on Donald Trump and people in his orbit, the Obama White House and CIA were criminally unmasking American citizens at will.  “Criminally” the operative term, in both cases. Otherwise known as: evil. Because lawlessness and criminality can’t be classified as: good. 

So, what we’re highlighting here are the tools of power, and the ability to affect elections with that power and those tools. If elections can be rigged, and we know they can, who has the power and the “eye watering” tools with which to do it? The FBI and CIA—and the Department of Justice, too, by neither investigating nor prosecuting voter fraud. And we can add the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to this list, also.  

And let’s be crystal clear about this power and these tools … 

Whenever these agencies surveil a target, for example, they can monitor all the target’s electronic communications. That means email, instant messaging and live chat, website and blogs, SMS/text messaging, phone and voicemail, video, which means looking directly into the target’s home and perhaps bedroom via smart televisions, laptop and phone cameras, and webcams.  

“Intrusive” isn’t the term for all this. Evil and perilous are more like it.  

The agencies aren’t supposed to be able to invade people’s privacy like this without surveillance warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). But then, they aren’t supposed to execute treasonous coups, lie to FISA courts, and spy on and unmask American citizens at will, either. Thus, the question: what happens when these agencies, the people in them and running them, are politically corrupt, criminal, and evil, which they have unquestionably proven themselves to be? 

Well, it means blackmail. It means treasonous coups and political corruption. It means control of government and elections. It means peril for free people and free societies at the hands of evil. 

More and more people realizing the evil that is liberalism, how are liberals to then continue winning elections? Do you think treasonous conspirators bent on a communist transformation intend to leave themselves vulnerable to democracy and the will of the people?  

Of course not. They’re going to rig elections and dispense with the vulnerability.  

And in fact, they’re doing it.  

No matter what one thinks about the potential outcome, that, numbers-wise, liberals wouldn’t have to rig elections to win. Liberals must rig elections. Because the evil authoritarian abuse they have in store will most certainly be rejected by voters eventually.  

And that, folks, shall not be allowed to happen. Evil doesn’t compromise. 

Democracy and elections must cease to exist, replaced with the illusion of democracy and public participation, which is precisely what is occurring now. 

So how do the FBI and CIA rig elections? Beyond secretly plotting to prevent and cancel the electorate’s choice, they allow voter fraud. They allow internet access to voter databases by hostile actors; access to voting machines via the internet; fraudulent mail-in ballots. The FBI, CIA, and DHS are America’s law enforcement and national security, and should not allow these things to occur.  

Well, this should be left to state authorities, hapless liberal voters would say.  

Okay. Michigan law enforcement and the state’s attorney general all agreed that massive 2020 voter fraud took place in their state, which was discovered to be a national operation, too. They investigated, made the case, and sent the evidence to the FBI in 2021. What happened? 

Nothing. 
Nothing at the FBI.  
Nothing at the CIA. 
Nothing at the DHS.  
Nothing at the Department of Injustice, either. 

See the problem?   

This is how these elite authorities, this criminal syndicate, rigs elections. People with not only the task but the “eye watering” tools to stop criminals and keep elections secure, but who nonetheless ignore massive, ubiquitous, and undeniable voter fraud—while inventing collusion hoaxes and crimes against their political opposition, no less.  

Gee, a nation’s law enforcement and intelligence institutions having political enemies. Pretty sure that translates to corruption, which involves criminality, which we know to be evil. 

And let’s not be naïve, either. These elite authorities don’t need to merely allow voter fraud. The tools at their disposal, they could simply insert votes into the tally that a particular and preferred candidate needs via the same internet, e.g. Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential victory. Biden is significantly behind in the vote count, vote counting center inexplicably, uncharacteristically shuts down, reopens hours later, and Biden emerges not-so-magically ahead.  

Why, where did all those votes come from? Why did we have to shut down vote counting when all the votes are there in house? So electronic vote fraud could take place, perhaps? 

Point is, if the elite authorities will allow others to muck around in America’s elections electronically, the authorities can muck around in America’s election’s, too. And haven’t they mucked around: collusion fraud, the Biden laptop and 51 former intelligence officials, paying CIA officials to change their view about covid origin? 

Undeniably. 

Well, how many times have they done it?  
For how long, how many elections cycles, have they done it?  
And if they were doing it, how would anyone but them know? 
But for Trump’s victory, no one would’ve ever known about the treasonous plot, certainly. 

Per treasonous success in 2016, imagine Obama and new President Hillary Clinton arm-in-arm at her victory celebration, extolling the virtues of “sacred democracy” and the wisdom of American voters. Imagine FBI Director James Comey, Peter Strozk, Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, Brennan, Clapper, Christopher Steele and the whole conspiratorial cast all touting election security and free and fair elections.  

And there sit the American people—their leaders chosen for them by evil criminals and none the wiser. It’s a scenario that actually happened in 2020, and in both cases one thing is certain: it wasn’t Trump the criminals were trying to usher to the presidency.  

Again, alliances confirmed. 

The modern conservative punditry makes arguments regarding republican election losses: Trump’s hand-picked candidates mostly lost in Georgia. And, The voters in Pennsylvania favored Fetterman, not Dr. Oz. How do Trump voters explain that? 

Well, did the hand-picked candidates really lose?  
Did voters really prefer Fetterman over Dr. Oz?  
Are liberals really winning elections nationwide?  

People keep saying, Why do voters in failing liberal cities keep voting for liberals?! Well, are the voters in these cities really voting for liberals, and crime and squalor? Are liberals such cunning deceivers that voters will deny the societal decrepitude before their very eyes?  

What if these treasonous criminals have had their hand in the outcome—not dictating every election to avoid suspicion, but only the races critical to power and the cause? We know for certain they were involved in a treasonous plot, and that they are ignoring voter and election fraud that would benefit the opposition. Four indictments and impending court cases and counting, we know the criminals despise Donald Trump, or are scared to death of him, one, or both.  

So then, to protect themselves from exposure and punishment, and to advance their communist mission, why not rig elections and secure the outcome? And if so, who but them would know?  

Some say it hasn’t gotten bad enough for people to wake-up to what liberals are doing to the country. Well, what if people know it’s bad, are awake, are voting against liberals, and the criminals are simply cancelling their votes and controlling election outcomes? They certainly have the tools to do it.

And worse … 

These conspirators are known criminals. Evil villains who have escaped punishment purely for their control of the institutions and agencies who would normally expose and punish them. Are they and their crimes served by not rigging elections and by not allowing voter fraud? Doesn’t the election of anyone but them into positions of authority and control spell potential doom? Doesn’t Trump’s relentless persecution demonstrate that? 

It’s all “conspiracy theory” until we acknowledge these people are evil criminals who’ve been caught committing treason. It’s all conspiracy theory until we acknowledge these are evil criminals who are also amending Democrat Party primary rules to lockout their own party’s primary candidate, Robert Kennedy, to guarantee Biden’s presidency; who have the leading republican candidate mired in  mass of manufactured litigation; and who attempted a sweetheart plea deal to close the door on Biden and Obama era crime forever, and to guarantee a Biden presidency. 

So, to the conservative punditry: doesn’t it seem the criminals are desperate to ensure that Biden remains in office? Yes? Well, why is that?  

Here’s a perspective: if republicans and conservatives were involved in all this, and if Trump, the GOP, and conservatism were benefiting. These same authorities, with their powerful anti-crime tools, would be all over it like a fat kid on cake. Yet it’s liberals and liberalism benefiting, and the authorities are absent. Again, why is that? 

Because they’re evil communist criminals attempting to upend a nation and arrest authoritarian control of its citizenry, the American people.  

When the conservative punditry understands that concept and uses it as the basis for opinion and analysis, only then will they be on the “cutting edge of societal evolution.” Anything else is just, below average opinion and analysis. Note: the political analysis of yesterday is inept, and over. 

Everyone knows Biden is guilty of his current alleged crimes, bribery and money laundering—even liberal voters. Bank receipts don’t lie. Even so, the criminals can’t afford to lose him, can’t afford an outsider to be Commander In Chief, because that’s how they control things. Thus, they can’t afford a legal case against Biden, either. Not because Biden is so valuable and irreplaceable, but because he’s a conspirator, and because a trial exposes Barrack Obama and the entire conspiracy. It’s why the conspirators’ hand-picked attorney general, Merrick Garland, tried to slip a plea deal past Judge Noreika and put the entire Biden, and ultimately the coup matter, to plea-arranged rest.  

And no, Biden isn’t running the country; he can barely put two sentences together. The conspirators, the criminals, are making the decisions, which is abundantly clear. Himself compromised, Biden must do what they say, too, which explains his agenda’s precise reflection of Obama’s Marxist agenda, the Conspirator In Chief. 

So, when wondering why the news media hasn’t yet, despite years of accumulating and verified evidence, climbed aboard this raging dumpster fire that is Biden Family crime. It’s because the original, core criminals don’t know yet how to handle the matter. Because the criminals don’t know how to handle the matter, the news media, a conspirator itself, doesn’t know how to address it. Unlike the original collusion plot, there has been no signal, no perceivable course of action. Originally, the criminals proclaimed that Trump had colluded with Putin to steal the election, and the news media immediately took flight with the story. That was their signal; they knew exactly what to do. In contrast, there is all this undeniable criminality involving Biden, the affirming evidence stacked literally to the Oversight Committee rafters. And yet the news media is silent.  

Silent because they haven’t had their cue. 

And they haven’t had their cue because the criminals need an insider, an original core conspirator, in the White House and don’t know what to do. And when you don’t know what to do, and when you can’t do anything else, you do nothing. You ride this jeopardy-ridden nightmare out.  

People think liberals are so cunning, so superior in their political and legal acumen. When, here they are, flying by the seat of their pants and becoming increasingly more desperate and obvious. They were arrogant, got out over their treacherous skis. Now here they are, forced to keep a doddering, demented criminal in the White House. 

As a result, Biden can do anything. He can wander aimlessly through White House shrubbery on the way to the door; dementedly walk out of an ongoing a medal ceremony; shake hands with invisible people; fall again and again; fall over on his bicycle; mumble unintelligibly; say weird nonsensical things; tell stories everyone knows are false. Nothing is too disqualifying or humiliating, because the criminals are trapped and can’t afford to lose him. They can’t afford physician analysis of his mental health, and therefore won’t allow it; can’t afford him to be in public more than necessary, to answer tough, unscripted questions without notecards; can’t afford to respond to his verified familial corruption; and most certainly, can’t afford a trial regarding these vice-presidential crimes, which would lead directly to the criminals and their treasonous conspiracy. 

Why install a doddering, demented criminal in the White House?  

Because he’s an original core conspirator and there are no other options. 
Because your treasonous plot can/must continue.  
Because your exposure and punishment can be controlled. 
Mainly, because you need him there. 

At least, that’s how evil criminals think. 

It’s just not debatable anymore. America is in the middle of a historic crime, an evil communist coup masquerading as normal politics. That’s the goal, to make everything seem normal, like the everyday bickering between political parties, the ideological push and pull over issues. No news about a coup. No trials involving conspirators. No unnecessary attention to the goings on behind a clearly ailing and broken presidential façade. Just, politics as usual. That way, the victims—the American people— aren’t alerted and are none the wiser.  

Former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich:  

“There’s, I think, a second reason for dramatically broadening the [Hunter Biden] investigation … this is really about the weaponization of government, the collapse of the rule of law and its replacement by the rule of power. And that really involves three principles. It involves Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden. 

“Remember, when you start getting things like the discovery that Biden wrote under three fake names, Obama by the way also wrote under fake names and of course, Hillary had an entire fake server in her home. Obama and Biden both wrote to her fake server which is totally outside the security rules. I think any investigation has to go way beyond Hunter Biden, who, by the standards of corruption is a small fish … while Obama was president, none of this could have happened without his active knowledge. It’s just not possible.” 

And there it is: accurate, compelling, top-shelf conservative analysis, if years late. Only, Gingrich still avoided a key phrase: evil criminals, which is exactly who these conspirators are, and exactly how they should be publicly characterized every day and at every public opportunity by the entire conservative punditry. Indeed, Obama did know, and gave his consent. And that he knew, it’s impossible that America’s vaunted, highly sophisticated law enforcement and intelligence agencies didn’t know, too, and didn’t execute the ongoing crime at Obama’s behest. 

Otherwise, they would have done their duty and stopped the crime, exposed the crime, and sought punishment for the crime. That’s how the good and evil paradigm works. The good guys pursue and stop the bad guys, the evil criminals.  

Hence, the analysis in this situation is straightforward: the should be good guys are in fact the bad guys, who are not only involved in an evil communist coup, but leading the agencies tasked with stopping criminals like themselves. Given the lengths to which they’ve gone to prevent their exposure and punishment, the minacious question becomes: what further evils might these criminals be willing to commit?  

The alarming truth is, when you’re evil criminals in the middle of a treasonous communist takeover and facing physical, ideological, and political death if you fail. There are no evils you are unwilling to commit, and to compliment the ones you’ve already committed—all in an evil quest to make slaves of an entire nation and citizenry, it should be noted. 

In response, the victims must authoritatively understand the evil world in which they live and the evil people who long for their demise. Because the conflict between good and evil is not just eternal. Ever-present, it baselines the human experience and world affairs. Thus, thinking like the opposition not only makes for accurate, compelling, and top-shelf political opinion and analysis.  

It can be the victims’ saving grace. 

©JMW 9/2023 
All Rights Reserved 

JMW’s latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside.

The American people must look a little deeper into this establishment concept. Doing so, they’d learn (a) the establishment isn’t exclusively democrat and (b) the forces against America are much more massive and problematic than they realize.  

It is to say, extremely few in Washington are loyal and friendly to the American ideal. 

The establishment is concerned with two things: power, and guaranteeing it has it. And one either opposes that idea, or supports it—supports establishment power and control, that is.  

There is no middle ground. The constitution says so. 

So then, why can’t the republican primary candidates talk about it? Why isn’t it the only thing they are talking about? It should be.  

What is “it,” exactly? 

A treasonous plot—an ongoing treasonous plot—by the Obama administration and his fellow conspirators: Hillary Clinton, America’s own FBI and CIA and DOJ, the Democrat Party, deep state actors, geopolitical players, and nearly the entire national news media, save Fox News.  

Obama and the entire establishment tried to take down a duly elected president in 2016, tried to usurp democracy and ixnay the people’s choice, and used the full and immense power of the federal government to complete and ensure an undeniably communist transformation.  

That’s the charge. The only question is: is it true?  

Because if it is, then nothing else matters. No issue is more important. 

Well, it is true. Irrefutably so.  

In under oath court testimony, Clinton campaign manager, Robby Mook, confessed that Hillary “signed off” on the phony Steele dossier scheme. And she not only signed off; she and the Democrat National Committee (DNC) paid for it, via a laundered draft, an illegal use of campaign finances, as it turned out. Clinton and the DNC were fined by the Federal Elections Commission—a fine quietly issued and paid.  

I can’t speak for everyone, but I’m not paying a fine for something I didn’t do. Because whatever would incur a fine would be (a) illegal and (b) an expense both financial and reputational—equally intolerable. I simply wouldn’t do it. I wouldn’t launder drafts, either, for the same reasons. And if I were criminal enough to do these things, well, I’d quietly manage them … too. 

Gee, laundered payments. What all does that imply, exactly? 

Special Counsel, John Durham, investigated the Russian collusion matter. He concluded there was no lawful predicate for the FBI to open the Crossfire Hurricane investigation and to spy on Trump’s campaign. Simply, the FBI didn’t have any evidence for the action but Clinton’s fake dossier, which each and every conspirator no less confessed in under oath/penalty-for-perjury testimony—but then said otherwise publicly and while not under oath and penalty of perjury.  

Something about being under oath and criminal perjury really brings out the truth in people, even treasonous liberals.  

Even so, in service to a treasonous coup, the FBI did it anyway, an act then clearly and indisputably sanctioned by the Conspirator In Chief: Barrack Obama. A historic conspiracy that was nonetheless left uninvestigated and unreported by the entire national news media, for now seven years. 

So. It’s settled, then. The entire establishment—the Democrat Party, the Obama administration, the deep state, the news media—conspired to commit treason against the United States and the America people. Of course, we can hear liberal voters howling: But, but, nobody’s been convicted or went to prison! Okay but, does that make these revelations any less true? The liberal faithful like to hang their hat on the no time-no crime idea, as if that somehow nullifies the treasonous plot and exonerates their political deities. Well, what about these under oath and investigative revelations? What about the campaign finance violations and fines?  

Ask the FEC why they fined Clinton and the DNC. They’d say, Well, in paying for the dossier, Mrs. Clinton and the Committee misused campaign funds [In fact, the FEC did say it, via the fine].  

You: So they paid for this ‘Steele Dossier,’ then, which was fake. “
FEC: Well, yes. At least they paid for it. We aren’t concerned with matters of authenticity, only spending violations. 

And if Clinton paid for it, then it renders the whole Russian collusion matter a fraud, a political calumny. The fact all the conspirators knew it was a fraud renders it a treasonous conspiracy. Albeit a conspiracy with no convictions or prison time. And to the fact there hasn’t been any punishment:  

Might that speak to the deep establishment corruption of which Donald Trump speaks?  
Might that be because the establishment is a corrupt criminal enterprise?  
A treasonous coup doesn’t demonstrate and authenticate crime and corruption?  

So, again: it’s settled—the irritating ululation of liberal voters notwithstanding. The entire establishment conspired to commit treason against the United States and the America people. This now firmly established, here’s the question: 

Do you really think treasonous conspirators care who runs for the 2024 GOP nomination?  

In other words, if traitors attempt a treasonous coup to arrest power and render the citizenry communist slaves, and then fail, and then use their establishment allies, federal agencies, and ultimate power to evade punishment for seven years, and thus far survive, virtually intact, and are thus emboldened, and poised to perhaps try it again, to this time perhaps succeed, never to be punished ever again, and to succeed in their communist dream.  

Do you really think an opposition’s candidate would matter to such people?  

