IF TYRANNY IS TREASON, ONLY A WELL-ARMED CITIZENRY CAN EFFECTIVELY RESIST IT AND HAS THE DUTY TO DO SO

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART FOUR

TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT IS TREACHERY TO A NATION'S PEOPLE

Quotations to ponder apropos of “tyranny of Government as actionable treason against the American people”“If there is a clear distinction between a Republican and a Democrat during these trying times, it has to be boiled down to this single truth: Republicans trust our neighbors with their God-given rights and ask to be left alone; Democrats extend privileges to their neighbors and become little Robespierres to see whether or not those privileges should continue to be extended. That’s it.” ~Shaun Kenney, a contemporary web blogger, of the website, The Republican Standard, reflecting on the thoughts of C. S. Lewis on tyranny. “All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once the fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force.” ~from an essay by George Orwell, novelist, journalist, essayist, who is best known for his satirical allegory on totalitarianism, “Animal Farm,” published in 1945; and for his dystopian novel, “1984,” published in 1949.“The greatest tyrannies are always perpetuated in the name of the noblest causes.” ~Thomas Paine, American Patriot, Philosopher, and Political Theorist“I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. . . . The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases. The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.” ~Thomas Jefferson; Founding Father of our Nation, Third President of the United States, Statesman, Philosopher, and Lawyer; quotation taken from a letter from Jefferson to William Ludlow, September 6, 1824. “Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.” ~quotation attributed to John Basil Barnhill, anti-socialist writer, editor, politician, and debater of the late 19th Century and Early 20th century.“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. . . .” ~C.S. Lewis, novelist, essayist, and lay theologian; from his essay, “God In The Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics” (1948)Tyranny is here, in America. It is here now, today. That this is so, is indisputable, irrefutable fact; unsettling and distressing as this fact may be to contemplate.The Neo-Marxist Internationalists and Mega-Billionaire Neoliberal Globalists of present-day America would vigorously deny this, of course, when confronted with the inescapable ample evidence for it.The actions of a Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist led and controlled Congress and Executive Branch of the Federal Government glaringly demonstrate the truth of this. They are responsible for it, and what is more, they know it to be so; they welcome it; they have planned for it; they intend to see it come to fruition—tyranny imposed on the people by a rogue Government.But they assiduously try to hide the truth of their crimes and sins from the people, lest the people rebel. The people cannot be allowed even to whisper the truth while these Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists go about conjuring up a drastic transformation of our Country.The Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists are methodically, inexorably dismantling a proud, sovereign, independent Nation, a sovereign people, and a free Constitutional Republic; rendering it an afflicted, wretched, borderless, amorphous territory—eventually to be merged into a globalist totalitarian new world order. This massive, horrific transformation of a free Constitutional Republic is taking place quickly. Already, in the space of eight months, after the puppet-masters evicted Donald Trump from Office through the unethical and criminal manipulation of the electoral process, the Nation is unrecognizable. Although powerful, secretive Destructive elements had been machinating to dismantle the Republic at its inception, upon Ratification of the United States Constitution in 1788, the process of dismantling the Republic had heretofore proceeded relatively silently, furtively plodding forward at a snail's pace. It was only at the dawn of the 21st Century upon the inauguration of the “Skull and Bones” President, George Bush, that the process of dismantling the Republic pushed forward openly, fervently, rapidly, in earnest. The Bush Administration with the assistance of Alan Greenspan, Chair of the Federal Reserve, along with a host of neoconservative henchmen,  embroiled the Nation in an expensive escapade in the Middle East, from which we have never really extricated ourselves, and which resulted in the loss of thousands of American lives, trillions of taxpayer dollars, and the collapse of the American economy in 2008. The Grand Apologist, Barack Obama, compounded the Nation's economic and geopolitical plight. As another puppet of the shadowy Destructors of our Nation, Obama attempted, through secretive, negotiations with other nations and multinational businesses, to bind the Nation to two massive transnational trade deals: the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and the Transatlantic Trade Investment Partnership (T-TIP). Had those international trade agreements materialized, they would, in their operation, have severely weakened the Nation's Constitutional underpinnings. It was expected that Hillary Clinton would have continued the Obama policies had she succeeded him. And, many there were, both here and abroad, that presumed Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in to succeed Obama. They were wrong. Clinton lost. Donald Trump became President and threw a wrench into the grand scheme of the Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists to dismantle the Republic. The shadowy puppet-masters who oversaw all of this were enraged. They made sure Trump wouldn't serve a second term in Office. Once their physically frail, emotionally weak, and cognitively challenged puppet was firmly ensconced in Office, they wasted no time completing the process of destroying the Country from within—not only economically, but politically, societally, juridically, and culturally. Already, we see inklings of the resumption of TTP and T-TIP.The seditious Press and social media are collaborating in all of this. They are baldly, blithely censoring speech and endlessly, relentlessly pumping out gibberish on behalf of the puppet-masters. They have obtained the cooperation and acquiescence of many Americans; some capitulating, resigned; reconciled to their fate; others avidly embracing it.Americans’ brains have turned to mush. Many of them ardently support the takeover of the Nation, ravenously gobbling up all the nonsense generated by the Press and social media that an omnipotent Government, doling out occasional dollops of “freedom” and a few trinkets to those Americans who obey their dictates is a good thing; a right and proper thing; and they think: “woe to those Americans who do not heed the dictates of the Government taskmasters.”Americans who have bought into the nonsense, daily and malevolently spun by the propagandists, don’t realize or, more likely—especially the “Baby Boomer” Generation—did know, as well the public schools at the time had taught them, but now have long since forgotten, that our Nation was conceived in liberty.The ruination of a free Constitutional Republic is at hand and with it, the suppression of our sacred freedoms.The Neo-Marxists have taken over the education of our youth. They have rewritten the civics and history curricula of our public schools. They have recast the entirety of a Nation’s glorious history and Constitution to create a false narrative, one completely at odds with the truth, and one alien to and antithetical to the nobility of man, as they usher in a new era. It is one devoid of the notion of the sanctity, invincibility, and inviolability of the rights and liberties of man; of the autonomy and sanctity of the individual over the Collectivist State.But freedom is not a privilege to be dispensed occasionally to some and denied more frequently to others—at the whim of and by the grace of Government.‘Freedom,’ ultimately, is an incommensurable, irreducible, ineffable, elemental concept, actualized as an illimitable, immutable, unalienable right of the people. It is intrinsic to the people, bestowed upon them and into their very being by a loving God. Yet, Government usurpers pretend that freedom is an artificial construct. These usurpers see, in “Freedom” something akin to candy; a reward to be given to those who willingly bow to their will.To these usurpers, “freedom” is nothing more than a commodity, a thing created by or manufactured by the Government and therefore a thing within the lawful power of Government to mete out or to revoke, as Government alone, at its whim, decides.THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S ABSOLUTE CONTROL OVER THE FREE EXERCISE OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND ITS DISDAIN FOR THE NATION'S CONSTITUTION AND LAWS IS THE SINE QUA NON OF TYRANNY. Not without reason, the founders were much concerned with tyranny. And, a deep and disquieting concern over the unintentional resurrection of tyranny in a fledgling independent sovereign Nation informed the founders’ thinking as they fretted mightily over the shape a new Government, one conceived in liberty, should take.For, they knew it would be the greatest of ironies indeed, if, at the end of the day, a Federal Government they created for a new Nation—one conceived in liberty—would fall victim to the very thing they had with no little effort defeated. They determined that a true Republican form of Government would best stave off a rebirth of tyranny.But even a Republican form of Government, with powers carefully delineated and demarcated among three co-equal Branches, would of itself be insufficient to defeat tyranny. For ambitious powerful men would undoubtedly attempt to usurp powers the Constitution forbade. Thus would spawn a new tyranny—the very thing the founders had defeated and had no stomach to see arise anew.The founders realized the most effective weapon to check the natural inclination of those wielding power to acquire ever more power beyond the limits imposed on them by the Constitution would require an omnipresent armed citizenry. And as they perceived as self-evident true that the right of the people to keep and bear arms preexists in man—they etched that Divine Right in stone. The usurpers of the sovereignty of the American people don't care about any of that. Their sacrilege against the one true Deity knows no bounds.An explicit Bill of God-Given Rights incorporated into the Constitution would make clear to those who serve in Government that what the Divine Creator gave to man, no artificial Government construct can lawfully take from man. For any attempt to do so would be an assault not only on the dignity and autonomy of man but a mortal sin against the will of the Divine Creator, not that the usurpers wouldn’t attempt, or, for that matter, haven’t already attempted to do so.THEY WILL GO AFTER AMERICANS’ FIREARMS AS THEY MUST BECAUSE AN ARMED CITIZENRY CONSTITUTES AN IMMEDIATE AND DIRE THREAT TO THE EXECUTION AND COMPLETION OF THEIR GOAL: THE IMPOSITION OF TYRANNY.The usurpers know that wresting firearms from Americans would be a far more difficult proposition than constraining the right of free speech and association, which they have been doing with relative ease, and abrogating the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, which they have already accomplished.Actions of the Biden-Harris Administration and of the Pelosi-Schumer Congress are a conscious, unmitigated assault on the Constitution, on the Nation, and on its people. Together these actions constitute the imposition of tyranny on the American people. 

BUT——DO THESE DELIBERATE ACTS, SINGLY OR COLLECTIVELY RISE TO THE LEVEL OF TREASON AS THE WORD ‘TREASON’ IS DEFINED IN THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND IN FEDERAL STATUTE?

Does the import of the Treason clause the founders wrote into the Constitution extend to the imposition of tyranny on the people? If so, then tyranny amounts to levying war against the people. This means that the levying of war against the people is no less an act of betrayal, i.e. no less an act of treachery against the people, and, therefore, no less treason committed by the Government upon its own people, than is an unlawful levying of war by the people against Government.But this idea that those individuals serving in Government can, through their actions, commit treason against a people is a novel concept. For the treason laws of all other Nations do not admit of a Government action that can constitute a betrayal of the people. But, then, no other nation on Earth has adopted a Bill of Rights that at once establishes fundamental rights that exist intrinsically in the people; a Bill of Rights that serves as both a categorical declaration and an urgent reminder to those that serve in the Government that Government exists solely to serve the people. This means that the People are the Master, and Government is the Servant. It also means that the People are the sole Sovereign of and over the Nation and thence manifestly Sovereign over the Government and Government is manifestly subservient to the people.Taking these propositions as axiomatic, i.e., self-evident, true, this means that, as a matter of both law and logic, Government itself, through its actions that harm the people——harms that rise to the level of betrayal of a sacred trust binding Government to service to the people for all time——are an UNFORGIVABLE TREASON AGAINST THE PEOPLE. And, the people, for their part, have the lawful right and the lawful duty, under the Treason Clause of the U.S. Constitution, to bring those who betray them, to account for their crimes against them.This notion of “TREASON AS TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT DIRECTED AGAINST ITS OWN PEOPLE” is a thesis that demands further attention and explication.In the next several articles, we explore this idea of deliberate imposition of tyranny by High Officials of the Federal Government against the people, as implicating the Treason Clause of the U.S. Constitution.____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved. 

DO GOVERNMENT POLICIES AIMED AT WEAKENING THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES AND DISARMING THE CITIZENRY RISE TO THE LEVEL OF “TREASON?”

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART THREE

As we stated in our first article posted on Ammoland, “Does the Biden Administration’s Assault on the Second Amendment Amount to TREASON,” one must be circumspect in application of a TREASON hypothesis. For, if we are careless in our understanding of the import of it, we risk diluting its significance, mistakenly attaching the duo labels of ‘TREASON’ and ‘TRAITOR’ to those who never warranted it but happened nonetheless to be branded with it and then crucified for it.And we know whereof we speak: Recall the branding of “TRAITOR” to our 45^th President, Donald Trump, and recall the crucifying of him and those closest to him: Those individuals who assisted him in his run for U.S. Presidency; Cabinet-level Officers; close friends and associates; even members of his own immediate family. All of them have been incessantly, rapaciously, relentlessly, viciously attacked and hounded because of service to, or mere association with, the purported traitor, Donald Trump.Trump was called a TRAITOR because of his alleged collusion with Russia—false as it turned out; a complete fabrication, and a pretext to get him out of Office; a well-orchestrated sham for his impeachment. The Neo-Marxist Democrats spent our precious tax dollars to launch an extensive investigation of Trump in launching and conducting it, hoping to find evidence of it; but found nothing, nothing at all for their trouble. A backup plan to destroy the Trump Presidency was then initiated as a pretext to impeach Trump, grounded on the flimsiest of notions: a telephone call to the President of Ukraine. Trump’s call to Volodymyr Zelensky was perfectly lawful, but it was nonetheless blown up to monstrous proportions by the legacy Press in league with the Neo-Marxist Democrats, led by the notorious, power-mad Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. But that time-consuming, wasteful, taxpayer-funded enterprise, too, fell flat.But what was Donald Trump’s worst “crime” for which he was presumed by the Neo-Marxist Internationalists and mega-billionaire Neoliberal Globalists to be a traitor—calling him an autocrat and a threat to democracy and constantly blaring out that he damaged democracy? It was this: support for the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The Heritage Society, on September 9, 2020, reproducing an article by the Federalist Society, said this about Trump’s record on the Second Amendment after four years in Office:“In his most recent State of the Union address President Donald Trump promised the American people, “So long as I am President, I will always protect your Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms.” This was certainly a welcome statement from any elected official, particularly from the nation’s chief executive during a time of unprecedented attacks on the Second Amendment by many local, state, and federal lawmakers.But how has the President’s first term stacked up against his grand promise? When we step back from the hype and honestly assess Trump’s performance with respect to the Second Amendment, what do we actually find? Fortunately, when we take a hard look at the bad and the good in three important categories—the President’s rhetoric, policy, and judicial nominations—it is evident that Trump has gotten the Second Amendment right more often than he has gotten it wrong.Actions speak louder than words, particularly when it comes to national policy. But words, especially when they come from a President, are important. A President’s policy agenda often carries great weight with Congress, signaling to federal lawmakers what types of bills they might pursue without risk of a Presidential veto. President Trump’s Second Amendment rhetoric has occasionally been lacking. Yet more often than not, and principally when it has been most important, the President has said the right things.As with Trump’s rhetoric, most of his administration’s policy efforts have been consistent with his promise to protect the right to keep and bear arms.Early in his first term, federal agencies reversed course on several Obama-era policies that would have jeopardized Americans’ Second Amendment rights. For example, under the Trump Administration, the State Department settled a previous Obama Administration lawsuit with Defense Distributed and permitted that organization to publish its blueprints for 3D-printed guns online. This was a win for both the First and Second Amendments. Americans clearly have a right to discuss and disseminate information about how to conduct lawful activities—including how to smith a firearm for personal use.Similarly, the Trump Administration rescinded (before it could go into effect) an Obama-era regulation that would have effectively stripped the Second Amendment rights of any person who checked a particular box on a form submitted to the Social Security Administration. Normally, before the government can prohibit a person from keeping and bearing arms, it must first prove at some sort of hearing or trial that the person is a criminal, seriously mentally ill, or otherwise poses a serious danger to the community. The new Obama rule, however, would have summarily declared tens of thousands of Americans ineligible to exercise a constitutional right without first providing them any semblance of due process.In March 2018, the President signed into law the Fix NICS Act, an effort to strengthen enforcement of existing federal gun laws without expanding them or imposing new restrictions on law-abiding citizens. The federal background check system has long suffered from the failures of states and federal agencies to submit the criminal and mental health records of individuals disqualified from gun ownership. The Act increased federal oversight over federal agencies responsible for submitting records, increased funding to assist states in reporting disqualifying records, and prioritized funding for those states that established plans for increased reporting.Most recently, the Trump Administration lived up to its Second Amendment promise by fighting back against state closures of gun stores, shooting ranges, and government permitting offices during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several states and counties ordered these places shut down or refused to exempt them as “essential businesses.” In some places, this meant that residents who did not already own guns were de facto prohibited from exercising their constitutional rights for the duration of the epidemic.While the federal government could not override state definitions of “essential business,” the Trump Administration issued federal guidelines that deemed gun stores and gun ranges, as well as firearms and ammunitions manufacturers, as “critical components of the nation’s workforce.” The guidelines recommended that states allow those businesses to continue operating during the pandemic.Officially, this federal guidance applied only to the enforcement of federal laws or regulations. Nonetheless, it helped strengthen legal challenges to state closures and suggested that the federal government might intervene in such lawsuits on behalf of gun owners. As a result, several jurisdictions—including New Jersey and Los Angeles County—walked back their original orders to close gun stores.Despite all of these actions, President Trump’s first term saw one clear Second Amendment policy failure. Under his administration, the ATF arbitrarily reinterpreted the federal definition of “machine gun” to include bump stocks, banning their civilian possession and requiring owners to turn in these devices. It did so even though bump stocks do not modify the mechanics of a semi-automatic firearm, and the agency has no authority to change the meaning of federal law.Regardless of one’s perspective on the desirability, constitutionality, or practical effectiveness of banning the civilian possession of bump stocks, the way in which the ATF went about doing so is troubling. When a largely unaccountable federal agency feels empowered to effectively rewrite statutes in order to create new gun control laws, it poses a danger to the entire Constitution, including the Second Amendment.Thus far, the President’s most enduring legacy with respect to the Second Amendment will likely be his federal judicial nominees, who are primed to stand as a bulwark against future attempts by lawmakers to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. While not all of these nominees have had the opportunity to rule on Second Amendment cases, several high-profile picks have shown they are willing to come to the Amendment’s defense. Most importantly, by nominating judges who properly understand the role of the judiciary—to say what the law is, and not what they wish it to be—Trump has helped decrease the risk that federal judges will undermine the right to keep and bear arms based on their own policy preferences.Many Second Amendment advocates were disappointed when the Supreme Court this term continued its decade-long refusal to take up a meaningful challenge to restrictive gun control laws. The Supreme Court’s reluctance to do its duty with respect to the Second Amendment has been despite—not because of—Trump’s two nominees to the nation’s highest bench. Both Justice Neil Gorsuch and Justice Brett Kavanaugh have signed on to dissents from denials of certiorari in important Second Amendment cases, expressing their disappointment that the Court has so long declined to adequately protect this right from clear infringement. Moreover, in one of these dissents from denial, Justice Gorsuch did not refrain from attacking the Trump Administration itself over its agency-propagated bump stock ban.The President’s two Supreme Court picks are far from his only judicial nominees to prove themselves stalwarts of Second Amendment jurisprudence. Several of Trump’s lower court picks have made waves for their staunch defenses of the right to keep and bear arms.For example, Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a strong dissent in a case where two of her colleagues voted to uphold a Wisconsin law imposing a lifetime ban on gun ownership for non-violent felons. The plaintiff in the case was hardly a violent menace. He had been convicted of a single count of federal mail fraud after submitting sham requests for Medicare to reimburse non-compliant shoe inserts. Nevertheless, under the interaction of federal and Wisconsin law, this rendered the plaintiff ineligible to ever again exercise his Second Amendment rights.Judge Barrett analyzed the case through an originalist lens, noting that “Founding-era legislatures did not strip felons of the right to keep and bear arms simply because of their status as felons . . . but only when they judged that doing so was necessary to protect the public safety.”Similarly, Judge Stephanos Bibas of the Third Circuit wrote a scathing dissent when the other two judges on his panel upheld New Jersey’s ban on so-called “high-capacity magazines” as “reasonably fit[ting] the State’s interest in promoting public safety.” Judge Bibas excoriated the majority for failing to take the Second Amendment and Supreme Court precedent seriously. He reminded them that their job as judges is not to “water [the Second Amendment] down and balance it away based on our own sense of wise policy.” Rather, “the Framers made that choice for us. We must treat the Second Amendment the same as the rest of the Bill of Rights.”Finally, four Trump-nominated Fifth Circuit judges—James Ho, Don Willett, Kyle Duncan, and Kurt Engelhardt—joined together in a notable opinion dissenting from the Circuit’s denial of a request to rehear an important Second Amendment case before all of the Circuit judges. This case involved the federal prohibition on interstate handgun sales, requiring all handgun sales to out-of-state buyers first be transferred to an in-state dealer.As the dissenting judges noted, this law effectively imposes an additional waiting period and tax on certain handgun buyers, without really furthering a compelling government interest. Moreover, as they wrote, the Government “turns the Second Amendment on its head” by arguing that “to protect against the violations of the few, we must burden the constitutional rights of the many.” Importantly, “[o]ur Founders crafted a Constitution to promote the liberty of the individual, not the convenience of the Government.”In his first term, President Trump largely lived up to his promise to protect Americans’ Second Amendment rights. There have been a few missteps along the way, but on the whole, the Trump Administration has kept its word when it comes to our right to keep and bear arms.”You can read the entire article, a commentary on firearms, titled, “Second Amendment Grade for President Trump So Far,” by Amy Swearer, Legal Fellow at the Messe Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, at the Heritage Foundation website. But the words, “So Far,” in the above commentary on Trump’s Presidency must, unfortunately, read, “At the End Of” Trump’s Presidency. There would be no Second Term in Office. The unlawful machinations of Neo-Marxist Internationalists and Mega-Billionaire Neoliberal Globalists would see to that.Trump is now out-of-office. And it matters little at this point whether the failure to secure losing a Second Term was due to a fair and disappointing election outcome, or chicanery of the highest order, even as the latter inference is the sound one to draw from the evidence.Now, as Trump’s legacy is being shredded by the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists, Americans face a more pressing and vexing problem: protecting the U.S. Constitution from being shredded and preserving a free Republic that is being systematically dismantled.Americans now have a National embarrassment in the Oval Office: a corrupt, placid, flaccid, and senile shell of a man, Joseph Biden.Economically, Militarily, Geopolitically, Constitutionally, Culturally—this Country faces disasters on multiple fronts. There are three possible albeit mutually exclusive explanations for this. Americans must infer that this sad situation is due to:ONE, A SET OF UNFORTUNATE, PUZZLING CIRCUMSTANCES TO BE ATTRIBUTED TO CONDITIONS NO ONE COULD REASONABLY FORESEE, THAT PROPER ALLOWANCES AND CONTINGENCY PLANS COULD HAVE BEEN MADE APROPOS OF POLICY POLICIES EXECUTED; OR TOTWO, A CASCADING SERIES OF MISSTEPS TO BE ATTRIBUTED TO DELIBERATE INEPT AND INCOMPETENT POLICY CHOICES THAT BIDEN’S POLICY PLANNERS CONCEIVED, FORMULATED, AND EXECUTED, EVEN IF THE RESULTS OF THESE POLICY CHOICES WERE UNANTICIPATED AND UNWANTED; OR TOTHREE, A CAREFULLY DESIGNED AND IMPLEMENTED SET OF POLICY CHOICES, THE OUTCOMES OF WHICH HAVE BEEN CONTEMPLATED, MODELLED, ANTICIPATED, HOPED FOR: THE DESTRUCTION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, OF A POWERFUL INDEPENDENT NATION-STATE, AND OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.Any one of these three explanatory scenarios mark the impending doom of the United States engulfing, convulsing, and ripping the Nation apart, and that of the rest of the world. But, only the third explanation bespeaks possible TREASON. That explanation also seems the most plausible to us and, as well, the most disturbing for what it entails: the INTENTION TO PROMOTE OR CAUSE A SPECIFIC OUTCOME.Americans are witness to it all: a meticulously contrived, calculated, calibrated, and executed series of scenes and acts unfolding as if from a monstrous Shakespearian Play, played out on the Nation and the world as STAGE.Be this play comedy or tragedy depends on one’s perspective. But it is a play meticulously preplanned and prearranged; carefully rehearsed and choreographed and assiduously implemented in sequential order.It began with a flurry of executive orders and actions designed to unravel the stability Trump had brought both to and for our Nation and its people, and, by extension, to and for the rest of the world. And it is proceeding apace through deliberate, brazen, scurrilous evasion of and de facto abrogation of our Constitution and federal law.Trump had redressed a multitude of disasters deliberately inflicted on our Country by Bush and Obama. Such disasters were to continue under Clinton, consistent with the orders of a cabal of shadowy puppet masters. For nothing happens but for the “say so” of these puppet masters, whom Trump refused to answer to and obsequiously obey. And so, they had to push him out of the way. And with a last “Hail Mary Pass” they banked it all on the 2020 U.S. Presidential election. With a dementia plagued President Joe Biden and the insufferable Kamala Harris safely ensconced in the Executive Branch of Government, all the wrongs of Bush and Obama that Trump had redressed, and all the safeguards Trump had instituted to protect the Nation and its people, were thenceforth cast aside.Once again, Americans witness a Nation and world returning to a state of volatility and chaos, and all of it deliberately created, deliberately ordained.The goal of this elaborate, extravagant, carefully orchestrated policy agenda now unfolding in the Nation, is to dismantle the underpinnings of the most powerful, successful, and prosperous Nation on Earth.This involves:

• DISSOLVING THE CAREFULLY CONSTRUCTED DEMARCATION OF POWERS AND AUTHORITY EXISTENT BETWEEN THE THREE BRANCHES;

• UNDERCUTTING THE DOCTRINE OF FEDERALISM THAT HAS TO THIS POINT OPERATED EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY TO CARVE OUT AND DELINEATE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S AUTHORITY AND THAT OF THE STATES; AND,

• UNDERMINING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, IN WHOM RESTS ULTIMATE SOVEREIGNTY OVER GOVERNMENT, BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE, AS GOVERNMENT OF ANY KIND IS ULTIMATELY AND ANSWERABLE TO THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY.

As for the last,the attack on the right of the people to keep and bear arms as the final fail-safe mechanism to prevent tyranny is the most disturbing and alarming. For only by force of arms can the American people truthfully be able to successfully repel attempts to dismantle a free Republic and thrust America into a new Governmental construct: a transnational world order scheme that does not merely diminish the citizen’s sacrosanct and inviolate right of selfhood and personal autonomy but destroys that supreme unalienable Right.Through usurpation of the sovereign authority of the American people over Government and through the destruction of the United States as a free Constitutional Republic, preeminent military and economic world power, and predominant stabilizing influence in the world, a tornado is spawned. That tornado is destined to wipe away the fabric of western civilization—the Nation-State. In its place, comes the inchoate inkling of an “INTERNATIONAL WORLD ORDER,”—a harbinger of pain, misery, penury, and grief to the Nation and the rest of the world.Powerful functionaries of Government both here and abroad have intimated this new world order for some time.The late U.S. Senator John McCain mentioned this back in 2017 (see article in the Independent Sentinel) and that illustrious statesman and regular Bilderberg Group attendee, Henry Kissinger worked tirelessly for its creation, even writing a book about it. That book comes with the hardly inscrutable and singularly uninspiring if, for some, wistful title, “World Order,” published, on September 9, 2014, during Barack Obama’s reign.After defeating Trump, by chicanery on a massive scale, these same forces that crushed Trump, now focus attention on one-third to one-half or more of the American population that continues to support the “MAKE AMERICA GREAT” agenda.In the end, it was always the American people, who, all along, were the true target of the Neo-Marxist Internationalists and the mega-billionaire Neoliberal Globalists. Trump merely represented the wishes and desires of Americans who saw their Nation stolen from them. Most Americans saw their sacred rights shredded: the right of free speech; the right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of their property by the Government; freedom from unlawful detention; and the right of the people to keep and bear arms, necessary to secure their freedom from tyranny and maintain their sovereignty over Government.Most Americans sought to set the Nation’s course back toward the direction set by the founders of the Republic. We have diverged so far from the founders’ vision for us.Under the Harris-Biden Administration, Americans have inexorably moved away from the vision of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, grounded on the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism, and back toward the vision of the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists who envision a world grounded on the precepts, tenets, and principles of Collectivism. Collectivism in such Countries as China, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, and those under the domination of Brussels, and in the Commonwealth Countries are in store for Americans.Through an orchestrated program of DEFLECTION, DISTRACTION, DIVERSION, and DIVAGATION, the Nation’s OBSTRUCTORS and DESTRUCTORS who control the legacy Press and social media draw the public’s attention away from Federal Government policies designed to dismantle the Republic in clear violation of and defiance to the U.S. Constitution and to Federal Statute and channel the public’s reasonable, rational concern to the Nation’s DISSENTERS—those Americans who seek to preserve the Nation as a free Constitutional Republic—treating true PATRIOTS as improbable TRAITORS and possible TRAITORS as improbable PATRIOTS. And this topsy-turvy elaborate propaganda campaign reflects the FOUNDERS gravest concerns, their most deep-seated fears.Under the Harris-Biden Administration and Neo-Marxist-led Congress, Americans are witnessing the entire collapse of a free Constitutional Republic, brought about NOT by mere ineptitude and incompetence, awful as those failings are, but by cold, calculated, callous, caustic, and cruel design which is even more disturbing.The American public must hold high officials of the Harris-Biden Administration to account. And this must include Joe Biden himself, along with his secret handlers of whom the American public is not presently privy.Biden claims to take responsibility for debacles plaguing his regime, but does not. His words are obviously contrived; meaningless scripted utterances; ridiculous clichés. His addresses to the Nation, few as they are, fool no one.High-placed functionaries in Biden’s regime routinely blatantly lie to the public. They exude empty apologies when caught; and further seeming blunders are on the way. They always arise, concomitant with policies meant NOT to provide for the public welfare, the public good, but to bring about the demise of the Republic; to usher in the rise of a new international order; one sans independent, sovereign nation-states. And so, the Administration continues along its merry way.Biden and the policymakers and policy deciders DID what they intended TO DO. The nature of events that unfold are the consequence of options considered; the result of policy decisions made.Even if, sometimes, consequences of poor decisions backfire on them, like the drone attack that destroyed the lives of an innocent man and innocent children in Afghanistan—even as results seem unintentional to some—many other horrific events ARE intentional, the direct result of cold, callous planning, and cannot be reasonably denied. And they cannot be reasonably explained away.Consider the recurrence of COVID and other dangerous infectious diseases on the horizon in our Country this Fall. This is due to the Administration’s deliberate release of hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens into a Country, unvetted and unexamined by medical personnel.The Harris-Biden Administration has thrust a dagger into the heart of our Country. Many of the illegal aliens have COVID or other noxious, disgusting diseases. Others belong to murderous international criminal cartels. The Administration has invited all this horror upon us. It wants this. That is plain.The Administration evidently wants instability—social, economic, and health-related upheaval and unrest to occur in the Country. If that isn’t the case, then why deliberately weaken the security of the Nation by opening the geographical borders of the Country? See articles in NY Post article;  National Review; Border Report; and Geller Report.Americans will likely see in the coming weeks and months ahead, horrible diseases coursing through the Nation, along with continued social unrest and terrorist attacks against the citizenry. And there will be no respite from this. Americans will see an onslaught of hundreds of thousands more illegal aliens and purported “refugees” flowing into and throughout the Country before the end of the year, bringing with them the plague, crime, and terror attacks.Do Governmental policy decisions to date support a legal finding of TREASON by Biden and those serving in the Administration? To answer this question it is necessary to understand the law of TREASON—TREASON IN THE LEGAL SENSE, NOT MERELY IN A COMMON OR RHETORICAL OR THEATRICAL SENSE.It is only through a keen understanding of the law of TREASON, that one can establish the elements of treason, applying those elements to the actions of Biden and others, and therefrom know whether those actions amount to TREASON. If so, the American people have a sound and solid basis to bring Biden and others to account for their Treason against the Nation, against its Constitution, and against its people.Through all that we do in our articles on Treason, please etch in your mind the definition for it as set forth in the U.S. Constitution.Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1 “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. And, “18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason,” “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”In the next article we undertake an examination of the elements of treason in the U.S. so that we can apply those elements to the actions of Biden and others in his Administration.Our end goal is to ascertain whether specific policy choices of Biden and others amount to treason, namely, those policies directed to——

• STABILITY BY FOMENTING DISSENSION AMONG THE AMERICAN PEOPLE; AND,

• INDOCTRINATING AMERICA’S CHILDREN, INTRODUCING MILLIONS OF UNASSIMILABLE ILLEGAL ALIENS INTO THE COUNTRY ALONG WITH MURDEROUS INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL CARTELS AND INTERNATIONAL TERRORISTS, AMONG OTHER THINGS; AND,

• SUBJECTING THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY TO UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT; AND,

• TREATING LAW-ABIDING AMERICANS AS “DOMESTIC TERRORISTS” THROUGH DISTORTION OF LAWS DESIGNED TO COMBAT “INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC TERRORISTS,” AND OTHER “INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST” GROUPS; AND,

• ERODING THE SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE AND THE DOCTRINE OF FEDERALISM; AND,

• DISARMING THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY, LEAVING THEM DEFENSELESS AGAINST INCREASING CRIMINAL PREDATION, AND THREATEN THE CITIZENRY’S SOVEREIGNTY OVER GOVERNMENT.

The question is whether any one or more of these policies directed against the Nation, its Constitution, and its people, amount to “levying war against them” and/or encompass “adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” We shall see.____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

DEVELOPING A DOCTRINE OF TREASON IN AMERICA

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART TWO

As we maintained in our first article posted on Ammoland, “Does the Biden Administration’s Assault on the Second Amendment Amount to Treason,” one should be circumspect in the application of ‘TREASON’—this so there is no mistake in our understanding of the import of it, lest we dilute its significance—attaching the dire duo labels of ‘TREASON’ and ‘TRAITOR’ to those who never warranted it, but happened nonetheless to be branded with it, and crucified for it.And we know whereof we speak: Donald Trump, and those closest to him, those who assisted him in his run for the U.S. Presidency, including Cabinet-level Officers; close friends and associates; even members of his own family have branded and crucified the 45^th U.S. President and those connected closely to him. And now with Trump out-of-office—whether the loss of a Second Term was due to a fair and disappointing election outcome, or chicanery of the highest order, those who replaced Donald Trump with a National embarrassment, in the form of a corrupt, placid, flaccid, and senile shell of a man, one, Joseph Biden, must continue with the charade.The forces that crush a Nation and its people into submission now focus their attention on one-third of the population that supported the “MAKE AMERICA GREAT” agenda that sought to reset the Nation’s course back toward the vision of the founders of the Republic.Through an orchestrated program of DEFLECTION, DISTRACTION, DIVERSION, and DIVAGATION, the Nation’s OBSTRUCTORS and DESTRUCTORS who control the legacy Press and social media draw the public’s attention away from Federal Government policies designed to dismantle the Republic in clear violation of and defiance to the U.S. Constitution and to Federal Statute and channel the public’s reasonable, rational concern to the Nation’s DISSENTERS—those Americans who seek to preserve the Nation as a free Constitutional Republic—treating true PATRIOTS as improbable TRAITORS and treating possible TRAITORS as improbable PATRIOTS. And this topsy-turvy elaborate propaganda campaign reflects the FOUNDERS gravest concerns, their most deep-seated fears.The Founders realized, over two hundred years ago that THE BEAST in MAN, such as it is, never changes, and that BEAST would eventually, inevitably bring out THE WORST in MAN. The Founders were deeply concerned that appellations of ‘TREASON,’ ‘TRAITOR,’ ‘BETRAYER,’ and ‘JUDAS’ would be misapplied not to true ENEMIES of the Nation, but to its veritable PATRIOTS, the Nation’s PROTECTORS. The Founders were well aware that unscrupulous, scurrilous, craven, usurpers of the sovereign authority of the American people would damage and disparage and bring to utter ruin the lives and character of innocent people, and do for any of multiple reasons: anger and rage; spite and jealousy, or even for no other reason than political expediency or perceived political exigency.“English treason law influenced America's founding fathers as they crafted the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, America's founders wished to develop a treason doctrine that—unlike English treason doctrine—could not be used to suppress political adversaries.” United States v. Hodges: Developments of Treason and the Role of the Jury, 97 Denver L. Rev. 117, by Jennifer Elisa Chapman, Jennifer Elisa Chapman, Ryan H. Easley Research Fellow, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law.