What matters to traitors, a crime punishable by death, incidentally, is not getting caught. So Job Number One, obviously, is keeping your crime concealed, which the traitors have thus far done, at least to the extent they haven’t been criminally indicted, thanks to their establishment network of conspirators and ideologues.    

Now. Next question: regarding the opposition, who is the one GOP primary candidate who intimately knows what the traitors did, and can prove it? Which candidate has seen the evidence, documented the evidence [Mar-a-Lago raid anyone?], and whose functionaries helped prove the traitor’s crimes?  Furthermore, which candidate is the only candidate railing about establishment corruption, about putting an end to both the corruption and establishment reign, and about returning rightful, constitutional authority to the American citizenry? 

Donald Trump, of course. And isn’t this—establishment corruption and specifically treason—the only issue that matters? 

We’re talking about traitors, here. Traitors who are not only legally pursuing and indicting Donald Trump, but who must pursue and indict. Why?

For their crime, of course.

They’re Marxist traitors and treasonous coup conspirators. So, yes. They actually do care which GOP primary candidate runs for the GOP nomination, at least where it concerns Trump. 

The obsessive litigious shoes don’t match the dress? 

So then, what is this farce that is the GOP primary? Why are the candidates moving forward as if a treasonous coup never took place? It plays right into the establishment’s hands. In fact, the treasonous conspirators love this concept. There are all the primary candidates, talking about all the problems they’ll solve when “they become president.” It’s politics as usual—just what a treasonous establishment would want.  

No need to look back on a treasonous plot, folks. If we were guilty, then we would’ve been punished. Just ask our voters.  

Or as Barrack Obama put it: “Forward!” A term of conviction, interestingly, that European Marxists and radicals applied to their own respective movements, also aimed at moving past capitalism and—“Forward!”—into socialism and communism. And it’s really just communism, socialism the purgatory before the gulags and gas chambers. 

The GOP primary candidates are on stage talking about political stuff, a return to “fiscal responsibility” and “common sense governance.” Meanwhile, the traitors are busy burying the one threat to their power in manufactured and limitless litigation, an issue GOP primary candidates are clearly loath to discuss.  

We need to move past Trump.  
We can’t win with Trump. 
We need freshness in the Oval Office.  
Trump’s buried in litigation! 

Well, what is that litigation all about? Who’s burying Trump in it, exactly? And why? 

All these republican candidates know what, who, and why. But they also know their desires and ambitions, and what it requires to serve those desires and ambitions. And a disservice to those desires and ambitions is acknowledging a treasonous coup took place and, on behalf of the American people, fighting the Marxist establishment that executed it. 

There is one candidate acknowledging and fighting. Thus far he has refused to share the primary stage with America’s Marxist enemies. 

That’s the power of calling out your enemy and exposing his sins: if forces everyone into a choice, into choosing a side and exposing themselves. Including republican primary candidates, who’ve turned out to be just more establishment myrmidons. Trump the competition, they’d rather defeat him, than defend the American people from a communist coup. 

Side chosen. Loyalty revealed. 

It’s like looking at a tiny, pin-prick island on a world map, say, like, the Solomon Island’s Guadalcanal. Then approaching that island by boat to realize its comparative immensity and vastness. Likewise, the establishment is more expansive than people might suspect. More than just democrats, it’s a sea of self-serving people who want to maintain the political arrangement and eliminate any threat to the profitable status quo. 

Something they do by burying the threat in manufactured litigation and pretending treason is not the elephant in the room during a presidential primary. 

©JMW 8/2023 
All Rights Reserved 

JMWs Latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside. 

After Russian collusion was exposed as, essentially, a treasonous Obama administration plot, everything that followed in the get Trump saga—perpetual scandals, two impeachment attempts, a stolen 2020 election via a bioweapon and massive voter fraud, a January 6 insurrection scam, an unprecedented DOJ/FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago, countless post-presidency indictments and lawsuits—should have sent a crystal-clear message:  

Donald Trump cannot survive. 

As a friend recently put it: “Even the most disconnected, apolitical person should be able to notice the weird, pathological obsession.” 

You’d be surprised, I said. 

Even so, it is abundantly clear: destroying Trump is imperative. There can be no other outcome. What did he do to deserve such pathological preoccupation?  Well, let’s first address the things he didn’t do, which are represented by seven years’ worth of fake, manufactured scandals and crimes that were all disproven and fell flat. As for what he did do, as to the crime that made his demise imperative, the sin is singular: 

He proclaimed America’s political establishment “failed and corrupt,” and said he was going to replace it “with a new government controlled by you, the American people”— 

but wait, isn’t that how it was meant to be in America? The original design? 

Given the establishment’s reaction, its continuing seven-year legal assault and its abundantly obvious goal—Trump’s destruction. His accusation clearly and inarguably has merit. His sin was publicly indicting the establishment and challenging its/their domain and rule, and for seven-years now, members all—the Democrat Party, the GOP, the FBI and CIA, the deep state, the news media—have been seeking his demise. And despite falling flat on their faces with every single attempt, they, unfazed and undaunted, keep trying.  

What would inspire such establishment zeal? Such odd political alliances and unity?  

Exposing their rigged and corrupt system and putting an end to it, perhaps?  
Restoring constitutional law and order and returning political control to the American people?  

A seven-year assault yet at full-throttle, the establishment clearly loathes both of those ideas.  

Why? 

Well, maybe because they’re corrupt, and because they really, really like the beneficial system they’ve arranged for themselves.  

I’m spit-balling here, but it makes sense.  

Establishment democrats and republicans can’t unify on anything else. Yet challenge their power and control, their domain and rule, and their interests suddenly align. Suddenly there is agreement of purpose and kinship, which they don’t publicize, but that’s nonetheless obvious in their shared goal: Trump’s destruction. Liberals say directly, Trump is a criminal unfit for office! While GOPer’s like Paul Ryan are more indirect: “Republicans can’t win with Trump.”

A softer, less compromising approach, but the same objective, nonetheless. 

It has been said countless times, but perhaps it’s time to start living by it: don’t listen to what people say; watch what they do. Behavior never lies. Via behavior, people tell you what is in their heart, tell you what they believe and, to the point, their objectives and goals. Electing Trump, the American people overwhelmingly loved and agreed with him in 2016, and with 11 million more votes in 2020, loved and agreed even more. The establishment, on the other hand, did not agree, and for seven-years now have made the American people pay for their disagreeable selection.  

Why? 

Because they can! Because it’s their domain and rule, not the people’s. 

Via their power and control, the establishment manufactured seven-years’ worth of legal fraud to destroy Trump. Seven years’ worth—and the fraud factory is still up and running and the fraud ongoing. Now that is determination. Dedication invariably summoned for but one reason: abject fear.  

Absolute terror of losing their domain, power, control, and rule. 

Enduring their attacks and undeterred, Trump is equally determined to end their establishment reign, their rule of deceit and abuses at the expense of their rightful lords and paymasters, the American people. Hence, Trump cannot win reelection—cannot be allowed to run, even, and have the opportunity. If the citizenry understood the gravity of this conflict, they would be more concerned and engaged. Instead, they view it as normal, eye-rollable politics. When it is anything but normal politics. It’s wholly abnormal, in fact, which should be obvious when an entire political establishment undertakes a seven-year effort to destroy a singular politician and prevent him from exposing its treasonous crimes.  

For challenging the establishment’s domain and rule, not only can Trump not occupy the White House. He must be destroyed, utterly—not only to save and ensure the established order, but to send a message to all others who’d dare challenge its/their authority. 

This unrelenting and bankrupting legal assault is what awaits you, too, slick! 

The bottom line in all this is dark and ugly: the establishment is not only deeply corrupt, but treasonous. Members betrayed the United States and have been both caught in their treasonous crimes and, specifically the GOP, exposed for their establishment loyalty. Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, and every other establishment-loyal republican knows full well what the establishment has done to Trump, and fully understand the involved corruption, too. And they nevertheless chose a side— 

the establishment side.  

Trump represents a choice: the establishment or the United States Constitution? Or rather, establishment domain and rule, or constitutional servitude, as designed and intended? Some members want to avoid accountability for their treasonous crimes, obviously, but none want to surrender the power and control they’ve arranged for themselves, or the subsequent security and fruits, either. Members can accumulate vast personal wealth. They are societal celebrities, inexplicably cheered and lauded. Controlling law enforcement, intelligence, the judiciary, the news media—they can do whatever they want and either conceal their crimes or, if necessary, avoid punishment.  

Establishment members fancy themselves rulers, not servants of the people. And like all the rest of history’s despots, they aim to keep it that way.  

Hence, Trump must be destroyed. Utterly.  

He cannot survive because he’s threatening the establishment’s domain and rule, which is more than just a beneficial arrangement, incidentally. It’s HQ for a communist takeover of the United States—and not a planned communist takeover, either, but one ongoing. Liberals don’t plan on subjecting themselves to the peasantry’s complaints and unhappiness forever. The goal is to arrange things so the peasantry’s complaints and unhappiness don’t matter; so elections don’t matter; so campaign lying and all those bus tours to stinking, backwater states and towns are unnecessary.  

The Marxist objective well on its way to fulfillment, Donald Trump cannot then survive. If he survives and wins reelection, he will once again stop the establishment’s destruction of America, devastation necessary to usher in communism, and to permanently shutter the complaint and unhappiness departments. He will restore the historic prosperity, security, and success of his first term and, most injurious, will yet again demonstrate the ineptitude, corruption, and undeniable Marxist evil of America’s establishment complex. 

And that … is a problem. 

All roads lead to Russian collusion. Basically, the establishment plotted against the American people and were caught, were exposed. Thus, every step of the last seven years, every get Trump-themed political contrivance and subsequent road to nowhere, has been a strategic and desperate effort to conceal their treasonous Russian collusion crime, and to hold on to their domain and rule. 

Command and control that’s in grave danger as long as Trump hangs around. 

Trump cannot hang around, which is no less obvious. Hence the question: in a functioning republic where freedom, liberty, and the citizenry reign, why not? Why can’t a political challenger exist, and be met fairly in the arena of ideas? Whom does a functioning republic and Trump threaten exactly? 

The answer presents these suggestions, ideas not to be met fairly in the arena of ideas, either: perhaps the republic isn’t functioning. Perhaps the established rulers refuse to tolerate such insolence and disobedience from any and every political challenger.  

And furthermore, perhaps Trump demonstrates it. 

©JMW 7/2023 
All Rights Reserved 

JMWs latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside.

Is the Special Counsel a corrupt establishment conspirator? In view of John Durham’s long-awaited report on the Russian collusion plot, this is an apparent question that now, unfortunately, requires an answer. 

Media pundits keep telling us that these federal litigators assigned to these significant cases are apolitical and bipartisan people brimming with dependable character and integrity, and thus totally trustworthy. Yet time and again proven criminals escape prosecution and punishment—at least, certain proven criminals, criminals of a certain distinction. 

Establishment members never get punished. Pick your historic crime: a treasonous Russian collusion plot, Hunter and Joe Biden’s laptop crimes, election fraud. Crime after criminal and ethical and immoral crime, the result for liberal members is the same: no punishment. 

So, quick question: when political leaders can commit crimes and control their own justice, what do they call that? Tyranny? Communism?   

Pretty sure those are the terms. 

Regarding Durham and his investigation, let’s understand precisely what took place … 

Russiagate—the term for the establishment’s treasonous Russian collusion coup—was a political operation launched by Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC (Democrat National Committee). Or basically, Clinton and the Democrat Party. Criminally, they used campaign money to buy a fictional story about Donald Trump from FBI informant and former British intelligence officer, Christopher Steele, which they then put into a document, the Steele Dossier, and took to the FBI.  

Knowing the information therein was a manufactured and false Clinton product, the FBI still and then took that document and launched a full-scale investigation into Donald Trump anyway. Looking to expand their investigation and its capacities—surveillance, the FBI then took the fictional information to the FISA (Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court) court.  

Once in court, the FBI claimed it had extensive information that Donald Trump was a Russian asset, a spy for the Russians—information the FBI, again, knew was manufactured and false. Therein, the FBI lied to the FISA court and judge—about the information, the facts, and their biases. Most importantly, the agency did not provide the court the evidence of the target’s [Trump’s] innocence in their investigation [evidence they had, and a fact they knew for their case being a manufactured fraud and coup attempt], a fundamental requirement in the judicial warrant process.  

So basically, the FBI knowingly lied to a federal court to achieve their objective, which was to surveil a political candidate they did not like, who they no less knew was being targeted by his political opponent, Clinton, whom they obviously preferred.  

And, they succeeded.  

Clinton got the ball rolling with the paid for fiction and, after she lost the 2016 election, the FBI took over and kept the conspiracy ball rolling. A contrived, predicateless venture otherwise known as: a conspiratorial coup. 

In sum, if there was no predicate for the Trump/Russian collusion investigation, no reason to open it, for the investigation to ever begin, or for the surveillance warrant to be issued. Then everything that happened afterward—the Mueller investigation, the trials of Trump cabinet members, the advocating news stories, the years-long taunting by gullible and annoying liberal voters—shouldn’t have happened either. 

Per his report, Durham verified this lack of predicate, and in fact laid out the above summary in exhaustive and excruciating detail. But the lack of predicate wasn’t the point he was making. He was saying something else. The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution: 

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” [emphasis added] 

In other words, “no [FISA] warrants shall issue” without a predicate. 

Durham was saying the coup conspirators broke the law. They had no cause to surveil Trump, and they knew it [executing a treasonous coup, of course they knew it!]. Yet they did it anyway, with a manufactured fiction they knew to be invented. A dreamed-up, paid for tale that they put in an official document to destroy a political opponent and steal an election.  

Okay, so. The crime incontrovertible, where are the arrests, indictments, and prosecutions? Which should be a rather long, scroll-like list of individuals.  

Clinton was definitely a conspirator. Barrack Obama was, too, and his entire administration, from White House advisers to members of the FBI, intelligence community, and Department of Justice (DOJ). So was Christopher Steele, along with Glenn Simpson and his entire Fusion GPS staff. There were Democrat Party members, Adam Schiff for one, and a slew of others. Members of the news media were involved, too, and not just reporting contrived and fake news stories, but actively participating in the coup itself.  

The coup never stood a chance of success without the news media’s involvement.  

Know that. Never forget it. 

There are a lot of agency and company labels here, but within are countless individuals, conspirators, who perpetuated this now undeniable crime—multiple crimes, actually. Hence, this is clearly much worse than a mere “no predicate” issue and negligent police work.  

Clearly, it’s a criminal conspiracy. Indeed, a historic crime of treason.  

When you have no probable cause, no “predicate,’ you violate the Fourth Amendment. When a group of public officials has no predicate, and know they have no predicate, because they know the information they are using is manufactured and false. Then it’s a conspiracy—a conspiracy to defraud voters, to subvert an election, and to ultimately commit treason.  

So again, a major and historic crime clearly and unquestionably committed, where are Durham’s arrests, indictments, and prosecutions? His final report and investigatory task now complete, we know there won’t be any further indictments or prosecutions or punishment by Durham. As former FBI Director, James Comey, did for Clinton and her classified document crimes, Durham laid out the conspirator’s crimes in his report, and has effectively exonerated the conspirators, too. 

Well, Durham did try a couple of cases in court and lost, you say. True. But, how hard did he really try? We know what really trying, what being extremely determined to destroy your target looks like. It’s an establishment and deep state trying to pull off a treasonous plot both to steal an election and destroy a president they don’t like.  

Now that’s trying!  

Did Durham try this hard? Was he as vehemently committed to success? Or is he yet another establishment conspirator tasked with playing his role and making sure the establishment prevails and survives? He makes clear in his report that a major and historic crime took place involving a scroll-like list of conspirators. Yet there are no further indictments, prosecutions, or potential punishment?  

Pardon the profanity, but, how the f- can that possibly be?! 

Ask Comey: how can you lay out all these crimes committed by the target of your investigation, and then say “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case” against the target? People stand around glancing at one another confused, How can he itemize all these crimes and not prosecute? As if they’ve missed some key detail or haven’t the legal acumen to understand. But they haven’t missed anything. There simply won’t be any prosecution because Comey, a collusion conspirator, didn’t want there to be a prosecution of Hillary Clinton, not only his fellow conspirator, but the Russian collusion architect. 

Likewise, here’s Durham laying out in his report the crimes of these establishment conspirators, the very same conspirators Comey protected, incidentally, and he isn’t bringing any more cases, either. Conclusion? 

Let’s just say one and one makes two. 

Durham did indeed bring a couple of cases—Michael Sussmann and Igor Danchenko—to trial. The liberal juries in DC and Virginia nullified the overwhelming evidence against both men, which means both could’ve confessed their crimes and the juries wouldn’t have convicted them merely for the convictions validating Trump and his “witch hunt” claims.

In fact, upon conclusion of the Sussmann trial, the jury foreperson said, “Personally, I don’t think [the case] should have been prosecuted because I think we have better time or resources to use or spend to other things that affect the nation as a whole than a possible lie to the FBI. We could spend that time more wisely. The government had the job of proving beyond a reasonable doubt. We broke it down…as a jury. It didn’t pan out in the government’s favor.” 

Rather, it didn’t pan out in Trump’s favor.  

As for the foreperson’s “time and resources” complaint, incidentally, what could the nation do with $40 million dollars spent on a fraud that Sussmann and his collusion conspirators, namely Robert Mueller, perpetrated at taxpayer expense? Did that “affect the nation as a whole?” How about election fraud and disenfranchising American voters? That have national implications? 

Better still, Ms. Liberal Jury Foreperson, does any of that change your opinion about Trump? That he was the actual victim of a manufactured state crime and not a Russian asset? No? Not even a little? 

Oh boy. She gave us the finger. Typical. 

Yes, Durham failed twice in court. So, what? Did he become demoralized, forlorn, and throw-in the litigious towel? Or did he take the occasion to wrap up the investigation for himself and the rest of his fellow establishment conspirators? 

Durham did manage one conviction in the case: FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith, which was a conviction Durham couldn’t avoid, actually, for Clinesmith being so reckless and foolish. Nevertheless, it’s a litigious success that presents an interesting, and perhaps, condemning, query.  