THE STUDY OF TREASON IS THE STUDY OF HISTORY

“The study of treason is really the study of history. No other constitutional provision is as deeply rooted in English history as the Treason Clause. William Blackstone wrote that treason ‘imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of faith.’ Treason Blackstone further noted that treason against the sovereign—termed ‘high treason’—amounts to the ‘highest civil crime.’  Due to the gravity of the offense, the crime of treason must therefore be precisely ascertained. ‘For if the crime of high treason be indeterminate, this alone . . . is sufficient to make the Government degenerate into arbitrary power.’“Treason is the highest crime known to law. It is more serious than even murder: the murderer violates a single person or at most only a few, whereas treason cuts at the welfare and safety of all members of society. And the punishment for treason has always underscored the gravity of the offense.“The delegates to the Constitutional Convention faced a significant dilemma when they met to frame a new system of government. On one hand, the new republic would not last if the government could not demand the loyalty of its citizens; on the other hand, history had shown that broad treason laws led to the suppression of political opposition and free speech. English experience had also shown that leaving the definition of treason to judges left the law open to abuse through ‘constructive treason.’ The Framers therefore took upon themselves the difficult task of fashioning a law that would protect the newly formed government from disloyalty and betrayal, while simultaneously preserving the right of political dissent.” State Treason: The History and Validity of Treason Against Individual States,” 101 Ky. L.J. 281, 2012/2013, by J. Taylor McConkie, Brigham Young University, B.A.; Georgetown University Law Center, J.D. Trial Attorney, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division.The Founders were deeply concerned about the misuse of treason by a rogue Government that would use “TREASON” for unlawful, nefarious purposes.“The Framers’ intent for including the Treason Clause within the Constitution was to immortalize the definition thus preventing a rogue legislature from creating what James Madison called ‘newfangled and artificial’ treasons These judge-made expansions of the common law definition of treason more commonly called ‘constructive treasons were made in order to cover conduct that had never before been known as treasonous. This was a common practice in England and is what prompted the passage of the Statute of Edward III in order to control the definition of treason by the legislature instead of the courts. “Another major concern was that the state could use an undefined definition of treason to punish political dissidents or people who opposed the sovereign’s policies. Based on the freedom of speech and freedom of peaceful political expression, later memorialized in the First Amendment, it was important to limit the definition of treason to only levying war and adhering to enemies of the United States by providing aid and comfort to them.’” “The Revival Of Treason: Why Homegrown Terrorists Should Be Tried As Traitors, 4 Nat'l Sec. L.J. 311, Spring/ Summer, 2016, by Jameson A. Goodell, George Mason University School of Law, Juris Doctor Candidate, May 2017; Virginia Military Institute, B.A., International Studies & Arabic Language and Culture, 2014.It is the purpose of these Arbalest Quarrel articles on the subject of “TREASON” to lay all this out for the reader.For, if there be TREASON in our midst, we must recognize the legal contours and parameters of it in the manner the founders of our Republic intended for it to be used, as elucidated further in case law. Thus, before we apply it, we must be reasonably sure of our case against those we deem to have committed it. And, once assured of the efficacy of our case, proceed forward aggressively forward, to bring those charged with treason to account for their treacherous actions against the Nation and its people.Let us be clear. It is not enough to say, for example, that such individuals in Government that have committed treason should simply resign from their posts or should, if they refuse to resign, then be fired.Several media pundits deplore the actions of Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken; Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin; White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan; General Mark A. Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; General Kenneth F. McKenzie, Director of Strategic Plans and Policy on the Joint Staff. And, these media pundits have voiced, vociferously, their anger over the manner in which these individuals handled the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan—a complete debacle. Biden, for his part, not unsurprisingly, stated his support for General Milley and others. Some media pundits in the last couple of days, on Fox News, at least, have even made reference to “treason.” See, e.g., a recent episode on Tucker Carlson. But that is as far as any of the media pundits have, to date, gone and that is, apparently, as far as any of them are will to go. None of them has suggested impeachment of any of Biden's people except, perhaps, in a couple of instances pertaining to Biden, himself, and, even so, no one in the Fox Press Corps, or in any other media organization, that we are aware of, has suggested that Biden himself should be impeached specifically for the crime of “Treason.” And, we can appreciate the circumspection of the Press on that score. For unless a person can articulate the legal basis for impeachment on a charge of treason of Biden, or of impeachment or General Court Martial on a charge of treason of any one else in Biden's Administration, it behooves a person to be very mindful of and careful of what he or she is asserting. Nonetheless, what has taken place in Afghanistan under Biden’s watch, and the many devastating, deadly, horrific repercussions from that debacle which are just beginning to play out in Afghanistan and here in the U.S. and that are having a ripple effect around the globe, cannot be simply wallpapered over through mere resignations or firings of Biden officials even if Biden were to do so.Our adversaries in China, Russia, and Iran as well as our allies have taken due notice of the extent to which this weak-willed, corrupt, compromised, physically ill, and mentally debilitated “U.S. President” has given up all pretense of ability to lead a great Nation. Joe Biden has shown that he has no authority—bullied and pushed this way and that, this Country is going Hell in a Handbasket and taking the rest of the world down with it. In fact, the ineptitude and incompetence of Joe Biden and his Administration—from the instant Biden took Office up to the present moment in time—is so acute and so extensive, that one must wonder if the policy decisions made by Biden or by a secret cabal, operating behind the scenes, can simply be chalked up to a cascading series of unfortunate missteps, a set of deeply unfortunate circumstances and puzzling misadventures that the Harris-Biden Administration could not have reasonably made proper allowances for or contingency plans for because the events that unfolded simply could not have been reasonably foreseen, even as flagrant as those missteps seem to be and even as one remains deeply puzzled that Joe Biden is seen complimenting his advisors for doing a great job. Is he kidding?Anyway, that is one explanation one might conjure up for the disasters confronting our Nation on multiple fronts—disasters that are affecting many countries and that will eventually engulf the entire world. But there is another explanation. It is this:Americans are witnessing precisely what was meant to happen, is meant to happen, a meticulously contrived, calculated, calibrated, and executed series of scenes and acts of a monstrous Shakespearian Play. Be it comedy or tragedy depends on one’s perspective. But it is all preplanned, and prearranged, carried out sequentially, having commenced with a flurry of executive orders and actions designed to unravel the order and stability Trump had brought for our Nation, and, by extension, this order and stability that Trump had brought for the world.The goal of this elaborate, extravagant, carefully choreographed performance that is now unfolding under the auspices of the Harris-Biden Administration is meant to undermine the most powerful, successful, and prosperous Nation on Earth. And with the destruction of the United States as a preeminent world power and stable influence for the world, a whirlwind would materialize to destabilize the entire world and thereby pave the way for a new “INTERNATIONAL WORLD ORDER” that powerful functionaries here and around the world are intimating; a new world order that the late U.S. Senator John McCain happened to mention (see article in the Independent Sentinel, published March 26, 2017) and that the illustrious statesman and regular Bilderberg Group attendee, Henry Kissinger worked tirelessly for and wrote a book about, with the hardly inscrutable and singularly uninspiring if, for some, wistful title, “World Order,” published, on September 9, 2014, during Barack Obama’s reign.We, at the Arbalest Quarrel, are going under the assumption that, whether by sheer ineptitude and incompetence or cold, calculated, callous, caustic, and cruel design, high officials of the Harris-Biden Administration—and this must include Joe Biden himself, and any and all secret handlers that the American public is not privy to if such there be that had a hand in this, and we look at one example here, a real “cluster f**k” that transpired at Kabul airport involving the drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the deaths of Americans during that drawdown—DID DO what they intended TO DO even if the consequences of their actions were not what they had in mind, can those policy decisions support a legal finding of TREASON of any one or all of them. And we will look at other policy decisions and the execution of those decisions as well.Through all that we do in the articles to follow, we ask that you etch in your mind the following, for we will be constantly coming back to it:Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1“Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. And, “18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason,”“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”The third part of our series on treason follows forthwith.____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

DOES THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S ASSAULT ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT AMOUNT TO TREASON?

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART ONE

THE MEANING OF 'TREASON'

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.” ~Attributed to Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.) Roman Statesman, Philosopher and Orator, in a speech he gave to the Roman Senate in 58 BC as ‘Recorded by Sallust’ in the fictional novel 'A Pillar of Iron,’ by Taylor Caldwell (1983), ch. 5. ~The quotation bears resemblance to Cicero's Second Oration in the Cataline war (circa 40 b.c.) Under Biden’s reign, Americans are slowly losing their fundamental rights and liberties. They have already lost any vestige of a fundamental right of privacy as protected under the Unreasonable Searches and Seizures clause of the Fourth Amendment. And the Right of free speech under the First Amendment is, as well, under tremendous assault today.And let us not forget the assault on the right of the people to keep and bear arms as codified in the Second Amendment. For without the citizenry's exercise of the fundamental Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, the exercise of all other Rights is tenuous at best or becomes altogether illusory, leading inevitably, inexorably to subjugation.Americans already see that Biden, and his fellow Progressive and Neo-Marxist Democrats in Congress, and legions of unelected bureaucrats of the Administrative Deep State have made substantial inroads curtailing the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But the question is: Do these assaults on sacred Rights truly rise to the level of treason, well beyond the federal crimes of sedition, insurrection, and rebellion, awful as they are?How can the public know? And, if treason does exist, and if the polity shows Republicans in Congress that Biden and/or several of his senior advisors have committed treason, how can Americans persuade their Representatives in the House and their Senators in the U.S. Senate to hold those high-level elected officials and high level unelected military people accountable beyond merely requesting they simply and humbly resign, as some have averred.How can Americans make a cogent argument to legislators so that they will undertake or at least attempt to undertake impeachment of Biden and/or his senior advisors? And for senior officers in the military, how can the public urge that these military advisors be subject to a General Court Martial.The words, ‘treason’ and ‘traitor’ are often cavalierly bandied about. The American public has heard it all before, many times, mostly directed to Donald Trump and, by association, directed to all Americans who voted for him or who supported and who continue to support his “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN” agenda.Few people in American history, though, have been charged with “treason” against the United States; fewer still have ever been convicted of it. And no one has been executed for it.* That fact underscores the deadly seriousness of the import of the words despite the oft offhanded use of them, and says much of the true and dire purpose of and hidden motives of those forces that have used the word, ‘treason,’ incessantly against Trump. And many are those who leveled the charge of treason against the 45^th President, Donald Trump. Upon taking the Oath of Office, well-placed operators in the Department of Justice and FBI and in the military and in the intelligence apparatuses of Government, and in Congress, in academia and in the media, and even some individuals closest to Trump in his own Administration went immediately to work to undermine and sabotage and destroy his Presidency from its very inception to the final days. See, e.g., New York Times article.  and an article in The Atlantic.Government, academia, the Press, social media, all operated, in concert—components of an extraordinarily elaborate, well-organized, well-executed series of false flag operations—all designed to bring about Trump’s downfall.And, considering the extent to which these operators plotted to bring about Trump’s downfall, one is led to conclude either that Trump did indeed pose the greatest internal threat ever to befall our Nation, or, like Horatius at the Bridge, protected our Nation, standing alone against the hordes both within the Government and outside it who themselves truly pose the greatest and gravest threat ever to befall our free Constitutional Republic.Calling a person a “traitor” serves as a handy propagandist tool and it is one that is employed for the emotional reaction it is expected to elicit in the American public for the purpose of creating animus toward a person, but often, as well, as a distraction to direct public attention to the innocent person and thereby draw attention away from the real “traitor.”“The crime of treason carries an emotional response unlike any other. Its severity is second to none because one who commits treason aims to support the enemies his government, betray his own nation, and wage war against his own people. Infamous traitors such as Benedict Arnold conjure a near-unanimous feeling of disdain and anger amongst Americans, while others like John Brown do not so easily create the same uniform negative perception. Such is the nature of treason: those convicted of betraying their nation receive the designation of ‘traitor,’ arguably the most severe, polarizing, and stigmatic title law can provide, which may partially explain why the last case of treason occurred in 1952.” ~ from the law review article, “Treason In The Age Of Terrorism: Do Americans Who Join Isis ‘Levy War’ Against The United States?” 9 Am. U. Nat'l Sec. L. Brief 155 (2019) by Stephen Jackson, J.D., Senior Policy Analyst with SAIC.But, when do the words ‘traitor’ and ‘treason’ merely function as expletives and when do they function as true descriptors, indicative of the worst sort of criminal behavior of an American?It is one thing for a person to employ the words ‘treason’ and ‘traitor’ merely as a pejorative. In that case, “You Traitor, You!” is akin to the words, “Damn You, Go to Hell!” or “You Bastard, You!” But it is another thing entirely when the phrase, “You Traitor, You!” is to mean that the targeted person IS TRULY A “TRAITOR,” i.e., a person who commits the crime of ‘TREASON.’ For ‘Treason’ IS a crime.TREASON IS THE MOST SERIOUS OF CRIMES, for Treason is nothing less than BETRAYAL of one’s Country and of one’s people. It is essentially the MURDER of one’s Country and of one’s Countrymen. Betrayal of one’s Nation and one’s Countrymen was considered one of the most heinous crimes going back to the ancient Greeks and Romans. Dante Alighieri, in his monumental epic, “The Divine Comedy,” PLACED THOSE GUILTY OF TREACHERY TO NATION IN THE DEEPEST CIRCLE OF HELL.To apply the term, ‘traitor’ to anyone is no small matter and should not be a matter of casual conversation. It is defamatory if untrue.As applied especially to an elected official, no less a personage than the President of the United States, one should practice circumspection before employing it, in the absence of evidence to support the declaration of it. Unfortunately, we do not see this at all. And, it is all quite remarkable, as the denizens of “POLITICAL CORRECTNESS,”—today’s “THOUGHT POLICE”—so keen are they on remaking the English language so as not to offend, do not apply that prime directive across the board, utilizing the worst invective against anyone, everyone, who happens to hold to a different political and philosophical persuasion than that of the “WOKE” crowd to use of their own neologisms.To our Nation’s founders, treason is the most serious crime imaginable. It is not by accident that it is referenced in the U.S. Constitution.Treason is the only crime BOTH MENTIONED AND DEFINED in the U.S. Constitution. But, through overuse and deliberate misuse of the words, ‘treason’ and ‘traitor,’ by various members of Congress and by Government Officials and by the Press, Americans are unable to gain a clear view of and true perspective of actual instances of treason and of the those who commit it when evidence for it abounds.A person needs to cut through the chatter and chaff of those who cavalierly bandy the term about, misapplying it hither and yon to Donald Trump—and, now misapplying it to Trump’s supporters who number one-third to one-half of the population of the Country.The term, ‘treason’ is a legal term of art that has a clear meaning. One need only go to a readily available source, the U.S. Constitution, to determine its import and purport, and from the definition for it, look for instances of it. Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1, sets forth:“Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”Further, ‘treason,’ as with ‘sedition,’ ‘insurrection,’ and ‘rebellion’, is a statutory offense, Congress reiterates the definition of ‘treason,’ of it. “18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason,” sets forth:“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”Given the seriousness of the crime, the framers of the Constitution severely limited its application to the commission of either one of two, and only two, kinds of acts. The U.S. Constitution leaves no room for constructive treason and Congress could not and has not undertaken to restrict or enlarge constitutional. The Constitutional, as well as Statutory definition for Treason, involves:

• Levying war against the United States; OR
• Giving the Nation’s enemies aid or comfort.

But what does “levying war against the United States” really mean, and what does the phrase “giving the Nation’s enemies aid or comfort” mean?In the next few Arbalest Quarrel articles we look closely at these phrases. For, once we have a clear operational definition of the phrases, we can ascertain if any one or more actions of Joe Biden and of his senior advisors amount to actionable treason.Few people to date have actually applied the appellation or descriptor of ‘treason’ to Biden and/or to his senior advisors although the abundance of misdeeds leads one to wonder whether one or more of those misdeeds rises to the level of treason. Before the Arbalest Quarrel makes its announcement, it is necessary to see if Biden and other senior advisors have plotted to destroy this Nation. As an aside, there is a question of whether Biden is making policy decisions at all. Given the man's obvious and increasingly severe mental infirmities, this strongly suggests that Biden is incapable of sound judgment and reasoning. If true, that means that  Biden's secret handlers are making policy decisions for him; policies affecting the Nation and the rest of the world. And that raises serious legal questions of its own. But as for ‘treason,’ one can, with a clear operational definition, determine if the elements of the crime apply to the conduct of Harris-Biden Administration senior officials who are the decision-makers. But, what can we say about treason at this point before delving into the details of it?In the broadest sense, “levying war against the United States” and “giving the Nation’s enemies aid or comfort” involves the BETRAYAL of one’s Country and one's Countrymen—TREACHERY so extreme that, if tried and convicted of it, must need send the party guilty of it to prison for a substantial period of time and, perhaps warrants a sentence of DEATH. But, whether a TRAITOR to the Country is actually indicted and tried as such, and convicted of TREASON, such an individual rests well beyond any hope of absolution, dispensation, or redemption—ever.Now, among those who hate Trump, anything the man has said or did, during his tenure in Office, amounts to “treason.” Yet, one would be hard-pressed to distill from any of Trump’s actions anything that amounts to betrayal of Nation and people. Nation’s people. To the contrary, on any reasonable analysis Trump was faithful to the Oath of Office he took on Friday, January 20, 2017.Article II, Section 1, Clause 8:“Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: –I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”In retrospect, Trump’s actions were always honorable. But, can the same be said of Biden and his top advisors and handlers?From what the public knows about, Trump, it is clear that he fulfilled or attempted to fulfill to his foreign and domestic policies and initiatives, consistent with the promises he made to the American public in his campaign. Trump forged a stronger Nation from the mess created by his predecessors Barack Obama and George W. Bush.; strengthening the Nation in the broadest sense: economically, geopolitically, militarily, and societally. Disruption arose artificially, concocted by elements inside and outside the Country, intent upon undermining Trump’s achievements. Trump sought to protect the fundamental rights of the people—most importantly the sacred rights of free speech and freedom of religion; the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures; and, critically, the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Yet, the legacy Press called him an Autocrat and Traitor; but to whom? Not to the U.S. Constitution, but to those who seek to dismantle the Constitution and to dismantle a free Republic. And they installed their puppets, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, corrupt and unscrupulous people to do just that.In eight months, the senile, weak-willed, and corrupt puppet, Joe Biden, likely dutifully obeying the dictates of his secret handlers, unwound all the positive work for the Country that Trump had achieved. And what do Americans now see? Much, and none of it good: Government policies that promote economic instability and societal unrest—all of it manufactured by an Administration intent on disrupting societal harmony and cohesion.And, because the Harris-Biden Administration refuses to enforce the Nation’s immigration laws, Americans see massive waves of destitute illegal aliens, breeching our Southern Border; with tens of thousands more flooding through the Southern Border each month, along with members of international drug cartels and other assorted dangerous riff-raff; and most of them are disbursing throughout the United States. More recently, the Administration has compounded its unlawful immigration actions, having airlifted thousands of unassimilable Afghans to the U.S., disbursing them throughout the Country, without properly vetting them—a lengthy process to screen out the Islamic terrorists among them.Americans see multiple instances of unlawful federal encroachment on the authority of State. The Administration has openly, unabashedly disobeyed rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court; and is exerting unlawful authority over the polity by mandating COVID vaccinations.Through wholesale adoption of the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist program of “DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION” the Harris-Biden Administration is implementing policies designed to subvert and eradicate our Nation’s culture, history, heritage, and Christian ethos.Given the Administration’s contempt for the Bill of Rights, Americans are witnessing an assault on their basic freedoms, including, critically, the right of free speech and free exercise of religion; the right to peaceably assemble and the right to petition the Government; the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.In the matter of the “Capitol Breach” cases, of January 6, 2021, Americans have witnessed multiple instances of unlawful detention, the suspension of Habeas Corpus, and violations Due Process, and Equal Protection.And the Harris-Biden Administration is quietly, assiduously drawing up Executive Actions and agency rules, to undermine the right of the people to keep and bear arms.And through the implementation of its bizarre and inept military and State Department Middle East Policies, the Harris-Biden Administration has overnight destabilized the Middle East, thereby endangering the security of the United States and the world. Are we looking at mere incompetence here or something ominous: a devious master plan to destabilize society, dismantle the Constitution, destroy a free Constitutional Republic, and reduce the American citizenry to a state of abject penury and misery. Do any of the aforementioned actions by Joe Biden and others arise to the level of actual, indictable treason? In the next few articles, the Arbalest Quarrel will be looking closely at the law of treason with the aim of determining whether any one or more actions of Biden, and of Biden's Cabinet Level Officials, and of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and of Biden’s National Security Council committed actionable treason. ____________________________________________*One academic scholar, and apparently the only one, demurs, asserting that one man was in fact executed for committing treason against the United States. In his book, “On Treason, A Citizen's Guide to the Law” (published September 29, 2020), Carlton F.W. Larson, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of California, Davis, School of Law, avers that Hipolito Salazar, “is the only person ever executed by federal authorities for treason against the United States since the adoption of the Constitution for treason. . . . And the federal government later admitted it had made a terrible mistake—Salazar owed no allegiance to the United States and therefore was not subject to American treason law at all.” (pages 102-103). The execution took place on April 9, 1847, following jury trials “in what was called the ‘District Court of the Territory of New Mexico. ’ Five of the men had been convicted of murder. But, one, . . . Salazar, had been convicted of high treason for levying war against the United States.” (page 102). ____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

AMERICA: “A FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC—IF YOU CAN KEEP IT!”

PART ONE

DO NEOLIBERAL GLOBALISTS AND NEO-MARXISTS HONESTLY BELIEVE AMERICANS WILL MEEKLY SURRENDER THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES?