A convicted collusion conspirator, Clinesmith altered a document and intentionally lied to a federal court, just so the FBI and DOJ could secure probable cause and get the warrant, which “shall not be issued but upon probable cause,” to spy on Trump. Clinesmith agreed to plead guilty, because, well, there’s the clearly altered document, and he was caught. So, as part of the plea deal, why didn’t Durham bind Clinesmith’s cooperation to the plea agreement thereafter? Or more simply, as a condition of Clinesmith’s plea, why didn’t Durham force him to cooperate? 

Durham states in his own report that Clinesmith declined to participate.  

Declined to participate? What is this fresh nonsense?!  

Was anyone allowed to decline participation in Mueller’s phony Russian collusion investigation?  

No.  

Who told Clinesmith to alter the document?  
Were his superiors involved?  
Did someone sign-off on his lie?  

But a few important questions we have no answer to because Clinesmith “declined” to participate, and Durham allowed it. 

And, it gets worse … 

Durham allowed the architects—FBI Director James Comey, Peter Strozk, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and others—of the biggest, most fraudulent conspiracy in FBI/DOJ history to effectively decline participation, too. Strikingly, or perhaps, condemningly, none of them were brought under subpoena and compelled to testify, either.  

So, let’s be clear: the two people responsible for our law enforcement community, James Comey and Andrew McCabe, launched a fraudulent investigation, knowingly lied to a federal court to enhance that fraudulent investigation, leaked about it to the media, allowed it to continue for over a year. And John Durham never spoke to them? 

Durham’s task boiled down to one question: did the FBI have a predicate, have probable cause, to open the Crossfire Hurricane case and spy on Trump? His conclusion was a resounding no, which then compels a crime, and participants in that crime. And Durham allows them to decline participation and doesn’t speak to them. 

Why? Why would such fundamental aspects of prosecutorial procedure be neglected and allowed?  

Durham is a 30-plus-year federal prosecutor, was the US Attorney for the District of Connecticut and ran an entire federal prosecutor’s office. He served multiple jurisdictions in administrations, both republican and democrat. So, as former federal prosecutor himself, Kash Patel, said, “There is no way he doesn’t know how to use the grand jury process and subpoena individuals.” 

So then, Durham allowed these criminals walk. Let them walk even knowing, per his report, they were guilty. Thus, Durham is one of two things in this scenario: a prosecutor, if inept and failed, or an establishment conspirator. And prosecutors, determined prosecutors, apolitical and unbiased prosecutors, prosecutors brimming with dependable character and integrity, and totally trustworthy, do not fail to compel cooperation and allow criminals to go unpunished. 

Juries might allow it, which signals genuine national peril, incidentally. But not committed, competent, honest prosecutors of unquestionable character and integrity. 

During his testimony to congress, Durham found it “sobering” that the FBI didn’t interview its sources for its Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Yet here he is having done the very same thing. When your goals are honesty, fairness, and integrity, and to protect the accused and the accused’s rights and reputation, you do the work to make sure the accusations are true and that your resulting charges are warranted.  

Even the mundane and unnecessary tasks, like, you know, speaking to the accusers.  

The establishment swamp is a deeply corrupt and fetid place, a degree of which the American people had no idea. Donald Trump exposed not only that the swamp exists, but that it is made up of both Republicans and Democrats. Self-serving dwellers who want the political arrangement to remain the same, where they get to play their political games at quite literally the public’s expense. Where they get to hand out other people’s money and receive all the accolades of charitable compassion, and get to enjoy notoriety and celebrity and status, and the financial fruits thereof.  

The American people had no idea of the depth of the corruption, which has taken seven years to but partially expose. The opened sore continues to ooze, however, continues to reveal secrets and data as to how deep the corruption runs. For the continuing revelations, establishment figures, both republican and democrat, have been forced to publicly choose sides, if only by behavior and in deed. Trump remaining relative has made every swamp dweller publicize both their identity and loyalty, specifically establishment republicans. They talk about the rule of law and the national debt, and about everything and anything but the confirmed fact Donald Trump—and America—has been a victim of a treasonous plot, and that Joe Biden and his establishment conspirators are being protected by the establishment, which obviously includes these establishment-loyal republicans.  

As obscenely corrupt and disturbing as that is, the question is, does the establishment’s corruption reach the Special Prosecutor’s office and include John Durham?  Because, it appears it does.

Or, perhaps there is another answer … 

Former US Attorney, Brett Tolman: 

“I had my fair share of run-ins with main justice [DOJ]. John Durham is a good man. He’s hard working, but I believe absolutely that [he] was hamstrung by the Department of Justice; I think, at every angle that he probably wanted to pursue. [Selecting him] was both the optic of appointing a special counsel that provided some semblance of hope to the right, but it was also the trap the DOJ could use to confine the nature of the investigation and the aggression of the investigation.  

“Think about when the DOJ wants to be aggressive. We see them be aggressive when they want to, when it’s classified documents in the possession of a former president [Trump], they can be very, very aggressive. If it’s Hunter Biden, they can delay. If it’s special counsel John Durham … And I don’t believe that it was the investigation that [Durham] truly wanted to run. I think what you saw was an investigation that was outlined for him, that this was the way it was going to go down in the department.” 

Of course, Durham had the ability to fight back, the ability to say, No, this is my investigation and I’m here to find the truth wherever it leads. The DOJ certainly sanctioned the ability of other investigations to expand their focus, namely the Mueller investigation. If the DOJ was putting roadblocks in Durham’s way to hamstring his investigation and conceal the truth—their establishment crimes, Durham could have overcome them.   

Tolman again: “I don’t want to excuse John Durham for failings that may have been the result of his decision making. Because he certainly could have pressed the envelope, been more public. But it’s not his demeanor to do so, and I think [the DOJ conspirators] knew that when they put him in that position. You needed someone that was going to be willing to butt their head up against the executive levels of DOJ and say, No, I am going to issue a subpoena to Jim Comey. I am going to subpoena Hillary Clinton. I’m going to subpoena [Andrew] McCabe and [Peter] Strozk. And if they want to take the 5^th [Amendment], I’m going to make them do it on the record, and then I’m going to decide which ones I’ll give immunity to, and leverage, so that I can get them to talk. And they’ll be under oath. And if they don’t cooperate, we’ll go after them for obstruction. [The investigation] needed to have somebody that had that aggression, but [the DOJ conspirators] knew that they didn’t have that in John Durham.” 

So then, was John Durham a willing conspirator, or merely temperamentally weak and controllable?   

Either way, the establishment conspirators all got what they wanted: no punishment. 

The math is interesting: virtually everyone in Washington, the news media, and the entertainment industry despises Trump, to include former Attorney General William Barr, who appointed Durham to investigate crimes against Trump, and current AG, Merrick Garland, who unprecedentedly raided Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home for classified documents, and indicted him for related crimes. Durham just testified to congress that the entire Russian collusion matter was a treasonous plot involving all these establishment figures and agencies. And all are not only ignoring the revelation, but still angling to destroy the plot’s target and victim: Donald Trump. 

As recent years keep repeatedly revealing, the question about any and every establishment figure is not: are they corrupt? But are they not corrupt? Unfortunately, none can be afforded the benefit of presumed honesty and righteousness and innocence anymore. Henceforth, the assumption must be: they’re dirty, until they prove themselves otherwise. 

In his testimony to congress, Durham said his findings are “serious” and “deserve attention from the American public and its representatives.” “We found troubling violations of law and policy in the conduct of highly consequential investigations directed at members of a presidential campaign and ultimately, a presidential administration [the Trump administration]. To me,” he said, “it matters not whether it was a Republican campaign or a Democrat campaign. The law ought to apply to everybody in the same way.”  

Well, Durham had the equal justice ball in his hands, and an opportunity to do just that. So, why didn’t he?  

A weak and controllable temperament seems awfully convenient … to me.  

The unfortunate suspicion is Durham’s fault, purely a consequence of not having the cojones to do what was clearly and unmistakably right—if, indeed, that concept was ever a consideration in the first place. 

©JMW 6/2023 
All Rights Reserved 

JMWs Latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside.

One doesn’t take the fight to elitist liberals, no-no-no. Do it, and they will come after you. Taking the fight to liberals and refusing to yield is why Donald Trump continues to be a source of irritation. Actually, when you have tried everything to get rid of him but assassination, it’s a little more than irritation. It’s indignant fury. 

Even worse, when you publicly demonstrate the nonsense of liberal arguments, and their intellectual incompetence by extension. Well, that makes them even more indignant and furious. Liberals not only loathe being exposed and humiliated. They deeply despise those who do it. Because in their minds they are the smartest human beings, their views irreproachable and incontestable.

And any demonstrations to the contrary … well, those simply won’t be tolerated.  

Hence the name calling—racist, homophobe, xenophobe—that comes so easily. If the opposition is racist or whatever, then their humiliating and crushing demonstrations are invalid and ignorable. Racists have no standing, are to be neither heard nor believed.  

The opposition’s ideas naive and contemptible, which actually means: accurate and humiliating, liberals not only don’t want to hear the ideas. They don’t want others to hear them, either. They don’t want others hearing the embarrassing rebuttals to their ridiculous arguments and positions, and watching both them and their ideas being made laughing stocks. Such condemning displays are, again, more than elitist liberals can stand. They despise them, like Meredith Johnson despised Tom Sanders. 

“Meredith, could you step outside for a minute, please?” Bye-bye … 

She’s the quintessential liberal—haughty, entitled, condescending. 

Liberals argue with this ridiculous and unfounded sense of superior arrogance, and then the simplest ideas and wisdom destroy both them and their ideas. Like an acquaintance who proclaimed the unvaccinated were lone spreaders of the covid virus, for example, and that the vaccinated were safe from the illness.  

Well, they were wrong.  

But then, what do you expect? They are liberal.  

Proudly liberal, obviously. Too proud. And like, haughty, entitled, and condescending.  

Is saying “I was wrong” really so difficult? Or even, “I was misled.” 

Yes. It is.

Such failures confirm the impossible, the unthinkable: inferiority and subordination. Thus, such blunders are reviled by liberals—not so much the blunders, actually, but the public exposure of the blunders. And for Trump continually and unyieldingly jabbing them in the mouth over their blunders, liberals, like Clubber Lang, have been thrown into this state of indignant fury. Aware and afraid more and more people are recognizing their utter pathetitude, they’re fighting back. And it looks unhinged—the mindless anger, resentful glares, and Meredith-style outrage: “The drives were your responsibility, not mine!” 

Zero self-awareness. Zero self-control. The Malaysian news reel, Meredith? the line you’ve never seen?

Meredith? 

We’ve lost her, I’m afraid.

Smarter than other human beings, liberals are more qualified. Thus, there is no way simpletons, the opposition, could have better ideas and arguments than them. Because, well, that’s just absurd. And pathetic though it is, there is a class of voter, liberal voters, who like to align with this superiorist mentality.

Because, for the low-low price of intellectual servitude, they can feel elite, too!   

The anointed, liberals don’t care what simpletons think, and don’t care to hear what they think, either. And the more simpleton ideas and wisdom expose them, expose their ineptitude and inferiority, the more furious and out of control they become. Add the fact liberal leadership has been caught lying and cheating, and shown to be nothing more than common, inept criminals. It has turned the entire liberal cult into berserk rats in searing bucket. 

This is the phase, enraged madness, we are currently in with liberals, particularly the elite. In mindless, arrogant fury they think: Donald Trump will not go away! And he keeps thwarting and exposing and embarrassing us, and making us look ridiculous! And no matter what fraud we attempt, we can’t separate his voters from him! And every time I’m on Facebook, there are all these videos and memes making me look inferior and foolish. And everyone can see them! 

It’s infuriating, which is partly why liberals can’t conceptualize the reason for their embarrassment and rage:  

It’s them! They’re the reason! Them and their third-rate, ever-failing ideas and solutions!  

You can’t make humiliating social media videos and memes with winning and successful ideas and solutions. Well, you can. But you must lie and commit fraud. But then, the videos and memes aren’t truly humiliating because, well, they’re lies! Made-up fictions! Yet liberals sit around in their cliques and laugh at them, hehehe! Pass them around to each other on social media, hehehe! Why the petty fraud and unsettling delusion?   

Because their ideas are terrible! Subpar and ever-failing!

Because their ideas provide a constant stream of humiliating video and meme material, which demand rebuttal—even if it means lying and inventing one. This humiliation shall not stand! 

Imagine it: being so pathetic that you invent lies, pass them around as if they’re true, and collectively laugh at your own lies.  

It’s cuckoo. Bellevue-grade cuckoo. 

All liberals know is, they are the anointed; they are the premiere intellectuals and solutions people. Because, despite their ever-failing ideas, which they see fail, no less, that’s what liberals have told themselves, over and over and over. It’s what they’ve had to tell themselves, mantra-style:  

Our ideas are better … Our ideas are better … Our ideas are better … Ohmmmmm …
We’re superior … We’re superior … We’re superior … Ohmmmmm … 

Thoroughly convinced, or rather, self-deluded, liberals aren’t then interested in “reaching across the aisle” and solving problems, because the aisle is only thing keeping their delusion alive. And besides, what could simpletons bring to a discussion anyway? Certainly nothing superior.  

Except, it’s their ideas that are always failing, and that wind up video and meme mockery. It’s their ideas being bettered and battered by the simpleton’s ideas, and their superiority being proven mythical. The response to this humiliating and recurring outcome?  

No more talking! On Twitter, Facebook, talk radio, Fox News. Anywhere! 

Our ideas might be inferior, but damned if people will know it! You’re all cancelled! 

Remind me again why anyone would elect and tolerate such petulant blowhards?  

What Americans have learned post-Trump is that our establishment elite, specifically the liberal faction, are not only frauds, but narcissistic weirdos. Crichton wrote of his experience with Hollywood, liberal headquarters, and how it was filled with “homosexuals and theatrical people, and people who were into drugs and orgies and odd things of all sorts,” and into “all this looney stuff, psychics and astrology and peculiar diets.” And given his film oeuvre, Crichton would know. These are things people didn’t know about America’s cultural elite, how weird and corrupt they were and, worse, that they were admiring and pedestalizing such immoral weirdos.  

Well, Trump forced the weirdos not just to coalesce, but to expose themselves to the American public. Enraged, they erupted from their seedy lairs everywhere, proclaiming to the world they would “f*** anybody up” who opposes drag queens, for example; confessing fiercely and proudly that all their children were queer; and championing drag queen performances for everyone else’s children, to perhaps persuade them to be queer, too. Drag performances by grown men, incidentally, who psychiatry has maintained for the last 50 years receive sexual gratification dressing like women. What shall we do with that little factoid?  

Well, while you’re assessing, liberals are having 50 years of research revised and scrubbed from psychiatry manuals. No more talking!  

So, do you think this stuff is “evil?”  
Think it a “good” thing not to sexualize innocent children?

Yes?  

Well, liberals disagree.  

So then, what kind of war is this? A political war? Or the oldest war, the human experiences’ foundational war? 

An incontrovertible war of good and evil, we can then forgo the politics—which is precisely where liberals would love to keep this and every other ideological dispute, because it keeps them political adversaries instead of disciples and practitioners of evil—and focus on the real war and the real enemy: evil and its disciples. 

Good and evil: two things that cannot and will not coexist in the same space. One must be driven out so the other can reign.  

Per the clarification, we can then reframe the point: Trump forced, not just weirdos, but evil to coalesce and to expose itself to the American public. More directly, he forced evil’s disciples, liberals, to expose themselves. Trump compelled action, action to protect the institution—the institution of evil. Like Christ to Legion, Trump was the presence that urged evil from its lair, only in this case threatened and outraged and venomous, instead of worshipful and afraid. Hence, the now seven-year battle began, and American found itself at war with evil once more—homegrown and liberal this time.  

Evil has not only found its way into the homeland. It has taken over the culture’s major institutions—specifically and most alarmingly the media, the public microphone, with which evil can deceive and influence and manipulate. Evil has pitted itself against all things moral, decent, righteous, and Godly, terms that used to define America, and has endeavored to corrupt America to its core. So that people not only become more accepting of evil, but of evil’s rule.  

And very simply, the American people must now choose sides. 

Evil people think they are righteous, not evil. Because to them evil is righteous. Sociopaths, they don’t care that people are opposed to the sexualization of children, no more than they care about children being sexualized. “No, you’re right. It’s vital we protect the children.” Are we hearing liberals saying that?

No. Because they don’t care. They exploit children, and everyone else.

Evil people have no moral compass because they oppose morals—and rules, and discipline. And via its disciples—liberals, evil is attempting to transform a righteous nation into an evil one, into one representative of itself.  

What people think evil looks like and what it actually is are two different things. As Clarke put it, “The devil doesn’t come to you as evil. He doesn’t come to you on fire. He comes to you as everything you’ve ever wanted.”

In other words, evil isn’t just a maniacal serial murderer with menacing eyes, neck tattoos, and a devilish goatee. It’s your next-door neighbor, your coworker, your family member—average people who profess their love for children, but then champion and allow their exploitation, and even mutilation. People who lie about others to make fake videos and memes, and sit together laughing at their own lies. People who have contempt for the truth, and for those who tell it. 

People like, liberals. 

And taking the fight to them, to evil, one can understand why things appear as they do: acrimonious, nasty, hateful. Forced to defend themselves, which elitists feel they should never have to do, liberals aren’t prepared. In their attempts they sound absurd, incoherent and silly. And if not incoherent and ridiculous, then furious and unhinged. It’s why the fight must be continually taken to them: so they can routinely demonstrate to the world not just their inferiority, but their depravity, and whom they serve. 

And it isn’t God, or righteousness, or their fellowman. 

Darkness. It’s liberal sum and substance. 

©JMW 5/2023 
All Rights Reserved

JMWs Latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside. 

Regarding Donald Trump’s recent New York indictment, El Salvador president, Nayib Bukele’s, remarks are dark and ominous:  

“Imagine if this happened in any other country, where a government arrested the main opposition candidate. The United States’ ability to use ‘democracy’ as foreign policy is gone.”  

In other words, electricity to the “shining city on a hill” has been cut off at the main.   

Trump wasn’t arrested for an egregious crime, either. Like, say, a treasonous Russian collusion plot to overthrow a leading and longstanding democracy. He was indicted for paying a porn star to stop extorting him. A Non-Disclosure (NDA) Agreement that, somehow, broke federal campaign finance law. The same campaign finance laws that Hillary Clinton and the Democrat National Committee violated, misreporting money paid for a fake dossier used in a treasonous Russian collusion plot to overthrow a leading and longstanding democracy. Gee, that sounds familiar. 

Anyway, what happened to them?  

They wrote a $113,000 dollar check to the Federal Election Committee to square accounts—a fine quietly imposed and check quietly written, of course, to avoid those nasty optics. Say like, a double standard of justice and political corruption. 

So, let’s review: same crime, a criminal indictment for one, a quietly imposed fine for the other. 

A result otherwise known as: the nasty optics. 

It’s surely my overactive logical tendencies, but there seems an imbalance here, an inequality—the type liberals are always going on and on about. It seems there are two systems of justice being employed instead of the singular blind justice for one and all. It seems like, dare I say it?  

Well, like tyranny. 

What else would you call a government allowing loyalists to commit crimes and avoid punishment, but prosecuting political opponents to the letter of the law—the very same law the government ignores on behalf of its loyalists?  

There is no framed PhD on my wall, but it sounds rather tyrannical to me. In fact, definitively tyrannical. 

So then, why aren’t we calling Trump’s ridiculous indictment tyrannical? If what has happened to Trump the last seven years had been done to democrats, you can bet every liberal would be calling it tyranny. Democrat leaders would be draped in Gadsden Flags, singing the national anthem on capital steps, touting the ever-profound wisdom of the Founding Fathers, and arming the public with guns they professedly detest [yes, that’s how weird it would be!]. The establishment news media would be doing its job, too, rooting out the traitors, their lies, the documentation, text messages, laptop data [isn’t it interesting how the media employ themselves this rigorously for manufactured Trump scandals and crimes?]. The United Nations would even be on site, demanding a return to “sacred democracy” and that the traitors one and all be hanged.  

For God’s sake, man. If you can’t see this is tyranny, you ain’t black! C’mon, man!  

Obviously, tyranny has more than just taken root in America. It has fully blossomed, and its formidable establishment weapons are aimed squarely at Donald Trump. Of course, he isn’t the actual target. Democracy and the American people are the targets; Trump is just in the way, is the firewall. And one attack after another, an entire establishment apparatus has not just maligned him, but gone after him criminally. One attempt fails, the establishment manufactures the next criminal case, and then the next, and the next …   

For seven years Donald Trump has endured the full legal weight the federal government. Congress and nearly every federal agency has scoured his past with the best, most skilled legal professionals and investigators money can buy. No human being’s life has been more thoroughly dissected and laid bare than Donald Trump’s—his financial records, income taxes, banking statements, emails, text messages, personal life, his wife’s underwear drawer. Everything.  

In other words, every rock overturned, every nook and cranny thoroughly inspected—with high-powered headlamps and dental picks. Whatever is to be known about Trump criminally would be known. And yet, despite all this high-powered, super-determined examination, the establishment is forced to litigate an NDA agreement with a porn star. An agreement, no to incidentally, that the FEC (Federal Election Commision), the United States Attorney’s office, a former New York County District Attorney, and even the current New York County DA, Alvin Bragg, all claimed lawful and legit.  

Again, sounds rather tyrannical to me. Definitively tyrannical.  

Thus, the conclusion from all this, which should be obvious to everyone but liberal voters: (a) Donald Trump cannot survive, and for this (b) the establishment attempts to eliminate him are not going to stop. The question is why? Why the incessance and determination? Why the blind, lawless, maniacal desperation?  

Or more pointedly, why Trump? 

People think it’s because Trump called out the swamp and its widespread and politically diverse corruption publicly, and it made the swamp angry. This is partly true, and correction: it was swamp fear, not anger. It made the swamp afraid. Even so, doesn’t this scenario say something? A righteous swamp would want to either defend its virtue or root out the criminal elements and reestablish its virtue. Political corruption shall not and will not stand in the United States government! Only in this case, the swamp is angry and retaliatory. A response for which there is but one explanation: 

The swamp is corrupt, just as Trump charged.  

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump threw down the gauntlet on the liberal establishment. His “slings and arrows” speech was nuclear bomb to each member: the Democrat Party, the republican establishment, the news media, the deep state, financial institutions domestic and international. In terms direct and unambiguous, Trump let the establishment know he intended to expose their conspiratorial duplicity and corruption, and to return power back to the American people, which he did in the ensuing four years of his presidency despite a daily, unrelenting, and vicious establishment assault.  

In doing so, however, Trump unearthed and exposed something even more alarming, something clandestine and evil and never meant to be uncovered: radical Marxists in the governing class determined to destroy America via a conspiratorial network long in development. If Trump hadn’t thrown down the gauntlet and forced the establishment to address his corruption charge, voters would still think their government a political arrangement of parties and ideas, instead of what it truly is, or has become: a hotbed of communists deeply committed to transforming America into a communist plantation. 

Trump’s speech frightened the establishment, certainly, directly challenging the entirety’s power, control, and subsequent ability to accrue wealth. However, it threw these Marxist saboteurs into sheer panic. Here they were on the precipice of long awaited, thought to be impossible transformational success. Then Trump steps forward with these lethal corruption accusations and patriotic ideals, which came as no surprise to these saboteurs, incidentally. They knew the threat Trump posed long before the speech, which is why they were spying on and targeting his campaign as early as 2015, a year before the 2016 presidential election. They weren’t concerned with Jeb Bush or the rest of the 2016 republican presidential field. Else they would have targeted them, would have manufactured a phony dossier and collusion plot for them.  

Clearly, these Marxist infiltrators knew who posed the greatest danger to their cause. Who are they precisely? These communist saboteurs bent on making America a communist plantation? 

For starters, there is only one way for a nation’s federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies to open a counterintelligence investigation, in this case “Crossfire Hurricane,” into a political opponent’s, Donald Trump’s, campaign. It requires a directive or approval from the top, from the President of the United States: Barrack Obama.  

So, let’s connect the Marxist dots … 

Obama was raised by a black Marxist family, which his father abandoned, and was thus schooled in the Marxist tradition. For clarity, Marxist: communist.  

Communism: a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned, and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.  

Karl Marx. Hence, Marxism—communism by another name. And no private property rights, and people “paid” by their communist overlords as the overlords see fit, means the end of individual freedom and liberty, and America.

Note: Obama was schooled in this communist tradition. Or rather, the tradition of human slavery, oppression, and evil.  

Marxists are forced to play language games to conceal their true identity and intentions. They are indeed communists, but the term doesn’t sell well, is poisoned. So, it is replaced with terms like “socialist,” and “democratic socialist,” and of course “Marxist,” and other softer and enigmatic terms—linguistic coffee grounds to throw off the dogs. 

Professor of education at the University of Illinois, Bill Ayers, also a Weather Underground terrorist and radical Marxist, he became Obama’s political ally during Obama’s rise to power [note: a domestic terrorist who is also an American university professor, highlighting the connection between Marxism and American universities]. The Weather Underground was a 1960s radical faction identified by the FBI as a domestic terrorist group. A group dedicated to “the destruction of U.S. imperialism and the achievement of classless world: world communism,” proclaimed in its 1969 foundational statement. That’s: foundational statement. 

Ayers is a radical Marxist, and Obama’s ally and friend. 

As president, Obama lent his friendship and support to Black Lives Matter, too. Another radical group co-founded by Patrisse Cullors, who is not only a self-described trained Marxist herself, but a protégé of Weather Underground agitator, Eric Mann, also a radical Marxist.   

Along with Mann, Cullors is counted among Obama’s allies and friends, too. 

Then there is the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who said infamously, “Goddamn America—that’s in the Bible … America’s chickens are coming home to roost.” Wright is yet another Marxist friend and ally of Obama, who was a devoted 20-year member of the reverend’s church, Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ.  

Yet another man of the cloth, Reverend Louis Farrakhan, is another Marxist, and an anti-Semite to boot. Despite the Congressional Black Caucus pressuring a photographer for more than a decade to keep a photo of Farrakhan and Obama concealed to protect Obama’s political future, and the Marxist plot, the pair were nonetheless friends and allies, too. And why the Marxist hate for the Jews, incidentally, which Obama himself openly and repeatedly demonstrated during his presidency?  

The Jews are God’s chosen people, an anointed class of human beings that evil Marxists despise for being an anointed class, anointed by God. In other words, it isn’t the Jews that Marxists despise. It’s God. Otherwise, they wouldn’t persecute God’s chosen people, and conceal pictures of their evil Marxist associations, and whatnot. They wouldn’t lie and deceive people all the time, either. None of which aligns with God and righteousness, but instead evil. 

So. Highlighting all these Marxists in Obama’s personal sphere, hence the point people are trying to make about him, but never directly do:  

Obama is a Marxist too! Born, bred, and instructed. 

In fact, he is the continuation of the Weather Underground, its new millennium version. A devoted disciple who yet believes in the cult’s cause: “the destruction of U.S. imperialism and the achievement of classless world: world communism.” And evidenced by its involvement in the Russian collusion plot and the events beyond, the world shares Obama’s passion for this, too. 

So, a Marxist opposition clearly existent and pursuing its objectives should be understood, which involves rather basic principles and rudimentary logic. Marxists respect no law—no police officers, no judges, and no governments, obviously. Determined to end “imperialism,” Marxist are the law. Their attempt at communist “transformation” successful, they become the emperors, which is exactly what Obama and his fellow conspirators intend.  

What are Obama’s motivations? 

Drill down deep enough psychiatrically, and Obama is mad at his father for abandoning him, and in fact confessed this resentment. It is to say, Obama has daddy issues, still—like so many other fatherless black men. Raised by a family teaching the Marxist tradition and hate, Obama was then eagerly receptive to the hate, and to revenge. For one reason or another, this is undoubtedly the case for every Marxist radical. Abandoned or ignored or mistreated formatively, they are enraged at the world and want to get even with it. A quest for vengeance in which they have learned to be clever. 

“We have never been a collection of red states and blue states,” Obama says. “We are, and always will be, the United States.” Such inspiring proclamations aren’t authentic and heartfelt. They are employed to (a) disguise the contempt he holds for America and (b) to facilitate the evils he has planned for American “imperialism,” which we know to be the plan for all the fellow Marxists in his personal sphere, beholden to a foundational group pledge. Marxists like Black Lives Matter (BLM) leaders, who Obama repeatedly invited to the White House, and even publicly praised: “They are much better organizers than I was when I was at their age, and I’m confident that they are going to take America to new heights.”  

“Organizer.” The soft term for radical Marxist, and more linguistic coffee grounds. 

Of course, Obama doesn’t aim to take America to “new heights,” but rather to new communist lows. How do we know? Because here he is publicly touting his radical organizer creds and Marxist allegiance: “They are much better organizers than I was …” By his own admission, Obama is a fellow Marxist. A communist dedicated to “the destruction of U.S. imperialism and the achievement of classless world: world communism.”  

And here everyone thought Obama was a servant of the people beholden to the United States Constitution, the rule of law, and an advocate for American imperialism and supremacy.  

Obama is not the only Marxist leader in this latest communist coup, either.  

Weather Underground supporter and fellow Marxist, Susan Rosenberg, was sentenced to 58 years in prison in 1984 for possession “of 740 pounds of explosives, an Uzi submachine gun, an M-14 rifle, another rifle with a telescopic sight, a sawed-off shotgun, three 9-millimeter handguns in purses and boxes of ammunition.”—so much for the liberal stance against guns and gun violence. A fraud now, um, shot to hell. To mean, Marxists like Obama have no issue with guns or gun violence, as his beloved war-torn and ignored Chicago would testify. Marxists are after guns solely to disarm people, to take away a citizenry’s ability to resist Marxist radicals bent on unopposable authoritarian control.  

It is to say, an armed citizenry is a threat. 

“We’re caught, but we’re not defeated. Long live the armed struggle!” Rosenberg shouted as she was taken from a New Jersey state police barracks in Berlin for arraignment in Federal Court in Camden. Long live the “armed” struggle surely won’t sit well with today’s anti-gun and –second amendment liberals. Incidentally, can fellow Marxists be “bitter clingers,” too? 

Interestingly, Rosenberg’s sentence was commuted. She now serves as vice chair of the board of directors of Thousand Currents—a radical, grantmaking institution. An institution that financially sponsored whom?  

Fellow Marxists, of course: the Black Lives Matter Global Network. Again, “We’re caught, but we’re not defeated. Long live the armed struggle!” Clearly, Rosenberg meant it. 

By the way, notice how there’s a red line of radical Marxism always connecting these people like local mobsters on an organized crime unit’s war room wall? 

More intriguing, however, is who commuted Rosenberg’s 58-year sentence, just 16-years completed. Who would free a police-murdering Marxist lunatic found in possession of so many normally detestable guns that cause so much detestable gun violence? Who would forgive all these heinous sins? 

President Bill Clinton. On his last day in office, no less—to avoid those, nasty optics.  

Don’t be misled, Bill might be a Marxist, but he’s not a committed Marxist, like Hillary. She is the real militant. Not only would Bill rather chase the broads, of all ages. He has too big an adolescent need to be liked to be a Marxist zealot. In fact, Hillary having tried to establish communist healthcare in Bill’s first term, to massive public displeasure and the first republican controlled house in 40 years, Bill ran sprinting back to the middle and away from all that radical zealotry—all to be publicly liked again, of course. Bill is too weak for militant Marxism, too enslaved by his adolescent needs and desires. His father dying in a car crash, Clinton likely has daddy issues, too, which didn’t manifest as anger in this case, but as an insatiable, juvenile need for approval, both public and female.  

Hillary on the other hand, now she is committed! She has the radical’s narcissism, hate, and resolve. We know it’s true, because what else could compel someone to stay married to a serial philanderer after being publicly humiliated by him time and again?  

Only one thing could be so compelling, a larger cause and goal: Marxism, and the destruction of American imperialism. And by the way, Hillary is no Tammy Wynette. 

In the cult of Marxism, aka liberalism [more linguistic coffee grounds], the person dies so the cause can endure and succeed. That’s the radical Marxist, a martyr. He/she will endure whatever abuse and humiliation they must so the cause can survive and meet a triumphant end. Marxists are zealots, heretics. They are fanatical sociopaths on a mission, and whose attitude toward humankind is thus: the lion doesn’t concern himself with the opinion of the sheep.  

Author David Horowitz:  

“Radical utopians [Marxists] seeking to change the world invariably have three traits in common. These flow from the radical nature of their mission, which is to change the world. First, radicals are in a hurry. Their task is large and the opportunities to achieve it scarce. America’s political culture is specifically designed to support incremental reforms not abrupt breaks with the past. Ramming through transformational changes on the basis of razor thin majorities is exactly what the American system is designed to frustrate and thwart. But this is the very goal of radicals, and they are consequently pitted from the outset against the majority.  

“Second, because radicals are in a hurry, they’re impatient with process and persuasion which makes them generally tone deaf to the majority that opposes them. Radicals dismiss their opponents, because once their schemes are implemented — by whatever means necessary — they’re confident that a majority will see just how liberating their policies are, and they will be grateful. Blinded by arrogance they prefer government by mandate and diktat to the frustrating conversations that are the lifeblood of a democratic system.  

“Third, radicals generate energy for their movements by singling out a social subgroup, usually a racial or religious minority, to demonize as the enemy of these liberating schemes. In this way they remove opponents from the deliberative process and deny them a proverbial seat at the table where they can express their opposition.”* 

What Marxists learned was that they couldn’t accomplish their mission from a dank and dingy Weather Underground headquarters. Bringing down imperialism required a bigger platform, more power to do things. So, no more small-minded radicalism of the past and rathole headquarters; we need to think bigger! All the terroristic bombings and anti-American crusading of the ‘60’s and ‘70s weren’t winning new converts as quickly as they arrogantly demanded. And if the American people weren’t consenting and converting, then communism would be forced on them, diktat-style. 

Thus, the new strategy: winning elections and imposing Marxism. 

The new strategy employed the radical Muslim approach: say and do whatever you need to say and do to win elections and assume power, because our ideological ends justify the means. Then talk all that patriotic, red, white and blue stuff to the American people— “We have never been a collection of red states and blue states. We are, and always will be, the United States”—while you secretly undermine and destroy American imperialism.  

Marxists needed to be on the inside, in power. Thus, they committed to (a) getting fellow Marxists, one by one, into public office and government agencies and the judiciary, and (b) eroding the foundations of America, step by legislative and immoral step, for an ultimate conversion to communism. All led by the most committed radical, Hillary Clinton, who for decades laid the groundwork for Marxist D-Day. 

Enter: Barack Obama 

A committed Marxist—and beneficially “African American, articulate and bright and clean,” as Joe Biden characterized him—Obama presented the perfect opportunity for an all-in Marxist D-Day. Who could challenge him? When anyone dared, fellow radicals and establishment sympathizers called them racist. When anyone challenged his Marxist agenda, they were called climate deniers, or homophobic, or xenophobic, or whatever was required. Obama was clearly the Marxist movement’s long-awaited opportunity, who spent eight years of his presidency aggressively advancing the cause. Problem was, Clinton thought it was her turn to be president in the 2008 presidential election.  

As Donald Trump put it on the campaign trail in 2016, “The Clinton’s are criminals, never forget that.” Hillary and Bill have escaped more crime in the last 30-40 years than anyone: White Water, Uranium One, illegal computer servers, destroying subpoenaed emails, destroying phones with hammers, lying under oath on countless occasions, two rigged primary elections, a treasonous Russian collusion plot—the last a crime CIA Director, John Brennan, informed President Obama about, who then employed his CIA and FBI and DOJ in assistance. All this crime, and yet here is an entitled Clinton demanding to be President of the United States (think Marxists aren’t narcissists and sociopaths?). So, how did the Clinton’s escape so much egregious crime? 