“‘The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, ‘Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?’ With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, ‘A republic, if you can keep it.’”  ~quotation from an article by John F. McManus, published on November 6, 2000, in The New American, referencing an “exchange . . . recorded by Constitution signer James McHenry in a diary entry that was later reproduced in the 1906 American Historical Review.”Benjamin Franklin’s seemingly droll, yet, at once, sagacious response to Mrs. Powel’s query as to the salient nature of our new independent sovereign Nation, “A Republic If You Can Keep It,” echoes down from the ages to this precarious moment in our Nation’s history.While most Americans do fervently wish to retain our Nation in the form the founding fathers bequeathed to us, a free Constitutional Republic, some there are who do not. Their hostility toward the Nation’s continued existence as a free Constitutional Republic is both intense and blatant; and disturbingly, they control the Government, the legacy Press, social media, our educational system, and our financial system; and, most importantly, many of the “TOP BRASS” of the military.These would-be Destructors and Obstructors of our free Republic are ruthless, even rabid in their condemnation of our Country’s history, heritage, culture, and Judeo-Christian ethic. They intend to destroy all of it. To date, they have undermined much of it, and they have corrupted the minds of many Americans: youth, adolescents, and adults alike.They have corrupted innocent, impressionable school-age children, who are unable to comprehend the poisoning of their young minds. They have corrupted undergraduate university youth, who—so enthralled with and enraptured by a Marxist college professor’s pretentious, false erudition—are unable to recognize and therefore appreciate the difference between a cogent, logical, sound argument on the one hand, and what amounts to elaborate, artful sophistry, on the other. And they have corrupted tens of millions of adults—those too simple-minded to notice, or too gullible to accept the mounting evidence before them; or those who feel too intimidated or threatened to voice an objection, or simply too jaded to care.Yet there are many Americans who do see the Nation transforming into a disgusting, leprous monstrosity. There are Americans who have taken notice of the dire threat to the Republic and cannot and will not deny the truth. They do care, and this is what they see: Two mutually exclusive, antagonistic visions for America; the one in open conflict with the other. Only one WILL prevail. Only one CAN prevail—One pure and sanctified by the Lord; the other a product of the Beast, the defilement of nature, the poisoning of all that is good and proper in America.See the Arbalest Quarrel articles, detailing the distinguishing features of INDIVIDUALISM and COLLECTIVISM in “The Modern American Civil War: A Clash of Ideologies;” posted on October 6, 2018; and our prescient article on the dismantling of the Nation, “In the Throes of America’s Modern-Day Civil War,” posted on October 28, 2018.One vision holds true to the Declaration of Independence and to the United States Constitution. That vision preserves the Nation in the form the founders gave to us and intended for us: an independent sovereign nation-state and free Republic, grounded on the tenets and precepts and principles of INDIVIDUALISM, sanctified by the Divine Creator.The other vision looks to the Communist Manifesto for guidance. That vision portends the end of a free Constitutional Republic and, further, the end of the very concept of a nation-state and true morality. The political, social, and economic scheme envisioned is diametrically opposed to that of a free Republic and a sovereign people, a vision of America grounded on the tenets and precepts of COLLECTIVISM; the needs, wishes, and concerns of the individual not only denigrated but denied.The Collectivist vision eschews individual needs, wants, and desires as irrelevant and antithetical to the goals of COLLECTIVISM. It is a vision of America that denies and rejects the Divine Creator outright, and worships, instead, such false gods as Satan, Mammon, and Asmodeus: the gods of wrath, greed, and lust.The architects of this new model for America view people as little more than cattle. People are herded into groups. Uniformity and conformity of thought and conduct are engineered into society to better effectuate control. The enslavement of mankind is the result. The subjugation of man’s will and spirit is the end goal.George Orwell, in his epochal work, “1984”, published in 1949, showed the FACE of the BEAST; and Taylor Caldwell displayed the BEAST’S UNDERBELLY, in her monumental work, “Captains and the Kings,” published in 1972.One cannot but wonder that some Americans would willingly surrender their Fundamental Rights and Liberties and forsake the sanctity and inviolability of the individual spirit for a life of servitude and perpetual misery under transnational alien rule—all for a few crumbs doled out by a Nanny State guilefully intent on keeping the polity indolent, somnolent, and dependent. It is happening even now.Is it not true the United States became the wealthiest, most productive, and most powerful Nation on Earth—the veritable envy of the world—through the foresight of the Nation’s founders, who fashioned a Country, unlike any other then existent or presently existent on Earth?The founders fashioned A TRULY FREE REPUBLIC, WHERE THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES ARE SOVEREIGN, NOT TYRANTS. They were of one mind against the construction of a MONARCHY, DIARCHY, TRIARCHY, OLIGARCHY or other AUTOCRATIC, DICTATORIAL “—ARCHY,” composed of plutocrats or monarchists who would, through those systems, systematically and brutally oppress, repress, and suppress the human will and spirit—all ostensibly, as they would no doubt tell themselves—for the well-being of a proper, well-ordered, well-engineered, society, operating in a perpetual, albeit meaningless, vacuous stasis.Prime examples of the sort of governmental schemes the framers of the Constitution would abhor include the LENINIST/STALINIST REGIME imposed on the people of Russia, and the MAOIST DICTATORSHIP imposed on the people of China.How well did these seemingly harmonious societal constructs pan out? How well are they working out now? How are the TOTALITARIAN regimes of Venezuela, Cuba, and other countries across the globe doing?How is it that those who viciously condemn our Nation’s history, heritage, culture, and Judeo-Christian ethic, can explain away the fact that so many people in countries around the world seek to come to ours if our Nation is such a terrible place to anchor as the haters of our Country proclaim? The answer is: they cannot do so, and they do not even try. Rather, they simply create false narratives of America as a racist Nation; an ignoble Nation; a Nation that lacks, in their words, proper “DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION.” Yet, what DO THEY REALLY MEAN by those words, in practice, that they plaster all over the place? We have a pretty good clue given what we have seen. It is all a façade:

• ‘DIVERSITY’ REALLY MEANS ‘NON-ASSIMILATION’ AND ‘SOCIETAL CHAOS’

• ‘EQUITY’ REALLY MEANS ‘INEQUITY,’ ‘INEQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY,’ AND ‘SOCIETAL IMBALANCE’

• ‘INCLUSION’ REALLY MEANS ‘EXCLUSION’ AND ‘REJECTION’

We, as a Nation, have come full circle, from 1776 to 2021: from the inception of our Nation as a free Constitutional Republic to the possible collapse of it.Are Americans witnessing the death throes of a free CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, and doing so in REAL-TIME?Just as Americans now seek to preserve a Republic from those who seek to wrest it from our grasp, back then there were colonists who sought to sever ties with Great Britain and there were those who sought to retain those ties. See the article on the website revolutionary-war.net.“The Revolution is usually portrayed as a conflict between the Patriots and the British. But there is another narrative: the bloody fighting between Americans, a civil war whose savagery shocked even battle-hardened Redcoats and Hessians. As debate and protests evolved into war, mudslinging and rhetorical arguments between Rebels and Tories evolved into tar-and-feathering, house-burning, and lynching.The colonists themselves were divided. Tories were colonists who helped and even fought with the British during the American Revolutionary War. Also known as Loyalists for their loyalty to the British crown, their contention with the Whigs (Patriots) was so intense that their savage fighting can justly be called America’s first civil war.By one process or another, those who were to be citizens of the new republic were separated from those who preferred to be subjects of King George. Just what proportion of the Americans favored independence and what share remained loyal to the British monarchy there is no way of knowing. The question of revolution was not submitted to popular vote, and on the point of numbers we have conflicting evidence. On the patriot side, there is the testimony of a careful and informed observer, John Adams, who asserted that two-thirds of the people were for the American cause and not more than one-third opposed the Revolution at all stages.”And, now today, there are Americans, most of us, who wish to preserve the Republic. They are the true Patriots, true to the vision of the founders of the Republic, true to the tenets and precepts of INDIVIDUALISM the blueprint of our Republic, the U.S. Constitution, and its Bill of Rights. And, then there are those, the Collectivists; those who intend to unwind the Republic and to rend the Constitution as the Constitution is wholly inconsistent with the tenets and precepts of COLLECTIVISM.Among those who seek to destroy a free Republic and independent sovereign Nation-State, there are various factions. They include, inter alia, Neoliberal Globalists, Marxists, Socialists, Communists, Anarchists, and Maoists, Leninists, Stalinists, and Trotskyites—all bound by a common desire to bring to a close the era of a free Republic forged in steel on THAT FATEFUL DAY of JULY 4, 1776, that ushered in the AMERICAN REVOLUTION and the Birth of a new Nation, conceived in LIBERTY. But, the Collectivists of the 21^st Century in America disparage it; want none of it; are bent on destroying all of it.The COLLECTIVISTS are a selfish lot. The COLLECTIVIST MEGA-BILLIONAIRE NEOLIBERAL GLOBALIST FINANCIERS AND CORPORATISTS, never sated, want to control ALL copper, gold, silver, platinum coinage, and, by flooding the market with worthless paper, i.e., “Federal Reserve Notes,” reduce the American polity to a state of abject poverty, penury, indigence, and misery, and despair, completely dependent on Government largess for basic survival.And the POLITICAL AND SOCIAL RECONSTRUCTIONIST COLLECTIVISTS look forward to a day when they can lower the American Flag one last time; celebrate the fall of the Republic; and observe the remains of the United States, “ONE NATION, UNDER GOD,” at long last merged into a mammoth global political, social, economic, transnational Governmental scheme—a new regime; one devoid of the very concept of an American citizenry, and of an American ethos, and of an American psyche, and of a Nation sanctified by the Divine Creator.Unfortunately, many Americans, while definitely loath to sacrifice a free Constitutional Republic, feel helpless to prevent its demise and, so, have resigned themselves to accept defeat. Still, there are those Americans who will fight, as the Patriots of old, to protect their birthright.THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION OF 1776 PRESERVED versus THE NEO-MARXIST INTERNATIONALISTS’ COUNTERREVOLUTION OF 2021 ATTEMPT AT REVERSALDo Americans retain and maintain their Republic as founded or allow it to be extinguished, erased, abandoned? WHICH SHALL IT BE?____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

THE ROAD TO SOCIALISM IN AMERICA—PAVED WITH NOT-SO-GOOD INTENTIONS

WHEN DO AMERICANS BEGIN TO REALIZE THEIR COUNTRY NO LONGER BELONGS TO THEM?

PART FIVE

Take a moment to ponder a portion of President Donald Trump’s last State of the Union Address. Consider his most important remarks to the Nation, as reported on, and poignantly elucidated by Rebecca Walser of Fox News Business, on February 19, 2020, eleven months before the corrupt, senile store-window manikin, Joseph Biden, was sworn in as the 46^th President of the United States:“Who would have ever thought that any president of these United States of America would have to stand before Congress—and before the American people—and publicly declare that the United States is a free country, standing for liberty.In his State of the Union address on Tuesday, President Trump made an unequivocal pronouncement against the multiplying cries for socialism in America.‘Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country,’ the president said. ‘America was founded on liberty and independence—not government coercion, domination and control. We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will NEVER be a socialist country.’ [Emphasis added.]Unsurprisingly, many on the Democratic side of the chamber did not stand in unison to agree, nor did they even clap. No, no, they have the wheels of the socialism freight train started now, and they will give not an inch to stop it in its tracks.Free lunch? Yes please, that sounds nice. Hmm, how about a free education with a side of free health care?  Why don’t we even throw in student loan forgiveness, free housing, a guaranteed job, or forget the job, and let’s just give – you guessed it – free universal basic income while we are at it.America’s unique origin in escaping an overbearing, oppressive and overly-taxing government is likely the reason we have historically supported more freedoms, including economic freedoms, than our European cousins. But that is undeniably changing now.The shifting political winds are reflective of an underlying new positive attitude toward socialism in America. A recent Reuters poll found that 70 percent of Americans support Medicare-for-all, which includes a majority of Republicans. (A new poll released by the Kaiser Family Foundation found support drops, however, when participants were told the plan could lead to higher taxes.) . . . .This is our failure America, in not holding our government accountable. They have been allowed for too long to fake it, to spend money that we do not have to pay for services we cannot afford on a sustainable basis.For the last three decades, we have spent significantly more than we have collected in tax revenues resulting in a federal debt of $22 trillion.This has been carried out for the last 30-plus years such that the American people have been lulled into believing that we can spend without end, without the pain of an European tax scheme (40 percent to more than 60-plus percent). So why shouldn’t we add Medicare-for-all, free college education and even UBI – universal basic income?But it is all an illusion. . . .Others say that you can just print more money, but inflating our way out of this economic hole is a non starter, since both Social Security and Medicare make inflation-adjusted payments. This means that if we try to inflate our way out, the costs of our biggest social programs just go up proportionally—solving nothing.Economic equality comes at the heavy price of freedom (yours). People logically act in their own self-interest even if it is to their long-term detriment, like a bug sucking its host dry. Most will take advantage of the government’s offer for "free" anything – thus the reason the road to America is packed while the road to Venezuela is empty.But let’s be clear – ‘free’ is not free to our country. The great Roman empire imploded and collapsed under the weight of their own debt and extreme taxation. Are we determined to go down that same road?Let us have renewed hope today that President Trump stands to say no.”Unfortunately, eleven months after this story and analysis broke, Trump is no longer President. The Neoliberal Globalist “elites” along with their sidekick, the Neo-Marxists, that together share achieving their common goal of a one-world, uniform Super-State governmental scheme, with the U.S. to be unceremoniously merged into it and consumed by it, made sure that Donald Trump would never serve a second term in Office, and, more to the point, would never be permitted to serve a second term in Office, which might also explain why powerful Neoliberal Globalists have continued to attack him and to attack over a third of the Nation that had voted for him in the 2020 General Election. And the prognostications of Rebecca Walser as laid out in her 2019 Fox Business Report, have eerily, and uncannily, and no less dishearteningly, come to fruition.The American people are disillusioned and disenchanted. And the U.S. is well on its way to becoming a Socialist Country, despite Trump’s remarks to the contrary.So, then, was Trump wrong in his assertion—at once a sacred promise to Americans and a pronouncement of defiance to the Neo-Marxists of all stripes among the Democrats—even as Pelosi in a choreographed fit of pique, rips up her copy of the President’s address, thereby demonstrating her utter contempt for the U.S. President, the Country, the American people, and the Constitution.No, Trump wasn’t wrong. Yet, there is an unintended, unplanned, unforeseen irony in Trump’s assertion “that America will never be a socialist Country,” insofar as the Country is headed in that direction under a Neoliberal Globalist and Marxist-Controlled Congress and a Neoliberal Globalist controlled Executive Branch. The U.S. is in fact turning inexorably, and possibly inevitably and irrevocably toward Socialism. But if that should happen, if that would befall our Country, then the COUNTRY WILL NO LONGER BE AMERICA, for our Country will no longer be a free Constitutional Republic, and so THE COUNTRY WILL CEASE TO BE.Indeed, the Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists don’t even refer to our Nation as a free Constitutional Republic; never did. Back in 2018, Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, did say, of course, that:“We’re capitalists, and that’s just the way it is” which makes the Neoliberal Globalist “capitalist” monopolists happy to hear, who, for all that, eschew true competitive capitalism.But, has Pelosi ever been heard to reaffirm our Country as a “free Constitutional Republic?” In fact, has the infirm, corrupt, senile Joe Biden or the vacuous, opportunist Kamala Harris ever reaffirmed our Country as a “free Constitutional Republic? Has anyone in Biden’s Cabinet or Administration affirmed our Nation as a “free Constitutional Republic?”It stands to reason that the current crop of Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists in control of two Branches of Government have little if any regard for the Constitution. At best they give lip service to it, as they go about operating in the denigration of it. And no one in the legacy Press calls them to account for their abject failure to heed to the dictates of it. And we, Americans, are all the worse for it.________________________________________