Fellow Marxists and sympathizers in the right places: a radicalized and corrupt deep state, judicial system, and news media. Since when can a treasonous plot be committed and the news media refuse to expose it, and even address it? 

When they are fellow Marxists, sympathizers, enablers, and co-conspirators.  

That is how it was done; Hillary in the lead. A key point in Trump’s terrifying speech:   

“The Clinton machine is at the center of this power structure. We’ve seen this firsthand in the Wikileaks documents, in which Hillary Clinton meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of US sovereignty in order to enrich these global financial powers, her special interest friends, and her donors.”  

Before Barrack Obama in this Marxist scheme was the Clintons, the most successful government infiltrators. Marxists have tried this before but were sniffed-out by republican senator from Wisconsin, Joe McCarthy. Numerous communists and Soviet spies and sympathizers had infiltrated the United States federal government, universities, film industry, and elsewhere, McCarthy charged. And the establishment was apoplectic then for the same reason it is now: Marxists and their scheme have been sniffed-out and exposed.  

The Clinton’s have proven the most successful, however. Mostly for Bill Clinton’s charisma and likeability, which shielded Hillary’s communist treachery. Hillary was a leachy lamprey, fastening herself to a cool, charismatic host, who wasn’t motivated by all that radical stuff, but who was nonetheless useful to the cause. For his daddy issues, Bill Clinton was emotionally weak and vulnerable, and therefore Marxist prey. 

Much to Hillary’s elitist ire, Barrack Obama received the 2008 Democrat Party nomination, however, winning the presidency twice. Contentious though the pair were on the primary trail, these fellow Marxists knew there was greater Marxist work to be done and completed. Unified, Obama made Hillary Clinton Secretary of State his first term. In that appointment, Obama brought the Weather Underground leadership back into the White House, along with access to the vast Marxist network Hillary had set in place.   

Hillary’s crowning moment was to be 2016; the lead Marxists’ presidential reward for years of dedicated and destructive Marxist labor. Her succeeding two terms were to be the 16-year bookend to Obama’s eight-year “transformation” of the United States. Having set the table for Marxist transformation, it was her task, her crowning achievement and reward, to finish the job.  

In other words, electing Hillary president in 2016, Marxist were going all-in on an imperialism destroying communist takeover of the United States.

Now is the time!  And only one person stood in their way:  

Donald Trump.  

What is important to understand about Trump’s entry into the race is that everyone in the establishment knew he was a cultural elite, and that he’d shared their exclusive space his entire life. They knew he understood the machinations of the establishment, particularly the financial networks. He was a Washington outsider, but an establishment elite insider. As such, he knew the people, the systems, and the establishment way.  

This is precisely why Trump’s slings and arrows speech was so astute, informed, and deathly alarming. His establishment intimacy, along with having the financial resources and backbone to withstand any and every establishment attack, is what made Trump the Marxist Antichrist. When he gave his speech, calling Washington a swamp of corruption, and the news media “fake news,” politically corrupt, and conspiratorial. He not only left no doubt about his intentions. He made ignoring the charges impossible and forced an establishment address. 

The Marxist cabal was in sheer panic for the campaign speech alone. Trump winning the election, however, a rigged election, no less, sent them beyond panic and into desperation. Despite their treasonous efforts—Clinton’s server and classified and subpoenaed email crimes all dismissed, Wikileaks revelations ignored, a rigged democrat primary, spying on the Trump campaign, voluminous unmaskings of Trump campaign personnel, an ongoing and treacherous Russian collusion plot—the cabal could not overcome the American people, who sent Trump to the White House. The reason for the stunned establishment expressions on election night wasn’t the electoral loss, necessarily.  

Worse: the evidence room was unlocked to 8 years of Marxist treachery, specifically the last year and their treasonous spying and collusion crimes.  

The incoming commander in chief would certainly uncover their crimes and expose their Marxist plot, which is precisely what happened. To say the infiltrators were terrified is a gross understatement. They were panic stricken. They are panic stricken still. How do we know? 

Two iconic, international brands—Clinton and Obama—have been relegated to the political sidelines for seven years, and to virtual obscurity. For 26 years they were front-and-center and involved in everything. Followed by the media every day and everywhere, they were ever-present. And since election day 2016? 

Virtual obscurity. Why? When facing indictment, Rule Number One: keep your mouth shut. 

Since then, it has been a collective establishment effort to conceal both the crimes and the intent of these modern Weather Underground Marxists. To keep those crimes and intent concealed means that Trump cannot, must not, survive or be validated. Hence, the incessant, seven year and counting legal pursuit and assault. Hence, the unprecedented actions taken against him post-presidency and naked lawlessness.  

When Trump said that he “[takes] all of these slings and arrows gladly for you,” the American people, it’s certain he did not comprehend the cost.  

Marxists don’t care about the costs, specifically where it concerns human beings, either aligned or opposed. They don’t care about their constituencies: African Americans, Hispanics, LGBTQ, women, children. They merely use them, exploit them. What happens to African Americans—Clarence Thomas, Ben Carson, Shelby Steele—when they challenge or abandon the Marxist cause? Marxists set out to destroy them. Same with Hispanics, LGBTQ, women, children, and all the rest.  

So, go ahead liberal constituencies, challenge your Marxist allies. See what happens. Of course, we don’t have to see what happens, because we’ve already witnessed it. Radicals defend their constituencies if they’re loyal to the cause, and destroy them for disloyalty. Because nothing can compromise the cause. And what does this say?   

It makes the point: radicals exploit their constituencies. Constituencies constituted by human beings for which Marxists clearly have no feeling or compassion at all. All who get in their way, who compromise the Marxist cause, who impede the path to a communist goal, will be destroyed. Thus, the constituency loyalty and silence.  

Utterly ruthless, Marxists are singularly focused on the mission, which includes destabilization and destruction. Hence, their attack on law and order—the stabilizing aspects of every civilization. They couldn’t care less who gets shot, how many people are maimed or die, how many women are raped, how many children abused. Revolution comes at a cost, and Marxists are willing that everyone but them pay those costs. For Marxists must be around to run things, to enjoy the fruits of power and control, of the new imperialism, they plotted so carefully and worked so hard to establish.  

Proof radicals don’t care about human life is clear in their abortion advocacy. Further proof, if more were needed, emerged in a congressional investigation of the current border crisis. Fellow Marxist and Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkus, grilled by Congressman Matt Gates: 

Gaetz: “800,000 people have encountered your CBP (Custom and Border Protection) agents, and those folks have been released into the country. Some of those people are going to commit crimes, aren’t they? Will some of the 800,000 commit crime? Yes or no?” 

Mayorkas, pained: “Undoubtedly.” 

Gaetz: “Undoubtedly. And so, the Americans who are the victims of the crimes of the people you release into the country are collateral damage that you are willing to accept in order to have our border function as a turnstile. You’re willing to accept that collateral damage.” 

Mayorkas objected, of course, and lied, as all worthy Marxists are trained to do when truth is spoken. But the answer is yes. Clearly yes: human collateral damage is acceptable, namely American human collateral damage. 

All that matters is the Marxist mission: communist conversion.  

Not human life.  

Not the people who pay you to secure and protect them.  

Not the US Constitution or law. 

Only “the destruction of U.S. imperialism and the achievement of classless world: world communism” matters. The mission primary, everything else to Marxists is expendable.  

People think publicly exposing and humiliating Marxists like Mayorkas in front of the entire nation on television means something. It doesn’t. It’s meaningless to these cultists—to any cultists, really, who believe in what they are doing, in their cause and mission, evil though it is. Did Mayorkas confess anything, acknowledge any facts? Did he seem chastised and contrite by the obvious truth(s)? Did he head straightaway to the border to straighten out the mess, to secure the border, and to redeem himself? 

No. Because, that would compromise the mission. 

Hillary and Obama executed a treasonous plot against the United States and the American people. Did they and their fellow Marxist traitors care what it did to the country, to the citizenry? Did they care how much the plot cost taxpayers and their consequently enhungered children (everyone knows how much liberals care about starving children)? Encouraging disobedience and rioting in the early years of Trump’s presidency, did they care who got hurt or how much property was damaged and destroyed? 

This same Marxist cabal framed and financially ruined Lt. General Michael Flynn, a war hero and military veteran. They even leveraged Flynn’s son in the plot to break the elder Flynn and force a confession of guilt. Did they care for either’s innocence? Did they care about leveraging a human being, a son, no less, to destroy another’s life, his own father? Russian collusion was a fraud. Did they care about destroying Trump, his family, his cabinet members, his supporters—all of which are human beings?  

This same cabal used a virus to steal an election. Did they care about election integrity or election laws? About how many fraudulent mail-in ballots were counted? Did they care about a disenfranchised citizenry? Rigging the 2016 and 2020 democrat primaries against Bernie Sanders to guarantee Clinton and Biden victories. Did they care for election integrity and election laws in that case? That they were subverting democracy and cheating the nation’s voters?  

Okay, let’s do have a conversation about gun violence. The rule for discussion is this: getting rid of the second amendment is off the table. With that, we cannot then have a conversation about gun violence, because getting rid of the second amendment and guns is the Marxist cabal’s mission. Do they care that the second amendment is codified in the constitution? That it is a law “uninfringeable?”   

No. No to all of this, in fact, because Marxists respect no authority or law in making themselves the authority and law, per a Marxist plot. 

Therefore, people must get in their heads, must accept it, must believe it: a cult of Marxist communist radicals have infiltrated the United States government and are on a determined mission to destroy its republic status to achieve not just communism, but “world communism,” which they have no less stated publicly. They have infiltrated the country’s major institutions, too, to include the Democrat Party. A party that now belongs to them. The evidence?  

Where are the moderate Joe Lieberman democrats of old? Moderates who respect the rule of law, the constitution, and love America and its military? The faction doesn’t exist anymore because radicals drove them out and took over the party: You’re either with us in our communist quest, or you’re the enemy! On every piece of legislation, the party votes in lockstep. When it’s legislation that secures, strengthens, and prospers America and the American people, the party, in lockstep, votes against it.  

To say the “Democrat Party” is united is no longer accurate. Marxists now in charge, it is clearly the Communist Party. A new party using the old Democrat (D) moniker as cover. And they want to maintain the ruse, that things are still legitimately political, to continue executing their plot. 

So, Marxists communists being arrogant sociopaths who despise God, human beings, and individual freedom and liberty; who intend to enslave people under a Marxist regime, which they implied in their foundational statement; and who rig elections and flagrantly ignore all American law in pursuit of the objective. What term best characterizes such a scenario and people? 

Evil. Of which there is but one brand. The same made public by Tucker Carlson before his untimely and inexplicable exit from Fox News.  

America’s differences aren’t political anymore. They have transformed into a struggle as old as time itself: good versus evil. Individual freedom versus communism, or its many aliases. 

The problem for this current crop of communists is, in their all-in attempt to transform the United States into a communist nation, they got out over their skis in 2016 and were caught committing treason.

All roads lead back to Russian collusion.

Conviction for the crime means, by law, a traitorous death. However, this is secondary, believe it or not, to something even more dreadful: conviction means a catastrophic setback for the Marxist movement. To get so close to success, and then, poof! The mission exposed and back to square one, if ever to be successful again for at least a generation, perhaps two.  

It’s a scenario unthinkable, unimaginable, utterly devastating. 

Everything at stake, is Trump’s claim then such the stretch: “Anyone who challenges their control … they will lie, lie, lie, and then again, they will do worse than that. They will do whatever is necessary.” And isn’t “whatever is necessary” what we are witnessing? Flagrant lawlessness? Unprecedented legal actions? Desperation? 

Therefore, Marxists must be ruthless. To demonstrate how ruthless, they installed an elderly man with dementia into the presidency via election fraud to not only implement their Marxist agenda, but to take all the public heat for its implementation.  

He won’t know; he’s got dementia! they say chuckling, scheming in their secret Marxist lair.  

Of course, the downside to dementia is that it’s an undependable condition. The sufferer could become incoherent and uncontrollable. Hence, the strategic and dependable stand-by: Kamala Harris, another fellow Marxist too vacuous to be anything but a Marxist. And if you think Marxists aren’t this cunning, devious, and ruthless.  

Well, you don’t know your enemy. 

The scheme is simple: along with the installed and ailing president, a highly dependable radical lieutenant like, say, Susan Rice, is installed in a domestic policy advisor role. She controls the president, whispers her handlers radical policies in his ear for implementation, such as forcing people with good credit to pay for the high-risk mortgages of those with bad credit, for example. Or perhaps, no oil drilling to force expensive fuel and the implementation of Green energy objectives. Totally unjust and brazenly communist actions, which the ailing president then undertakes with demented, oblivious passion. When the public gets angry, there is the incognizant president to take all the heat, while the “organizers” chuckle and continue their Marxist work unscathed.  

Such acts are far beyond unseemly; they are evil, of which there is but on brand. 

Or the border. Who is Enemy Number One in America to these Marxists? Privileged, supremacist white people. The border being purposefully left wideopen by President Biden, an incognizant tool of his Marxist leaders, who is allowed in by the thousands illegally?   

Brown people—along with terrorists, criminals, drugs, crime, and disease.  

Marxists want to change the racial dynamics of the United States to expressly upend her, and are exploiting a disabled elderly man to do it. They don’t care about the disabled elderly man. In fact Obama once told the elderly** to basically take their pain pills and die quietly, that there would be no further healthcare options for them because they were aged healthcare liabilities unworthy of Marxist government investment. This, after lying to the American people about being able to keep their healthcare, no less.  

Marxist don’t care about the disabled or elderly. Trying to upend America, they don’t care how much terrorist danger or how many violent criminals they invite at the border, either. They don’t care how many Americans are murdered or raped by both, or how many children suffer or die of fentanyl overdose. In fact, they want all of this!  

Upending law and order requires chaos and upheaval. The more the better, and collateral damage be damned. 

Hence the glaringly obvious: Marxists are evil. They thrive on hate and revenge, the very nature of evil. Hate and revenge are their fuel. They want confusion and turmoil—also the very nature of evil. Because that is the way they have lived, angry at daddy, at the world. In fact, they create the instability to get what they want, to transform what is into what they want. In this case the death of imperialism. Otherwise known as: America.  

Theirs is a quest wherein lying is both necessary and, not just acceptable, but honorable. Horowitz, again:  

“Lying it a political necessity for radicals because by their very nature radical proposals are too extreme for the general population to accept. Democracies depend on transparency in government. But a common political strategy is to conceal the true nature of the legislation being proposed in order to limit public scrutiny of its contents.” 

In other words, Marxists say people can keep their healthcare when they can’t. They say the border is secure when it is not. They say an infrastructure bill is for the nation’s infrastructure refurbishment, when they intend to use the money to further their New Green Deal environmental objectives. And they not only lie like this. They find nobility in lying. Because they are advancing the Marxist cause they believe to be supreme—a cause of evil they believe to be supreme. 

Thus, Marxists are tired of having to win elections. Elitists in a supreme cause, they feel they shouldn’t have to run for office, and are finished doing it, obviously. Clinton rigged the 2016 Democrat primary against Bernie not once, but twice. Corrupting the entire government, she and Obama executed the treasonous Russian collusion crime. And there is covid and the 2020 election stolen by mail-in ballots and other election fraud. All these brazen attempts to subvert democracy present a fact indisputable:  

Marxists are finished with elections.  

The smartest people in the world, Marxists feel power and control are their birthright and that, furthermore, they really shouldn’t have to tell voters that it’s their birthright. Voters should not only accept this axiom; they should know it, instinctually. Because that’s the way things are. Because the way Marxists want to do things is a way things should be done, and voters will be “grateful” for it, even if they are not.  

You don’t “deal” with people like this. You stop them. They must be stopped.  

Otherwise, as Limbaugh used to say, you’re not going to recognize your country, which is where we are now and merely a matter of permanency.  

“What distinguish[es] communists [isn’t] their disdain for money and or their trenchant critiques of capitalism,” Horowitz wrote. “Rather, it [is] their paranoid imperative to crush whatever they perceived as a challenge to their indomitable pursuit of power.” Marxists love money and wealth like everyone else, and the capitalist idea that allows greater access to more of it. They lie and profess to oppose both, which should come as no surprise from inveterate liars. But their real fear is opposition, enmity found in democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, and guns—threats which must be crushed. And where are these traits currently in existence and practice? 

America. And who is currently targeting the traits and America? 

Marxists. Camouflaged and rebranded as liberal progressives. 

Liberals don’t care that they are “torched” or “destroyed” or “humiliated,” as is claimed in so many conservative memes and video replays where they are intellectually and argumentatively taken to the woodshed. Impervious to shame and humility, none of this sets them back or makes them recalculate and amend their positions. One can’t marshal enough facts to change their minds, either. Because one of those facts is: they are liars with evil intentions.  

Marxist intentions. 

Therefore, no truth whatsoever can be allowed to survive and endure, but instead must be “crushed.” Why? For where established facts and truth like steppingstones and breadcrumbs lead: to their exposure and destruction.  

Marxists don’t want America and Americans manufacturing things. As for Trump vowing to return manufacturing back to America in 2016, Obama asked, “What magic wand do you have?” Well, the same one Obama has, of course, but will not use for his Marxist ambitions. Marxists make it harder and harder to manufacture things and to do business in America because they want America to be dependent, not independent. They shut down oil drilling because they want America dependent on oil, not energy independent and leading the world. And nothing says dependency like trillions of dollars in national debt, to which liberals keep purposefully, strategically adding.  

A dependent citizenry means power for Marxists, means weakness, vulnerability, and an expedited Marxist transformation. And the acts to achieve the weakness and transformation are no less occurring in full view.  

Marxists aren’t going to say that their goal is American vulnerability and a communist transformation: We’re here to make communist slaves of the American people! So just, heads-up, folks. That’s our plan. They are going to talk about “sacred democracy” and issue fake patriotism, “We have never been a collection of red states and blue states. We are, and always will be, the United States” They’re not going to expose themselves or their scheme.  

But then, they don’t have to.  