HOW MANY AMERICANS APPREHEND THAT THE U.S. CONSTITUTION IS THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND?

PART SIX

It may be remarked—nay, must be proclaimed loudly, passionately, continuously as all too many Americans lose sight of the fact—that the Supreme Law of the Land is the U.S. Constitution. This isn’t mere supposition. It is fact.Neoliberal Globalist “elites” know this to be true, but they have no use for the Constitution as it intrudes upon their ability to consolidate economic power for themselves across the globe, at the expense of the economic well-being of the American people and at the expense of the well-being of the Country.And the sworn enemies of the U.S. Constitution and of a sovereign American people, America’s transnational Neo-Marxists, know this to be true as well because the U.S. Constitution is grounded on the tenets of Individualism, embracing the core notions of personal freedom and liberty—tenets and precepts and principles antithetical and anathema to those of Collectivism, upon which classic Marxism, and the spawn and shades of Marxism spring from. But they all come from one cloth, and they are all vehemently opposed to Individualism.For the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism, alone form the foundation of the U.S. Constitution, and they are inconsistent with and in clear contradistinction to those of Collectivism that insist on the subordination of the human will, soul, and spirit to and that demand obsequious devotion to and subservience of the individual to the State. That explains why the callous, caustic, fabulously wealthy Neoliberal Globalists and the idiosyncratic, cold-hearted Neo-Marxists are both of one mind in their stated objective to rid themselves of it.And so, with Trump out of the way, and as the Neoliberal Globalists and as America’s Neo-Marxists have brazenly, audaciously taken over the institutions of Government and of the Press and of much of society, they have begun in earnest to consolidate their power over the Nation and over the citizenry, in defiance of the plain import of the Constitution.And now they feel that the political and social and economic climate of the Country has changed to such an extent in their favor, that they feel no reticence in openly questioning the continued need for it. They have even gone further than that, questioning the very legality of it, and withal, cloaking their anathema to it and animosity for it, rebelling vociferously against it—the academia especially expounding through more and more rhetorical flourish and through sophistry, posing as a sound erudite argument, their naked abhorrence of it.See, e.g., the 2013 Article, in Harper’s Magazine, titled, “Constitution in Crisis;” and an article in The Atlantic, titled, “The U.S. Needs a New Constitution—Here’s How to Write It.” And, in a lengthy New York Times’ Op-Ed, the paper has tacked together several essays by various legal scholars who propose amending the Constitution’s Bill of Rights and Articles. A simple web search keying in the words, “do we need a constitution,” brings up a plethora of articles challenging the continued need for the U.S. Constitution—the blueprint of a free Republic that ceases to exist the moment the Constitution ceases to be.The reader should note that all or virtually all these articles arose in the most recent decade of the 21^st Century, and several of them within the last few weeks or months.But what explains this flurry of articles, and essays coming to the fore now? This cannot be accidental. Indeed, it isn’t.If the Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists thought the Constitution was simply irrelevant, they likely would have given little thought to it, would simply ignore it, and in the actions of the Harris-Biden Administration, the American people have witnessed just that: the blatant failure of Biden to faithfully execute the laws of the United States as required of him, spurning his Presidential duty under the “take care clause” of Article 1, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. This failure goes beyond an arguable difference of opinion as to the President’s duty, or to incompetence of which Biden has more than an ample supply. It is much more than that.Biden’s actions amount to outright subversion and sedition. And the Neoliberal Globalists and International Neo-Marxists are perfectly content with this. They have expected it of Biden. More, they have demanded it of him. And, he has delivered, doing all that his handlers expect of him, even as he makes a fool of himself during the few times his handlers allow him, albeit reluctantly, to appear before the public, hewing to script—at least to the extent that a person suffering from dementia can.Perfunctorily dismissing Congressional enactments such as the Nation’s immigration law, in direct defiance of the Legislature’s Article 1 authority, see irli.org, and dismissing out-of-hand U.S. Supreme Court rulings on evictions, demonstrating his contempt of High Court Article 3 authority on questions of law, if he ever thought about it, to the extent he is capable of coherent thought at all. See article in christianaction.org and article in theweek.com. Biden has not only defied the authority of two other co-equal Branches of Government, he has also spurned his own duties under the “take care clause” of Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution.But there’s more to the Constitution than the Articles demarcating and limiting the authority and powers of the three co-equal Branches of the Federal Government, critical as those Articles are to the foundation of a free Constitutional Republic.Even as few give little thought to it, there is one set of laws that preside even over that of the Supreme Law of the Land, the U.S. Constitution. It is Law bestowed on man by the Divine Creator. It is the Law of Natural Rights, and there is no inconsistency in averring the authority of and the awesome power of natural law above even the U.S. Constitution. The framers of that great document, the Constitution of the United States, conceded as much, through the codification of Ten Amendments to it thereby embracing and enshrining Divine Law within it, an integrated part of it, inextricably bound to it, so there is no inconsistency between the import of Divine Law and ofthe U.S. Constitution’s deference to Divine Law.

THE PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

The Bill of Rights is of paramount importance to, and a singularly critical component of the U.S. Constitution, both shaping the nature of a free Republic, and establishing the role of Government vis a vis the American people, subordinating Government to the people.It is the Bill of Rights, especially, that has provided the U.S. Constitution with its true staying power; and that has allowed the Country to survive and thrive as a free Republic. The Bill of Rights is one feature of the U.S. Constitution that cannot be readily ignored or dismissed out of hand by the Neoliberal Globalists and the Neo-Marxists, much as they wish to do; much as they try to do.The Nation, as a free Constitutional Republic can, truth to tell, continue to exist, at least for a time, even where a corrupt Executive Branch and a corrupt Legislative Branch give little heed to limitations built into their own authority and duties under the Constitution. And, that is true of the Third Branch of Government, the Judiciary, as well.The Bill of Rights, though, exists and operates on another plane; another order of magnitude; well beyond even the Articles, a human construct, and well beyond such man-made procedural Amendments that came thereafter. For, the Bill of Rights codifies Divine Law.The contents of the Bill of Rights isn’t a human construct because it isn’t a mere compilation of man-made law even though some there are who might perceive it to be such, namely the Neoliberal Globalist corporatist “elites,” and the transnational Neo-Marxists, and other Collectivists who, all of them, deny this, of course. Even to describe the Ten Amendments of the Bill of Rights as little more than an elucidation of and edification of man’s greater potential fails to hit the mark as to their true significance and purpose. For, it is only by the grace of Divine Providence that man can, a priori, recognize the Creator’s gifts to him, bestowed on man by the Creator as the supernal omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, and morally perfect Being. These God-given Rights and Liberties, Natural Law, preexist within man, exist, then, prior to the creation of Government by man.It is not given to man, by mere experience, a posteriori, through man’s five sense organs, that man comes to know of his true Nature made in God’s own image but, through man’s non-physical Spirit that the fact of and nature of the fundamental, immutable, illimitable, unalienable Rights come to be apparent to man. How, then, can man’s nature be lawfully subordinated and subjugated to State control and dominance, since Government is a man-made construct, and such manmade device offends and subverts the will of the Supreme Creator, where man’s will, and soul, and spirit are quelled and suppressed?Such a Government transgresses God’s will and such Government that dares to subvert the integrity and sanctity of man’s spirit and soul is heresy, and this heresy is the goal of this new, obscene non-American Governmental scheme that has begun to take root in the Country, and it is growing apace, to be merged into a new world order, to bring man low. Americans must fight the attempt with all the power they can muster. The way they can do this is to insist that their fundamental rights are not subject to negotiation or compromise. That which is given to man by the Divine Creator cannot lawfully be revoked by the State, and cannot be contracted or purloined away.______________________________________

AS LONG AS AMERICANS ARE ABLE TO EXERCISE THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, SOCIALISM CANNOT TAKE ROOT.