Their behavior is the tell, and it never lies. And where their ideas and agenda lead—straight to powerlessness, enslavement, and control—is yet another tell. 

Every day of his presidency these same Marxists attacked Ronald Regan for championing the American people and making America secure, prosperous, respected, and great. Every day for seven years they have attacked Trump, this time legally, for the very same thing. Every day they leave America’s border wide open to terrorists, criminals, drugs, and illegal brown-people immigration. Why this specific pattern of Marxist behavior?  

They are executing a plan: “the destruction of U.S. imperialism and the achievement of classless world: world communism.” And in Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, two humiliating dimwits, they don’t even care to run a good cover anymore.  

Marxists are evil, of which there is but one brand and but one lead organizer and founder. They are all-in criminal cultists, deeply committed believers and zealots. Martyrs who will do quite literally anything to achieve their communist ambitions, aided by fellow cultists, sympathizers, enablers, and useful voting idiots. Their sole enemy is law, constitutional law, for which they have contempt and are determined to eliminate for new law: communist law, their law. For when one law ends, one must emerge to take its place and assume control—the truth Marxists neglect and conceal. 

Thus, theirs is a mission that their targets must recognize, acknowledge, and prevent.  

Otherwise, doom.  

Know how hard it is for a citizenry to regain control of their country once it has been overtaken by a communist regime? It’s bloody, and near impossible. And to think, citizenries just give their freedom away to a collection of exposed liars. 

Perhaps communists are right. Citizens are naive peasants desiring to be ruled—at least, some of them.  

After his appearance in a New York court room, Trump said, “All I ever did was try to protect our beloved nation from those who want to destroy it.” Clearly, he was on to something. For their 2016 election failure and ultimate exposure, the Marxist conspirators have been forced into all-in crisis mode, sparing nothing and no one, the result yet undecided. How does such a formerly unfathomable transformation even have a chance of success?  

It begins with a foundational statement, and a plan. 

Evil’s greatest advantage is that it takes people and societies too long to recognize and oppose it. 

*Horowitz, David Final Battle, p.149.  
**For playback efficiency, exchange begins at the 28:00 mark. 

Note: this article contains opinion. Good opinion.  

©JMW 5/2023  
All Rights Reserved 

JMWs latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside.

Imagine a prosecutor in a major trial making her case. After laying out the circumstantial, if compelling, evidence to the rapt jury. She steps conspiratorially to the jurists and says, “But this, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this,” pointing to the widescreen hanging on the courtroom wall now glowing with life, “is the most important thing. Lights, please …” 

“Here’s the defendant, here,” she says, on her way to the courtroom widescreen, pointing to the video figure, newly appeared. “His face concealed, he emerges from the shadows to the lighted porch. A lefty, he raises the gun with his left hand, then shoots the victim in the back of the head at close range [the weapon firing, soundless]. Freeze it! Right there,” she directs the video engineer. The assailant’s hand frozen in the air.  

Slowly, dramatically she returns to the jury. “Now. Ladies and gentlemen. How do we know, beyond any doubt, that this assailant is the defendant?”  

A pregnant pause for effect.  

A smile creeps onto her face. She then turns to the widescreen, walking, pointing …  

“Because the defendant forgot to take off his unique, family-crested wristwatch.”  

She says it deadpan for maximum effect—the video engineer ever-so-slowly zooming-in for the clear and incontrovertible visual.  

 Visual and strategic perfection! 

“The defendant is so foolish … or so arrogant,” shrugging coyly, “I don’t know, you decide,” she says to the jury, politely grinning. “He is so foolish and arrogant, that he forgot to take off his easily identifiable, uniquely family-crested wristwatch. This one right here,” she says sharply, displaying it to the jury looped around her finger. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, note the family crest on the band. The very same” she points to the widescreen, “as the assailant.”  

Strolling down the jury box for thorough viewing, “It’s always the small things, ladies and gentlemen,” she adds. “The defendant thought he’d committed the perfect crime. And yet, he forgets … to remove … his watch.” 

Courtroom chuckles … 

And via this “most important thing,” the entire world now sees this defendant for what he truly is: an evil criminal. A liar. A con artist. A phony. A loathsome human being. A sociopath.

The veil is lifted. The mustard’s off the hot dog. 

A lot can be learned about people from this “most important thing.” In fact, it is striking what one can see, and learn, when light is cast at just the right pitch, exposing the tiniest imperfections otherwise invisible, yet massive in significance. People get caught-up in the minutiae and drama, the things easily noticeable. Meanwhile, standing there plainly visible is the inconspicuous perpetrator wearing a ball cap, hands in pockets, smirking.  

Evidence so clear that later it’s said, How did we miss that?! 

From the Map Room in the private residence of the White House, a silent finger countdown [in 5…4…3…2…1…] led then President Bill Clinton into his confession of an affair with intern Monica Lewinsky. What is the “most important thing” in this confession?  

Confessing the affair, Clinton confirmed that he knew all along he’d had it. 

Clinton knew all along that he’d had the affair, and yet he and his political allies, to include the mainstream news media, a group in entirety professing to champion women, tried to destroy Lewinsky—and all the other woman who accused Clinton in the past: Juanita Broaddrick, Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones.  

It’s the feminist thing to do, destroy those you profess to protect and champion. 

Clinton knew he’d had the affair, and yet he played word games with investigators. 

Clinton knew he’d had the affair, and yet he wagged his finger at the American public and demanded they “listen to him.” Because he was going to “say this again,” which he did via a menacing glare and rhythmic lectern thumping with his fist: “I did not. Have. Sexual relations with that woman. Ms. Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie. Not a single time. Never! These allegations are false! And I need to go back to work for the American people.” 

Of course, the allegations weren’t false. They were true, revealed so for an errant dollop of presidential semen, forcing Clinton’s Map Room confession. Remarkably, although not so remarkable for a narcissist, a confession in which Clinton remarked, “This is gone on too long, cost too much, and hurt too many innocent people … our country has been distracted by this matter for too long.” Sentiments that were indeed true, but only because Clinton kept denying what he knew he had done and lying about it. 

Pitching the lamp but a few degrees for clearer viewing, it is abundantly obvious Clinton isn’t merely a bad person. He is an evil sociopath, which is not a characterization too far.  

And indeed, it’s “the most important thing.” 

In the witness chair in federal court, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager, Robbie Mook, was asked about the phony Alfa Bank story used to try to destroy Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential candidacy. Under oath, Mook confessed, “We discussed it with Hillary; she agreed with the decision [to share the false and contrived story with a reporter, in furtherance of a treasonous plot].” Only, Clinton had Fusion GPS, an opposition research firm, and Perkins Coie lawyers, Michael Sussmann and Marc Elias, on the payroll. A political and legal cabal that had come up with the story in the first place—in fact, were paid to come up with the story.  

In other words, the matter didn’t need to be “discussed” with Clinton by her campaign team, nor did the release of the story to the news media need her agreement. And why not?  

“The most important thing,” of course.  

When days before the 2016 election Hillary Clinton sat down with her iPhone and Tweeted, “Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank.” Clinton knew she had paid for the fake story herself via Perkins Coie, and that she was doing so not in furtherance of a mere hoax of her design, but in service to a treasonous plot of her design. A plot to destroy Trump’s initial candidacy, that continued into the Trump presidency. A plot that included a costly, purely theatrical, three-year investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Purely theatrical because Mueller was investigating Clinton’s plot and not an actual Trump crime. Because there was no Trump crime, only a manufactured crime being used as part of a treasonous plot. So then, Clinton knew the investigation was pure fantasy, too, and let it run its destructive course anyway.  

As one reporter put it, “The Russian/Trump [fraud] that Mrs. Clinton sanctioned [and engineered] has done enormous harm to the country. It disgraced the FBI, humiliated the press, and sent the country on a three-year investigation to nowhere”—and it indicted the Obama administration, too. For Clinton did not command and direct federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies. That was Obama’s role. 

All this national upheaval taking place for years and, the whole time, Clinton wasn’t just the engineer. She knew she was the engineer—facilitated by co-conspirators: Obama, his FBI, CIA, DOJ, and the corporate news media, too.  

So. Once again pitching the lamp but a few degrees for clearer viewing, it’s abundantly obvious that Clinton isn’t merely a bad person. Like her husband, she’s an evil sociopath, too, which is not a characterization too far, either.  

And indeed, it’s “the most important thing.”  

Standing on the presidential debate stage with Donald Trump in 2020, Joe Biden claimed “nothing was unethical” about his son Hunter’s job at Ukraine’s Burisma Holdings, employment attained for Joe’s political status, and to financially benefit Joe, the “Big Guy.” Of the laptop where all this incriminating data was stored, Biden offered a response given him in debate prep, “There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said, what [Trump’s] accusing me of, is a Russian plant.”  

Cognitively impaired, Biden, predictably, muffed the line. What he meant was 51, not 50, former intelligence officials had signed a letter suggesting Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation. Disinformation meant to, yet again (Russian collusion), swing the 2020 election for Donald Trump. 

Joe “The Big Guy” Biden having cashed the Burisma checks, however, and having guaranteed they continue by bribing Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko. Biden wasn’t merely lying about the laptop being Russian disinformation. Like Bill and Hillary Clinton, he knew he was lying.  

Knowing. Big difference. 

So again, pitching the lamp but a few degrees for clearer viewing, it is abundantly obvious that Joe Biden isn’t merely a bad person. He is an evil sociopath, too, which is not a characterization too far, either. 

Finally, the corporate news media. Or the “mainstream” news media, as it’s called. Or the unaffectionate but true, “Fake News” media. They see all this evil corruption taking place, particularly that of Hillary and Biden. They have their reporters in the courtroom who hear Mook’s confession about Hillary, her being the author of a treasonous plot. They see the video of Joe Biden confessing bribery in Ukraine: “Well, son of a bitch! …” They see the signed receipt showing Hunter Biden dropped off the laptop in question, and that it’s unquestionably his laptop, and that the data contained therein is therefore true, and damning. They know precisely what Fox news and so-called “conservative news” outlets are reporting about the laptop is true, and therefore damning.  

And what is the corporate news media’s response? 

They either directly lie in their reporting, “51 former intel officials say laptop is Russian disinformation.” Or they lie by omission, which simply means they don’t report what they know. 

Key word: know.  

And if they know and aren’t reporting what they know, what does that imply? 

Pitching the lamp but a few degrees for clearer viewing, it is abundantly obvious that the corporate media, the “fake” news media, isn’t merely a bad industry constituted by bad people. It’s an evil industry populated by sociopaths, too, which is not a characterization too far, either. 

So, there you are showing liberal voters all this incontrovertible and condemning evidence. Bill Clinton confessing to the affair. Mook confessing Hillary’s treasonous plot. Biden bribing Poroshenko and cashing the Burisma checks. The “fake” news media caught repeatedly lying, in service to a political ideology. All knowing full well that they’re lying. And what is the response of liberal voters? 

Pitching the lamp but a few degrees for clearer viewing … 

Liberals aren’t political foes. They are evil sociopaths. Worse, they’re evil sociopaths incapable of seeing themselves as such. And not only is this not a characterization too far.  

It’s the most important thing. 

©JMW 4/2023 
All Rights Reserved 

JMW’s latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside. 

The Speaker’s gavel finally in Kevin McCarthy’s grasp, we might try to understand the intense, historic opposition to his speakership by twenty republican Freedom Caucus members. An enmity that was never really explained, unfortunately, but that’s rather elementary. 

Basically, the animosity results from this: caucus members are tired of being Paul Ryan’d—and McConnell’d. And Bush’d. And Cheney’d. And Romney’d. And Boehner’d. And Kinzinger’d.  

And ultimately, establishment republican’d. 

In other words, Freedom Caucus members are tired of a deeply corrupt liberal establishment controlling and imperiling the country. A fetid swamp that, yes, includes GOP republicans. A majority of the party, actually—leadership-wise, at least. Reliable liberals pretending to be republicans. Turncoats, opposing on the margins, but invariably dutiful to a swamp in peril.  

But, let’s stick with Paul Ryan.  

Finally gaining access to documents in a secure facility in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) chairman, Devin Nunes, investigating the Obama administration’s treasonous Russian collusion plot, was shocked at what he found.  

“At first I couldn’t fathom the scope of it,” Nunes said. “These corrupt bastards were unmasking every report with a Trump official in it, every report with anyone remotely related to Trump.” 

In other words, while Hillary Clinton was running a Trump/Russian collusion media campaign with crooked lawyers, opposition research firms, and the national news media. Obama was using the nation’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies to spy on the Trump campaign. And they weren’t just spying to be spying. They were spying to manufacture a phony data trail to compliment Clinton’s fake Russian collusion media plot, and to frame, yes frame, members of the Trump campaign. Conspirators, they were manufacturing crimes and setting obstruction and perjury traps for the 45^th President of the United States, Donald Trump, duly elected.  

An act otherwise known as: treason. 

Nunes was on to them. To the point, what did he do next with these and other investigative revelations?  

He briefed House Speaker, Paul Ryan.  

“I told him that I was going to speak to the press and the president. I told speaker Ryan this had nothing to do with Russia. They were just spying.” Spying on Donald Trump and his campaign to, initially, prevent his presidency and, later, to impeach and eliminate him.  

An act otherwise known as: treason. 

So then, and on point, Ryan, third in line to the presidency and comprehensively briefed, knew what Clinton, the Obama administration, the FBI and CIA had done and were doing to Trump, a duly elected President, and that all were involved in a treasonous conspiracy. Incontrovertibly up to speed, he knew historic crimes had been committed not only against Trump, but against democracy and the American people.

Yet, and still on point, Ryan spent his speaker’s tenure badmouthing and undermining Trump, before ultimately retiring because of him (reasoning Ryan disputes). Retirement not only for his personal dislike of Trump, which is evident, but primarily because Trump had arrested control of the Republican Party from Ryan and his fellow establishment republicans—establishment the operative term. 

Despite his political attempts to portray otherwise, Ryan despises Trump still.  

November ‘22, ABC News:  

“I’m proud of the accomplishments [during the Trump administration] – of the tax reform, the deregulation and criminal justice reform – I’m really excited about the judges we got on the bench, not just the Supreme Court, but throughout the judiciary. But I am a Never-Again Trumper. Why? Because I want to win, and we lose with Trump. It was really clear to us in ’18, in ‘20 and now in 2022.” 

First, all those pride-generating accomplishments of which Ryan boasts, coupled with the historic successes: stock market, oil, unemployment, defeating ISIS, et al. It sounds like Trump was a pretty good leader. A “winner,” one could say, definitely not a loser. And all this winning while fighting off a treasonous coup, no less, and an entire establishment determined to manufacture his administrative and personal demise. A concrete fact that didn’t make it into Ryan’s calculations, interestingly. 

Or rather, tellingly.   

Second, the well-established rule: “Everything before the “But” is BS” applies to Ryan’s remarks, too. Pathetic though the attempt, it’s politics. Ham-handed politics, but politics nonetheless. The “pride” and “excitement” Ryan feels for Trump era accomplishments are, in fact, results of Trump’s leadership and of his policies. Ryan offers the compliments, if indirectly and ham-handedly, not because he wants to, but because he knows the vast majority of republican voters (a) know what Obama, Clinton, and the liberal establishment did to Trump and the country, and (b) still vehemently support Trump.  

The “But” is what you say before you reveal your true self. In this case, that you’re an establishment republican who has lost control of the Party to flag-hugging interloper. You know, like, the black waiter at the club who came into new money and is now a member. Having cocktails with the crew at the club bar, it’s like, “How ya’ doin’, bro?” But everyone knows he doesn’t really belong, that he hasn’t really, earned it. 

An establishment member, Ryan was always a Never-Trumper. He “worked” with Trump because he had to, because via democracy, ugh! eyeroll, he was forced to. And like every other establishment republican, he undermined Trump the whole time. Like snickering at the former black waiter when he abandons the crew for the club facilities. He should know where the restroom is, boys. He cleaned it! [Raucous crew laughter] 

Again, establishment the operative term. 

Third, in the discussion with ABCs Jonathan Karl, another card-carrying establishment member, incidentally, where are the remarks about the treasonous plot? About Obama, Clinton, the establishment, and what they did to Trump, democracy, and the American people? To include Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, not so incidentally. A sacred veteran. A war hero, no less, who establishment members deemed a traitor, framed with manufactured crimes, and financially ruined—all verified in declass documents per Kash Patel and former Director of National Intelligence, Rick Grenell.  

Ryan briefed on all of it, where is the patriotic outrage? 
Why no discussion of the treasonous plot, and no criticism of the conspirators?  
Why isn’t treason an issue for Ryan? And Karl?

Per the plot, the establishment essentially said to the American people: Democracy is dead, plebes. We run things now. This is precisely what the coup means, and to say it’s a crisis is a grotesque understatement. It’s communism, unveiled. Then there’s Hunter Biden’s laptop proving financial corruption between the President of the United States and the Chinese government; that’s a crisis, too. There are the “Twitter Files,” proving collusion between the Biden administration, the FBI, CIA, and Big Tech to censor speech and rig elections, also crisis status. There’s the entire news media, to include Karl and ABC, refusing to utter a word about any of it, which is no surprise given they are proven conspirators in establishment crimes.  

All this and yet, here’s Paul Ryan attacking Trump … still. As he’d done the six years previous. We can’t win with Trump. Trump’s gotta go. The GOP has to dump Trump. One thing that does get to stay? And receives no criticism from Ryan?  

The establishment.  

It’s clear from Ryan’s remarks who he favors—the laughing and collegiality with fellow establishment member and Never-Trumper, Karl. The fawning over a corrupt Nancy Pelosi and her husband, and over “traditional GOP candidates.” Or rather, traditional establishment candidates who need to replace Trump’s candidates. 

Again, establishment the operative term. 

So, this is Ryan choosing sides with the establishment. There is nothing more anti-American and undemocratic and dangerous than an administration and political actors, and a nation’s FBI and CIA, no less, attempting to rig elections and take leadership choice and control from the hands of the American people. It’s communism, pure and simple. And rather than help the man, and the country, that were attacked by the traitors, Ryan and his establishment republican club crew want to get rid of the target and enable the traitors.  

In other words, nothing is more important than the establishment. Not even treason. 

“You run a coalition government when you’re Speaker of the House … you have to run a coalition,” Ryan says. Really? Have to? Well, democrats don’t run a “coalition government” when they are in control. They unite and railroad right over republicans, even have help from republicans to run over the voters—help from establishment republicans, that is.  

Not recognizing the abusive disparity, Ryan and the rest of his establishment republican crew are either blind, naïve fools or establishment loyalists. Comrades whose hearts belong to the regime, which is apparently the case, which brings us to current speaker, Kevin McCarthy, via Donald Trump. 

From the moment Trump announced his candidacy in 2015, he was crystal clear about his mission: returning rightful control of the government to the American people—“returning” to obviously mean control was lost. Or rather, arrested. Trump, on the campaign trail: 

“Our movement is about replacing a failed and corrupt political establishment with a new government controlled by you, the American people. The Washington establishment, and the financial and media corporations that fund it, exist for only one reason: to protect and enrich itself. The establishment has trillions of dollars at stake in this election. For those who control the levers of power in Washington, and for the global special interests, they partner with these people that don’t have your good in mind. Our campaign represents a true, existential threat like they haven’t seen before. This is not simply another four-year election. This is a crossroad in the history of our civilization, that will determine whether or not ‘We the People’ reclaim control over our government. The political establishment that is trying to stop us, is the same group responsible for our disastrous trade deals, massive illegal immigration, and economic and foreign policies that have bled-our country-dry … this is a struggle for the survival of our nation, and this will be our last chance to save it. This election will determine whether we’re a free nation, or whether we have only the illusion of democracy, but are in fact are controlled by a small handful of global special interests.” 

Trump not only scared the hell out of the liberal establishment with these remarks, but the republican establishment, too—establishment being the operative term. Equally frightened, isn’t it then clear that the establishment carries no political distinctions? Is it not then clear the establishment a unified force of both republicans and democrats? 

Indeed it is clear, and it’s precisely why the republican establishment worked so desperately to undermine Trump and rid the party of their own presidential candidate, pre-election and post-election. Wherein the treasonous establishment plot was executed and made manifest, crimes of which each and every republican, establishment and otherwise, was made fully and knowingly aware. A list to include: 

Speaker Kevin McCarthy. 

After the January 6^th incident on Capitol Hill—another establishment scheme in a long, scroll-like list of manufactured anti-Trump schemes—and with Trump blamed for insurrection. McCarthy had a phone conversation with establishment republican and virulent anti-Trumper, Liz Cheney, both of them fully informed and aware of the treasonous establishment plot against Trump, democracy, and the American people.  

Referencing the 25th Amendment, a constitutional process for removing a president from office, Cheney: “What happens if it gets there after he’s gone? Is, is there any chance? Are you hearing that he might resign? Is there any reason to think that might happen?” 

McCarthy: “I’ve had a few discussions. My gut tells me no. I’m seriously thinking of having that conversation with him tonight … I’m going to call him … The only discussion I would have with him is that I think [the 25^th Amendment] will pass [congress], and it would be my recommendation you should resign. Um, I mean that would be my take, but I don’t think he would take it. But I don’t know.” 

In terms of blame, there are all kinds of problems with the January 6^th “insurrection”: Nancy Pelosi’s dereliction of duty in protecting the capitol, Ray Epps and FBI involvement. Amazingly—in the sarcastic sense, we can locate a cave-dwelling terrorist in the mountains of Afghanistan but, domestically, can’t find Ray Epps or the person who placed bombs around the capitol the day before “Insurrection Day.”  

The point: intelligence can find who it wants to find. 

Nevertheless …  

Given the history, given the long list of manufactured, anti-Trump, establishment schemes of the previous six-years, all failed and exposed. The first instinct for Cheney and McCarthy should be: This is just another establishment ruse to get Trump. Clearly, however, there is no such instinct for either of them and, as with Ryan and Karl, no discussion of the treasonous plot, either.  

Treason punishable by death, is it not logical to presume that getting rid of Trump is, for the conspirators, paramount? And that the ceaseless six-year assault on him—all the lies, fraud, and establishment treachery—is an effort to avoid the dire consequences? Are those impossible calculations? 

Well, they are if you’re an establishment conspirator. 

Here’s how the McCarthy/Cheney conversation should have gone:  
Cheney: “The establishment traitors are now trying to get rid of Trump with the 25th Amendment, just as they have done repeatedly for the past six-years. How are we going to protect democracy and the American people?” 
McCarthy: “I will talk to him tonight and develop a plan.” 

Again, both Cheney and McCarthy were/are fully aware of the treasonous plot against Trump, democracy, and the American people. Yet here they are plotting Trump’s demise. And in assistance to whom?  

The establishment—plotting and establishment the operative terms. 

Behavior. It never lies. It’s how you know. 

All 222 republican congress members are fully aware of the treasonous plot against Trump, democracy, and the American people. And the point is, you choose a side. The House Speaker matter is settled now, but originally only 20 members, essentially the Freedom Caucus, the “Trumpers,” sided with Trump, democracy, and the American people. 202 republicans remaining, and 212 congressional democrats already fully devoted to the establishment. It’s an indication of the mountain yet to climb before “replacing a failed and corrupt political establishment with a new government controlled by you, the American people,” as Trump put it. 

The 20 members opposed McCarthy because he had revealed his establishment allegiance, and because they were tired of being establishment republican’d. Tired of being Ryan’d, McConnell’d, Bush’d, Cheney’d, Romney’d, Boehner’d, Kinzinger’d  

And for his apparent allegiances, McCarthy’d.  

This is how the establishment does it. We’ll let you have your little Freedom Caucus, the establishment’s republican wing says. But when it comes to pulling the strings and control, we’ll wield the power, which in this case is the Speaker’s chair. Freedom Caucus members well understood this. Thus, the hostilities and defiance in the new congress’ opening rounds. 

Obviously, the establishment—establishment republicans, the Democrat Party in toto, the news media—wants a reliable fellow club member in the Speaker’s chair. Interestingly, or perhaps inexplicably, so does Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Gov. Mike Huckabee, and other usually dependable anti-establishment, pro-America, -Trump, and –democracy conservatives. 

During the congressional drama over McCarthy, Hannity had a hostile exchange with Rep. Lauren Boebert, a Freedom Caucus member and fervent Trump supporter. In their nightly television lineup, Hannity, Ingraham, and guest Huckabee all sat squinty-eyed and, making faces, annoyed as caucus members tried to explain, if rather poorly, the reason for their objections to McCarthy.  

“Maybe it’s time for you to step down!” Hannity said to Boebert. “Is this a gameshow [to you]?” 
“What’s the endgame?” Ingraham said sarcastically to another caucus member. 

Under fire, Boebert said plainly, “I do not trust Kevin McCarthy to deliver on [his] promises.” And why the distrust? 

For McCarthy’s establishment friendly behavior.  
For him not laying the wood to Liz Cheney during their Jan. 6^th phone exchange.  
For saying, “I’ve had with this guy,” meaning Trump. 
For virtually ignoring the treasonous conspirators, and Hunter’s laptop revelations, and voter fraud, and the scroll-like list of establishment lies, scams, and crimes of the past six years. 
For suspiciously not having the same passion for these issues as the Freedom Caucus. 

That’s why. 

Hannity, Ingraham, Huckabee—all knew about these McCarthy issues, just like they know all the details of Clinton’s and the Obama administration’s treasonous plot. They know all-too-well about establishment republicans, too, and how they undermined Trump for six years. And in fact, the Freedom Caucus members, the Trump and America and democracy fighters, are their people. People who, like Trump, are trying to break the establishment wheel. A corrupt system Hannity, Ingraham, Huckabee, and the entire nation and world now knows to exist for six years of comprehensively exposed establishment treachery. 

When you go to do big things, and especially the right and just things, like breaking the corrupt establishment wheel. This the kind of pressure, grief, and ultimate persecution you will endure for being in the minority, for standing on truth and principle, and for being unafraid of public embarrassment and humiliation. Because that is what the establishment does: publicly embarrasses and humiliates people who challenge establishment doctrine, rules, and supremacy. It is the favored establishment tool, a tool of conversion. Employed so that dissenters forfeit their beliefs and accept and support establishment beliefs.  

All hail the establishment! Or face public scorn and humiliation. 

So it is with these caucus members, who know full well what the problem is, and why they’re doing what they’re doing. They see the establishment for what it is, which is precisely what Trump said it was: “failed and corrupt.” As to the claim’s veracity, the past six years have removed all doubt, and it is a genuine and undeniable crisis for American democracy.  

Freedom Caucus members don’t want establishment republicans in control via the Speaker’s chair, because they have seen what establishment republicans do: align with their establishment brethren. It doesn’t portend well when getting to the bottom of establishment crime and punishing the criminals—democrat and republican alike. 

Establishment republicans like Ryan and McCarthy say they’re proud of Trump’s accomplishments and such. Yet, unlike Freedom Caucus members they never, with passion and purpose, take up Trump’s wheel-breaking cause. They don’t fight for Trump, democracy, or the American people, none of the three. Clearly, they fight for the establishment, for the established order, and for establishment power and control.  

There isn’t a better reason to fight than a treasonous plot; there will never be a better reason, in fact. Yet, establishment republicans are mute. Only, they’re not mute. There’s their behavior, a language in itself. Unlike Freedom Caucus members, they leave the treasonous crimes of the establishment virtually unspoken, and help the establishment rid America of the individual who vowed the establishment’s demise and to return power to its rightful owner, the American people.  

Freedom Caucus. Who couldn’t get behind something so, American, but people oppose to such antiquated nonsense? 

Pouring over the Twitter Files, investigator Matt Taibbi concluded the US government was “in the censorship business in a huge way.” What he is actually saying is the United States government, under establishment control, was undermining democracy. Only for a billionaire’s purchase of the Twitter platform are we able to know this. In the same way, only for the miraculous 2016 victory of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton are we able to know of her and the Obama administration’s treasonous coup. Tellingly, establishment members, republican and democrat alike, don’t want to talk publicly about either revelation, or about any of the establishment fraud and crimes of the past six years. 

It means, simply: members are determined that the establishment wheel remain intact, and that members remain in power, and in control. Which then means: but for 20 congress members, and perhaps a few more, the United States government has anointed itself king, and demoted the American people to subjects. You know, like it used to be, and is nearly everywhere else in the world.

To know the times, one need only read the signs. 

©JMW 1/2023 
All Rights Reserved 

JMW’s Latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside. 

Catholic writer, Blaise Pascal: “Truth is so obscure in these times, and falsehood so established, that, unless we love the truth, we cannot know it.” 

The unfortunate fact is some people don’t want to know the truth, at least not certain truths, and thus obviously don’t love it. The result is folly, and there is no group more adept at folly than liberals, who’s foolishness is insanely easy to demonstrate. My “Liberal Dunce Folder” offers a quick example. 

For those wondering, I keep a file—a massive file—of the many examples I find of well-demonstrated liberal foolishness. Or rather, examples of sound and incorruptible logic that crush “liberal logic,” or so it’s called; that render liberals’ arguments and positions on matters utter nonsense; and that should be for them utterly humiliating.  

It’s never humiliating, of course. But, nevertheless … 

For the example, which we’ll label: Exhibit A, something fairly recent: Liberals want to eliminate the Constitution’s Second Amendment and confiscate guns from the American people. Yet they leave Taliban terrorists $90-million-dollars in weaponry.  

So, how does this make sense? It doesn’t, obviously—a recurring theme when dealing with liberals. Thus, the incessant head scratching and perplexed expressions at liberal ideas and arguments.  

Some would say this Afghanistan fiasco was Joe Biden’s doing alone; blame him for the logical inconsistency! But are Biden, any of his fellow Democrats, or the liberal news media taking issue with the inconsistency? 

No.  

And your local liberal voter—the mindless, servile and annoying liberal devotee in your personal sphere—are they saying, “What fresh nonsense is this, fer chrissake?! We’re supposed to be ridding the world of guns!” In fact, forget the inconsistency. Shouldn’t liberal voters be incensed that Biden left $90-milllion in weaponry behind that they financed?  

They should be angry, but are they? No. Like the democrats and liberal news media, are liberal voters taking issue with the logical inconsistency? 

Them either. 

It is clear we’re staring at a steaming pile of illogical foolishness. The question is: can liberals one and all see that it’s a steaming pile of illogical foolishness? The answer is yes.  

No guns for you, Americans, because guns are the bane of civilized society. But here, terrorists, the world’s most violent and evil criminals, have $90- million worth of our taxpayer’s weaponry.  

It’s disgracefully illogical, not to mention hypocritical. And make no mistake, liberals all can see it.  

Let’s try a few more choice examples from the “folder,” considering them Exhibits B, C, D, and so on … 

“If guns kill people, why do we send people with guns when they go to war?  Why not just send the guns?”  

Imagine a military commander briefing a room of crated M-16s on an upcoming operation. Because, this is where liberal logic leads: “Okay, men. Listen up. The LZ is here, in this field. We’re moving three klicks to the north, up this ridge, here …”  

It’s embarrassing, I know. 

Here’s one from youthful gun control activist and Parkland school shooting survivor, David Hogg: “Remind me. How many AR-15’s did Jesus own?” 
Twitter response: “Not enough to avoid being murdered by his government.” 

Ouch. And did the murderous rebuttal faze Hogg? Not in the least.  

Incidentally, liberals have no use for God, and think the concept nonsense. Yet, they lecture everyone on the virtues of Godliness. Doesn’t seem very, logical, does it. 

And this Foxworthy themed logic: “If you don’t trust the police or government, but you think they should be the only ones to have guns, you might be a liberal.” Or perhaps, a “redneck” liberal.   

And these on the issue of abortion: “Bacteria is life on Mars, but a heartbeat isn’t life on earth.”  

“Biology lesson: your baby’s DNA isn’t identical to your DNA, making it not your body.” 

“Why would liberals be upset about deporting children, but not upset about aborting them?” 

And this related pandemic jewel: “If unvaccinated American kids aren’t allowed in public schools, why would we import millions of unvaccinated immigrants?” 

And these on the issue of gender: “If men who think they are women can use women’s bathrooms, why not men who think they are men? Does mental illness make you safer to women?” 

Arm sweep everything else off the table, having to argue male and female restroom arrangements with liberals should explain the level of lunacy we’re dealing with. There isn’t a liberal parent one, male or female, who wants their 6-year-old daughter in the restroom alone with a mentally ill weirdo dude in a dress. Not one. Yet, ask your local liberal parent if they approve of this liberal-driven restroom nonsense, and watch them battle feelings of cult betrayal. They won’t be sending their 7-year-old daughters into bathrooms alone and unattended, but damn if they’ll openly rebuke cult doctrine and question cult leadership. Thus, the predictable response:  

“Transphobe! Bigot! Trumptard!” 

“If liberals don’t believe in biological gender, then why do they march for women’s rights?” 

“Liberals say there’s a gender pay gap, and then say there’s no such thing as gender.” 

“The people who claim President Trump has mental issues, also claim there are more than two genders. Let that sink-in.” 

Indeed, let those last three sink-in. And when you feel deeply embarrassed for liberals, realize they feel humiliated, too. For religious loyalties, however, they just can’t show it. Instead, it’s: 

“Transphobe! Bigot! Trumptard!”  

And then, these illustrative outliers: “If socialist college professors believed their own propaganda, wouldn’t they teach for free?”    

“White privilege: the privilege of being called ‘racist’ by people who see nothing except your race.” 

Remember the liberal line, “Walls don’t work?” Well: “If walls don’t work, are prisoners staying voluntarily?” 

“Liberals won’t fund a border wall to keep illegals out. Yet they expect you to fund sanctuary cities to keep illegals in.” 

These two Exhibits encourage one to think: liberals just say whatever pops into their mind, don’t they. Yes. They do. 

And finally, for a bleeding scalp, this from Clint Eastwood: “If you could reason with a [liberal], there wouldn’t be any [liberals].” 

The reader is probably asking: are these people really this—let’s be amiable and say: naive? 

The answer is no.  

Contrary to what some say: that liberals are morons, they are not morons. For the most part they are extremely intelligent, capable human beings. The problem is, one, they’re emotion driven—angry, bitter, resentful, hateful (liberalism is the repository for malcontents)—and they make these illogical proclamations, see: the Exhibits, emotionally and without thinking things through. Then, as well-illustrated by the Exhibits, those less inclined to emotion do the thinking, and issue the thoughtful, incontrovertible, wise, and should-be-embarrassing rebuttals. 

The result is the decimation of liberal logic and ideological ruin. Their argument lying lifeless for all to see presents problem two for liberals: the ruins. They can’t acknowledge them. For if they did, they’d be admitting their leaders, the people they revere and serve, are incompetent fools, and worse. And if their leaders are incompetent fools, and worse, then what are the servile liberal faithful?  

One can see the quandary. The answer to it?   

It’s doing what liberals always do when confronted with their failed logic and beliefs, represented in this old adage: if you don’t like what’s being said, change the conversation.  

The Exhibits, in their entirety, present a problem: the liberal premise in each is illogical and doesn’t make any sense. A fact clear to everyone, even liberals. The truth of the matter is, liberals are liars. If they truly wanted to eliminate guns from society, for example, they wouldn’t provide $90-million worth to the world’s most violent and evil criminals, to use on society.  

So, liberals are not only liars. They are hypocrites, too.  

Point this out to your local liberal—in fact, point any one of the Exhibits out to your local liberal, and it is a logical certitude which cannot be reconciled or overcome. So in response, liberals deftly change the subject to something else, a distraction. They must change the subject and make that topic the discussion, because fools can never and will never argue the truth. Why?  

The truth means the demise of their beliefs—beliefs they want to have, that they want to be true. Or, demise of their ideology, their religion. In this case: liberalism.  

The outcome intolerable, liberals create an alternative universe for themselves where these desired beliefs can be real, genuine, and true. And when facts and logic render those beliefs false, and when their counterfeit universe is challenged by reality. Liberals simply won’t allow it. They can’t allow it. Otherwise, they would be complete and utter fools, and complete and utter followers and worshipers of fools.  

The proverbial “blind leading the blind.” 

Liberal: “Trump’s a traitor who colluded with the Russians to steal the election!” 
You: “No. Sorry. Hillary’s campaign manager confessed in federal court that it was a scam perpetrated by Hillary. Trump was fully exonerated.” 
Liberal: “Well, Trump is a disgusting human being!” 
You: “Are we still talking about Russian collusion?” 

No. No we’re not talking about Russian collusion any longer. Because facts and truth can’t exist in the alternative universe. Why? Because liberals can’t argue them. Indeed, facts and truth aren’t merely offensive in Fantasy Land. They are deeply offensive. Look at the previous conversation. It is every word true. Is this not what occurs in every conversation/debate with liberals? Does your local liberal accept the truth, and reality? No—and despite showing them hard, incontrovertible evidence. Liberals continue diverting to other topics, instead. Why?  

Because the truth isn’t what they want to believe; it deeply offends them.  

Trump’s a traitor, dammit! I want to believe that! 

Thereto, liberals divert for having fully invested in this traitorous fraud put forth by their leaders, which makes the faithful dupes, suckers, and ultimately fools. Who wants to cop to that? In fact, take each of the Exhibits. Confronted with these instances of equally devastating logic, who wants to cop to those intellectual and ideological failures? 

Not liberals. So what do they do?  

They repeatedly change the conversation.  

In other words, everyone must argue the lies and ignore the truth. It’s how Fantasy Land survives. 

The Bible speaks of “hardness of the heart”—They have eyes to see but do not see, and ears to hear but do not hear. People can’t see or hear not because they can’t see or hear, but because they don’t want to see or hear. It’s “hardness of heart,” which ultimately means: defiance.  

People, in this case liberals, want to believe something else, and thus obstinately refuse to recognize the truth. Pride won’t allow truth’s validation and failure. It’s the heart basically saying: there is no evidence so irrefutable, compelling, or damning that will make me change my views!   

Thus, supremely logical bearers of truth become racists, misogynists, bigots—become anything but correct, righteous, and the ideological winner. This is precisely why conversations/debates with liberals never go anywhere, and why problems can never be effectively solved. The truth ends debate and remedies problems, and liberals reject it. And whatever the subject matter, what does one do with people who refuse to acknowledge the truth? 

Mr. Scott, you’re an alcoholic. 
No, I’m not. 
You’ve lost your wife and family and business for it. 
That wasn’t the reason. 
No? 
No. 
Well, it’s what your family says. What your business partners say. 
You can’t listen to them. 

How does one breakthrough this hardened, Tungsten-grade obstinance? 

It’s impossible. Any attempt, fruitless.  

Mr. Scott would rather live in the alternative universe he has created for himself, wherein neither he nor his drinking are responsible for his personal destruction. Likewise, liberals would rather live in their alternative universe, wherein the truth isn’t allowed to exist, and failure and humiliation must then never be endured.  

Clearly, Fantasy Land is a virtue-free society. So then, why discuss freedom, liberty, honor, integrity, morals, principles, the rule of law, the constitution, and the like with liberals when they haven’t such virtues and such virtue dependent things in their characteristic profile?  

If liberals were principled human beings driven by morals, integrity, and honor, they would be in agreement with the truth, and you. They would believe what you believe and hold your positions. Instead, they get up every day and listen to what their leaders, people of like belief, tell them to believe, which they then take out into the world and proselytize. And then, there you are, the truth-seeking realist, providing them the logic they never employed; providing them the unassailable truth of matters, with the documents and quotations and indisputable facts. And they want no part of it.

In fact, you’re an infidel! 

Although perfectly capable, liberals, particularly the servile faithful, aren’t interested in thinking for themselves. They aren’t interested in listening, in thinking things through critically, and employing their own logic to decipher the meaning and truth of certain matters. It’s a really easy thing to do, and they can easily do it. It’s just, they want to believe something else. 

Thus, liberals proceed to argue 15 million other inapplicable nothings so as to remove this offensive and annoying truth bearer from their presence. Liberals don’t want reality. They want their comfortable and warm alternative universe, wherein they can be quasi-righteous and -intellectually superior.  

Wherein Trump is a traitor colluding with the Russians.  
Wherein guns are evil, and not the people who wield them and use them in crimes.  
Wherein there is no gender, but a gender pay gap.   
Where liberals can be enraged at the ill-treatment and deportation of children, but abortion enthusiasts at the same time. 

A person of truth and order doesn’t understand this chaos. Things must make sense to people of order, must be logical and add-up. They must know what they are doing, and that it’s the right thing. They want to live where things make sense, where things are secure and prosperous.  

Well, such a place is living hell to liberals, who fancy Fantasy Land, and who are no less encouraged to believe such a place exists by leaders and a culture that help maintain the belief’s viability. The desire for make-believe is odd given liberals desperately want the truth in other areas of their lives. They’re warm to the truth, actually, and will even listen to its bearers. In these cases, the logical capability works just fine.  

You’re cancer-free, Mrs. Liberal. [elation, tears, hugs for the truth-bearer] 

Yet, show them actual trial testimony of Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager confirming her treasonous fraud, and thereby exonerating Donald Trump. Show them laptop evidence that exposes presidential crime and corruption. In fact, show them the facts behind any one of the previous Exhibits, and they reject it. All of it. Why? 

It contradicts what they want to believe. 
It renders Fantasy Land and their entire liberal religion a fraud.  
Worse, it renders them dupes, suckers, and fools.  

And who wants to cop to that? 

Hence, the hard-hearted defiance. Under these conditions, it’s no longer about true and false or right and wrong. It’s about undesired reality, and losing, and saving face, and humiliation, and having to change. 

A fourteen-year-old girl and her soccer coach father were suspended by a Vermont school district for the daughter’s discomfort with undressing in front of a transgender boy in a school locker room. Liberals one and all know the transgender issue is a liberal cause. They know adolescent girls and boys undressing in front of each other is utterly absurd and morally wrong, too. Furthermore, they know MeToo feminists have advised young women to speak out when they are uncomfortable, and that it’s “their body” to do with as they see fit. 

Liberals know all of this, and yet they run the other way. They ignore the story, let it wither on the vine. Until they’re forced to address the matter for some nauseating truth bearer, where the response is: 

“Transphobe! Bigot! Trumptard!” 

Standing up for children and fellow females? For morality? Being people beholden to their convictions, organizational claims, and word? No. None of that. 

That means facing the music, and there’ll be none of that, either. 

Again, it’s the heart basically saying: there is no evidence so irrefutable, compelling, or damning that will make me change my views! Leaving the truth more loathsome than “Medicare healthcare advisor, Susan, on a recorded line. Can you hear me okay …?” 

So what we have, basically, is a cult of narcissists and sociopaths. People who never recognize their mistakes or failures or the undeniable truths that illustrate both; who then never apologize for either; and who thus make society a contentious, dreadful place—at least for the realists, the people of truth and order. The, good citizens. 

Fantasy Land seems like a pretty cool place: lies are true, enduring righteousness, never having to fail or apologize. An extremely seductive locale, indeed. There’s only one problem:  

It isn’t real. It’s a world of lies, and obviously self-loathing—that one would make deceit an ally and truth their enemy. And then, defiantly stick to the lies no matter what. 

Speaking about her husband’s indiscretions, actress Emma Thompson said she was “utterly, utterly blind” to the fact he was having affairs with other women. “What I learned,” she said, “was how easy it is to be blinded by your own desire to deceive yourself.” 

Lying to oneself is easy, indeed. But then, what does one do upon realization of such an adverse condition? 

One begins a love affair with the truth, so they can then know it. And changes their life, for the better.  It’s the mark of a mature, well-functioning adult, and of a contributing member to society. 

Otherwise, you’re just a fool. 

©JMW 11/2022 
All Rights Reserved 

JMWs latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside. 

“Her childhood was ended too soon. He took that from her. We hope that she can make it through this. We know that she will never be the same. We know that she will never get her innocence back.” 

So read a statement to the court written by the broken, lamenting father of this 14-year-old victim, his daughter. The victim met her assailant, 22-year-old, Thomas John Boukamp, on a messaging app when she was thirteen. He later kidnapped her from her Lubbock, Texas middle school. That’s, middle school. Boukamp: 

“I loved someone I connected with, I was filled with violent sexual fantasies, and then I thought I had found someone who understood me. I didn’t want to take advantage of her…I loved her.”  

The evidence of this, “love?” 

During eight days of captivity, Boukamp raped, strangled, beat, and forcibly removed the child’s braces with pliers. 

Incidentally, this idea that parents feel overbearing about knowing what their innocent, naïve, and inexperienced children are doing, and that they feel cowardly when their kids scream in protest at their privacy intrusions. Let this outcome be the reason parents step forward with a crisp fresh one. Crack!  

“Say one more thing. I dare you; I double-dare you.” 

Kids don’t know [poop emoji]. Precisely why experienced and sage parents are in charge.  

In fact, the warning signs for every catastrophe yet to personally unfold are clearly visible, and everyone ignores them. Thinking when they happen to someone else, How awful. Gee, glad that wasn’t me, or mine.  

And then it happens to them.   
And there’s no do-over, no restoration. Only wounds and scars … if luck prevails. 

“I like teenage girls!” Boukamp confessed in a recorded jailhouse phone call, played for the court at his sentencing. “They [federal agents and prosecutors] don’t like that I like that. I frankly don’t care what the morality of this current time and place says. It’s not wrong. There’s nothing wrong about it. And they’re not going to ever convince me of its wrongness. So up theirs. I hate this nation.”  

Narcissism much? And how ‘bout rape, strangulation, assault, and removing braces with pliers? Can we convince you of that wrongness? 

Trust me. That either. 

Boukamp added he would never apologize for “quote unquote raping a 14-year-old” and said he didn’t care that authorities were monitoring the [jailhouse] call. “If you’re listening to this, yeah, your family is going to die. Play this at my f-ing sentencing! Do it. I hate you!” 

It is certainly untoward for a 22-year-old man to pursue a 13-year-old girl, but that isn’t necessarily what makes Boukamp such an evil human being. It’s the captivity, rape, strangulation, the use of pliers to remove a child’s braces—sans a local anesthetic, no less—and the narcissistic defiance and belligerence thereafter.  

Evidently, Boukamp’s “sexual fantasies” were a little too, eccentric, for a naïve 14-year-old child, and her unwillingness to participate in those fantasies threw him into a rage.  

Thus, the “love” and unspeakable evils. 

So, what is it that makes Boukamp so evil? Society has no shortage of justifications: parental abuse, bullying, female rejection, mentally handicapped, sociopath, psychopath, insanity. Whatever the assigned reason, does it really matter? The baseline is: evil. 

Can’t we just let that standalone as the descriptive?  

What Boukamp did is evil. He’s an evil human being. The reason he is evil is beside the point, really. And actually, how or why Boukamp is evil is nobody’s concern. He’s evil, period. A descriptive that, indeed, stands alone.  

Okay, so, next question: what makes Boukamp any less evil than Hillary Clinton? 

Such the great divide in evil here?  

Clinton orchestrated and financed a treasonous plot to steal and overturn the 2016 presidential election. Isn’t a treasonous plot to deceive the public and steal an election standalone evil, too?  

Of course it is, but it gets worse …  

Clinton then allowed some $50 million taxpayer dollars to be spent on a two-and-a-half-year investigation, the Mueller investigation, which used her pretext as the basis for the investigation. Or in other, more practical terms, Clinton, grinning broadly and rubbing her hands together in diabolical delight, sat in her Chappaqua study watching news coverage of the Mueller investigation for 2 ½ years, knowing Special Counsel Mueller was investigating Trump with her treasonous plot script.  

Mueller: It says here you partnered with Vladimir Putin to steal the election, Mr. Trump, and that you had courtesans pee on a hotel bed in which former President Obama had slept. Do you deny these charges?  
Trump: Well, it all seems rather laughable, Mr. Mueller. Don’t you think? Who would suggest such ridiculous things? 
Mueller: Blast you! Damn your hide! I’ll ask the questions! It’s confirmed right here in the script, er, intel, that I received from Hillary Clin, er—from someone with intimate knowledge! So, confess! 

The point is this scam is incontrovertibly evil. And note Clinton not only allowed millions in taxpayer dough to be spent investigating her fraud, but as a means of furthering it and securing its success. The fraud, her fraud, dragging the United States into bitter and unwarranted political turmoil, no less. And why?  

For her political fortunes. 

People say, What a horrible, evil human being to do something like that. On the evil scale, this incident is certainly up around the “10” mark. But it doesn’t begin to hint at the depth of Clinton’s depravity. Last week, for example, she accused republicans of plotting to steal the 2024 election—read alternatively as: she accused republicans of what she actually did herself. 

How does a human being do this? Even if Clinton has yet to be herself indicted or convicted of the crimes, federal court testimony proves conclusively she committed them. So, we know she committed them. More importantly, she knows she committed them. And yet, falsely and sans a single shred of evidence, here she is proclaiming the GOP is plotting steal the 2024 election.  

It’s breathtaking and offensive hypocrisy, yes. But how does one justify in their mind accusing someone else of a treasonous plot, knowing full-well they are the architect of one, and that the public is fully aware of their guilt in the matter?  

How does one do that?!  
How does one override the senses of guilt and shame and ultimate morality? 

It’s pretty simple, really. Clinton clearly has no sense of morality. What isn’t present in the first place needn’t be overridden. It can’t be overridden, in fact. If Clinton had a sense of morality, she would have never orchestrated and executed a treasonous plot. She wouldn’t later accuse others of doing what she herself did and was caught doing, either. Had she this sense of morality—the desire to do good and for righteousness, she would be ashamed and remorseful.  

So, the morality gene is clearly absent in Clinton. We often say in a cliché way, “Good Lord. That person is shameless!” But in Clinton’s case, it’s really true. She’s incapable of shame, which means she’s incapable of humility. And what label fits these sorts? Human beings who follow no law or moral code, who lie, cheat, and steal, who wrongly and hypocritically accuse their fellow human beings, and who are incapable of both acknowledging their failures and the humility it requires to do it? 

Peel away the slick-paper backing and slap the sticker on the pantsuit lapel:

*EVIL* 

If there is no law or moral code, then there can be offense to either, and thus no evil.  
However, there is a law, both God’s and man’s. And, there is a moral code. 
Thus, those failing to meet those standards are then, (fresh sticker please):  

*EVIL* 

Clinton and her fellow conspirators in the Obama Administration knew what they were doing was against the law, else they wouldn’t have gone to such lengths to conceal their crimes, and to keep them concealed. They knew, and didn’t care. They didn’t care because they don’t recognize any law. That’s the tell in all of this. Evil is entitled, isn’t subject to any rules. And doesn’t entitled lawlessness precisely describe how Clinton, Obama, and liberals behave? 

Treasonous coup, anyone? 
Lying to FISA courts to illegally spy on Americans? 
Wasting millions in taxpayer dough to investigate a fake crime of your design? 
Falsely labeling a laptop Russian disinformation to conceal its damning data? 
An aiding and abetting news media blackout to conceal historical political crimes, and to ensure electoral and political victories for the crooks? 

The tell: evil behavior by evil human beings. 

And what about liberal voters, the supporters of this evil … 

Hearing Boukamp’s remarks, your average liberal voter would be seething: What a disgusting, evil piece of human debris! Get a rope! They’d demand. Yet here is Clinton—likewise evil, lying and cheating and stealing, wrongly and hypocritically accusing her fellow human beings, and following no law or moral code. And who has a husband, not so incidentally, who clearly shares Boukamp’s appetite for young, naïve women and Boukamp’s contempt for the “morality of this current time and place.” All this depravity and injustice, and yet liberal voters applaud Clinton’s every utterance and stand loyally behind her on stage with “Hillary!” signs. 

So, why the different response to evil from liberal voters? 

Well, your average liberal voter doesn’t want to believe in Boukamp. He’s just a deranged, narcissistic nobody. He has no power or prestige, and no doctrine to sell—the requirements of a liberal voter god.  

Furthermore, Boukamp told the truth, that he liked adolescent girls; that he didn’t care about morality; and basically, that he would proudly, passionately, do what he did to his 14-year-old victim again. All of which is waaay too much public honesty for your average liberal voter’s comfort, who obviously prefer their gods be more cunning and deceptive, and haughty. Hubris of the degree you can get caught in a treasonous plot, and accuse your political enemies of plotting one, too. 

That is the kind of cojones your average liberal voter respects. Rather, that is the kind of evil your average liberal voter expects. And these being the prerequisites, what does it say about liberal voters? People who will yet, knowingly, turn out in hordes to vote for and enable their clearly evil gods in November and beyond? 

It says they’re evil, just the same. 

The fact is, lest anyone delude themselves, every human being must resist and defeat evil every single day of their existence. They fail. Try harder. Succeed. Fail again. Try again. As Stevenson put it, “The saints are the sinners who keep on trying.” Indeed. 

Then there are those who not only don’t try, but see evil as the success. People who labor every day to ensure evil’s dominance and reign. These people serve no law or morality, except that they might use either in a ruse to advance evil. They don’t expose treasonous plots; they plan and execute them. They don’t verify damning laptops as authentic; they fill them with corruption data, and label them *Russian disinformation*. They don’t acknowledge their criminal and moral failures; they don’t have these failures, because they haven’t the morality gene. They don’t tell the truth; they lie, without compunction. They don’t want questions; they want compliance …  

with evil. 

And finally, this: evil isn’t stopped because the “tryers” keep pointing it out, and pointing their fingers at its practitioners.  

Evil has no rules, no conscience, no shame, and it doesn’t bargain. A juggernaut, it crushes everything in its path until it rules, because that’s the world’s endgame. Its demise requires but a simple vote, now. Left to its devices, however, necessitates something a little more, bloody. And costly. 

Or so says the lone voice in the wilderness. And history—example after example after example … 

©JMW 11/2022 
All Rights Reserved 

JMWs latest: New Rules:  Relationship Logic for the Darkside.