PART SEVEN

Only through exercise of the peoples’ fundamental rights can the citizenry hope to withstand the onslaught from those disparate evil forces consisting, inter alia, of a heterogenous assortment of Neoliberal Globalists, Corporatist Monopolists, Internationalist Neo-Marxists, Government Neoconservatives, liberal Progressive and Marxist members of Congress and of the Federal Bureaucracy, the seditious legacy Press, and Marxist elements in academia, all hell-bent on disassembling the United States, transforming the Country from its root structure as a free Constitutional Republic and independent sovereign Nation-State into an autocratic lackey of a larger autocratic super-structure, embracing the entire world.On some level the combined power of these terrible, ruthless, amoral and immoral forces operating both inside the United States and outside it, Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists alike, adopting a common Collectivist ideology, an ideology incompatible with the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism upon which the U.S. Constitution is grounded, driven by a singular lust for amassing wealth and power—of benefit to themselves at the expense of the American polity—continue to plot, connive, conspire, and machinate toward realization of a similar goal: the creation of a one-world transnational super State; a mammoth transformative political, social, economic, and juridical construct; a global totalitarian regime embracing and subsuming all present western nation-states; erasing all geographical boundaries; eliminating and eventually erasing from the memory of the polity any sense of a once-shared national identity, a once-shared history and heritage, a once-shared civic culture, a once-shared Christian ethos and a once-shared Judeo-Christian ethic. It would all cease to exist. Yet, for the U.S. to become merged into this transnational one-world, totalitarian Super-State, it is essential that the U.S. Constitution first be abrogated, and that means abrogation of the citizens’ Fundamental Rights and Liberties. All of it must go. But there is a tenaciousness to the Constitution, especially that part of it that speaks to the fundamental, unalienable Rights and Liberties of the citizenry: the Nation’s Bill of Rights.Even with vast sums of money spent behind a massive propaganda campaign to denigrate the Nation’s revered history, heritage, and culture, and to challenge the inviolability of God-bestowed Rights and Liberties, set in stone in Nation's the Bill of Rights, most Americans maintain and exhibit a deep attachment to and devotion to their Country and to their fundamental Rights and Liberties upon which the sovereignty of the American people over Government is preserved. And, on some level all American citizens understand that God-given Rights and Liberties cannot be simply ignored and dismissed out-of-hand, if the Nation is to survive as a free Constitutional Republic; and the American people will not long abide usurpers in Government who betray their Oath to the United States Constitution, whether it be the President of the United States who betrays the Oath of Office he is required to take, pursuant to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8 of the Constitution, to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States;”whether it be those in Congress who betray the Oath they are required to take, pursuant to Article 6, Clause 3 of the Constitution, to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States; or whether it be those in the Civil Service or uniformed services of Government who betray the Oath they are required to take, to “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;” pursuant to 5 U.S.C.S. § 3331. The solemnity of the Oaths of those sworn to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution are not to be taken lightly. And, if these betrayers of their Oath think there will be no accounting for an act of betrayal to the Constitution of the United States, the American people shall demand an accounting, as they are the sovereign rulers of the Nation as established by the U.S. Constitution. Those who serve in Government are the servants, not the masters of the American people, and the ultimate enforcement power that the American people wield over Government is made abundantly clear not in the electoral system through which the American people have a say only in the vote they cast for this or that servant of the citizenry, but in one especial fundamental, immutable, illimitable, unalienable Right: the inviolate Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms.______________________________________________

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS CANNOT BE LAWFULLY APPROPRIATED OR COMMANDEERED  BY THE STATE; AND IT ISN’T FOR SALE!

PART EIGHT

The Bill of Rights cannot be easily supplanted, ignored, dismissed out-of-hand, as the fundamental rights and liberties are engrained deep in the psyche of most American citizens and they are loathed to surrender their sacred God-bestowed Rights and Liberties, knowing that, to do so, means the loss not only of their Country but of their own Soul.One natural, God-given right, in particular, the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, as Divine Law, codified in the Bill of Rights as “the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms,” is Divine Law that happens to have been codified into law by man. More to the point, this Divine Law is written into man's Spirit. That is what makes the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, Divine Law, and not mere man-made law. This Divine Law serves to prevent the takeover of the Nation’s Country by tyrants. The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, as Divine Law, isn't for sale!The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, as Divine Law, is subsumed in a more elemental Divine law: The Right of Personal Self-Defense, against a predatory animal, whether that predatory animal hops on two legs or runs on four, and against a predatory, tyrannical Government. Further, the Natural God-bestowed Right of Personal Self-Defense is itself subsumed in the God-bestowed Right of Personal Autonomy, for it is through Self-Defense that man is able to preserve and has the solemn duty and cardinal responsibility to preserve and secure from harm not only his physical well-being but his psychological and spiritual well-being; his individuality; the sanctity of Self-hood; the inviolability of his Soul, sanctified by the Divine Creator.If unable to exercise the God-bestowed Right of Self-Defense, of which the firearm is the most efficient means of Self-Defense, man cannot effectively persevere against those forces that would dare crush his will and spirit into submission; would not be able to effectively defend against those forces at work in society today that compel uniformity and conformity in all thought and conduct; would not be able to resist evil forces that insist on transforming a Nation of individual Souls into a collection of mindless, senseless drones, an obsequious, obedient, formless glob—a monstrosity, a thing created by evil forces in clear defiance to the Creator's will. For the Creator intended for man to be noble, that he might, through his individual Soul, be a demi-Creator in his own right, set out on his own path, realize his full potential as an independent creative Spirit; for he is made in God's Image.Yet, it is a thing strange that, given the plain meaning of the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, codified in clear, precise, concise words in the U.S. Constitution, it would come to pass that an American citizen would find it necessary to petition the Judiciary to secure for him a God-given Right that Government or private enterprise interests—artificial constructs of man—would dare deny him. Yet for decades, before the seminal Second Amendment Heller case was heard, ignoble forces were at work to subvert the plain meaning of the Divine Law, arguing that the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms was not an Individual Right at all, and certainly was not to be perceived as a Natural Right, but one bound up in service to a collective, a militia. This idea is false on its face, and, when one realizes that the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, codified in the Second Amendment, isn't a man-made law at all, but Natural Law, of Divine Origin, pertaining to the Individual Self, to the Individual Soul, to one’s personal autonomy, then any notion that the Right is to be understood as, to be taken as, something that applies to and has meaning only in the context of groups, to a collective, falls apart of its own weight as a matter of logic, as well as of law. One comes to realize that the mistake of law and logic that arises from the conclusion that the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms has meaning and purport in the context of one's service in a militia, in the context, then, of one's service in a group, is due to problematic, false assumptions. The mistake of law and logic that some academic scholars as well as the lay public fall prey to commences from an assumption, taken as axiomatic, as self-evident, that the Bill of Rights, is simply a creation of man, an artificial construction of the government, an arbitrary formulation by State actors in Government, not unlike the Articles of the Constitution, or later procedural amendments to it, and not unlike other man-made common or codified law. In that case, grounded on acceptance of false assumption and illogical reasoning, one draws the illogical conclusion that fundamental rights are no more than privileges to be bestowed onto this one or that one, or to this group or to that group by the grace of the State, and, just as readily, rescinded by the State, as the sole creator of the Right. Through acceptance of the false assumption that the Bill of Rights is really a set of State created privileges, all sorts of inanities arise therefrom, such as the idea that the Ten Amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights can readily be amended no less so than the Articles of the Constitution or the procedural amendments subsequently ratified and added to the Constitution or just as readily repealed. But, the Bill of Rights is no mere collection of Rights and Liberties, for they were not created by man. They are codifications of Divine Law. As such, they existed prior to any artificial governmental construct of man. As Divine Law, not man-made law the Bill of Rights cannot be lawfully amended, modified, abrogated, or ignored. The Rights codified in the Bill of Rights exist internally in and eternal in man. They aren't creations of the State, of Government, of man. This fact, the Neoliberal Globalist and Neo-Marxist Counterrevolutionaries both inside Government and outside it, will not accept—indeed cannot accept—for the idea that some Rights exist beyond the lawful power of the Government to whittle away at, to reinterpret the import and purport of, or to nullify outright, frustrates these evil forces to no end, as that idea makes impossible the realization of their goal of a one-world transnational governmental regime in which man is subjugated to the dictates of Government, as the State, alone, to these Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists, is to be perceived as god, having power of life or death over the men they rule.__________________________________________

LOOKING BACKWARD TO HELLER AND MCDONALD AND FORWARD TO THE UPCOMING BRUEN (CORLETT) CASE

PART NINE

The late, eminent Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, announced in Heller, what was always patently clear, but often denied: that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right. The clear language of the Right should have been enough to evince the Omni-expansiveness of it; the elemental inalienability, immutability, and illimitability implicit in it. Yet, from the inception of Heller, there was hesitancy and arrogance among many academicians and Government functionaries that compelled them to disavow the plain import and purport of the Right, grounded most likely on jealousy to concede the obvious import of the Right, having no desire to admit that sovereignty over Government is not a shared power or one that belongs only to those who serve in Government, but is sovereignty that rests solely with the American people. The servants of Government exercise such limited authority that the Constitution provides for and that authority is exercised only with the consent of the citizenry. That consent can be withdrawn. And the servants of Government well aware of the limitations inherent in their power constantly seek to constrain the sovereignty of the American people and they have been at work, enacting countless laws, rules, codes, regulations, and ordinances to constrict and restrict the right of the people to keep and bear arms notwithstanding the reaffirmation of the import of the right as categorically stated in Heller.And Anti-Second Amendment State Governments, as well as the Federal Government, are always looking for a way to avoid the import of Heller to affirm the legality and Constitutionality of State Action infringing the core of the Right protected. The first major attack against Heller took shape in the Anti-Second Amendment jurisdiction of Chicago, Illinois, with the City pointedly arguing that the Heller rulings pertaining to the right of Americans to utilize handguns for self-defense in their own homes, only operates as a constraint on the Federal Government, not on the States. Justice Alito who penned the majority opinion in the second major Second Amendment case, McDonald vs. City of Chicago, set forth at the outset of his remarks, the nature of and extent of Chicago’s defiant stance on the matter:“Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 128 S. Ct. 2783, 171 L. Ed. 2d 637, this Court held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense and struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home. Chicago (hereinafter City) and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws effectively banning handgun possession by almost all private citizens. After Heller, petitioners filed this federal suit against the City. . . . They sought a declaration that the ban and several related City ordinances violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Rejecting petitioners' argument that the ordinances are unconstitutional, the court noted that the Seventh Circuit previously had upheld the constitutionality of a handgun ban, that Heller had explicitly refrained from opining on whether the Second Amendment applied to the States, and that the court had a duty to follow established Circuit precedent.”The McDonald case made clear the rulings in Heller applied to the States too. In pertinent part, Justice Alito, wrote:“. . . we must decide whether the right to keep and bear arms is fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty. . . .Our decision in Heller points unmistakably to the answer. Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.  Explaining that ‘the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute in the home . . . we found that this right applies to handguns because they are 'the most preferred firearm in the nation to 'keep' and use for protection of one's home and family. . . . ‘[T]he American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon’). Thus, we concluded, citizens must be permitted ‘to use [handguns] for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.”Heller makes it clear that this right is ‘deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition. . . . Heller explored the right's origins, noting that the 1689 English Bill of Rights explicitly protected a right to keep arms for self-defense, and that by 1765, Blackstone was able to assert that the right to keep and bear arms was “one of the fundamental rights of Englishmen.’Blackstone's assessment was shared by the American colonists. As we noted in Heller, King George III's attempt to disarm the colonists in the 1760's and 1770's ‘provoked polemical reactions by Americans invoking their rights as Englishmen to keep arms.’The right to keep and bear arms was considered no less fundamental by those who drafted and ratified the Bill of Rights.In Heller, we held that the protects the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense. Unless considerations of stare decisis counsel otherwise, a provision of the Bill of Rights that protects a right that is fundamental from an American perspective applies equally to the Federal Government and the States. We therefore hold that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.”Yet, the apparatus of Anti-Second Amendment forces in Government remained undeterred. These forces continued their efforts to find ways around Heller and McDonald through more and more comprehensive and Government licensing schemes.State and local Government firearms’ licensing schemes became progressively bloated through time, and with that bloat the language of them became increasingly vague and ambiguous; and, in the worst instances, became convoluted, inconsistent, and incoherent. Anti-Second Amendment Courts continually, blatantly misinterpreted the rulings of Heller and McDonald, setting down their imprimatur on unconstitutional Government actions.Perhaps the most voluminous Anti-Second Amendment regime to be constructed and one of the earliest, and one of the most insidious; a regime that was continually expanded and revised through time, is that one emanating from New York.Not surprisingly, the first major case the U.S. Supreme Court accepted for review, almost a decade after the seminal Heller case, was New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, et.al. v. The City Of New York And The New York City Police Department-License Division, commonly and colloquially referred to as the “New York City Gun Transport Case.”The case held a lot of promise for Americans who cherish their right of self-defense and the right of personal autonomy, for having granted Petitioners’ writ of certiorari, these Americans expected quite reasonably that the U.S. Supreme Court would apply its precedents in Heller and McDonald to affirm the unconstitutionality of the constraint on one’s right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, outside the home, at least for the purpose of transporting a handgun to a locale outside the environs of New York City. New York’s Courts had hitherto placed burdensome constraints on transportation of handguns outside the home for those New York residents who held valid but restricted handgun premise licenses.Although some Americans might see the New York Gun Transport case as a win for those who cherish the right of the people to keep and bear arms, it wasn’t. Rather, it was a lost opportunity. Consideration of and a decision on the merits of the case were sidestepped. Now Americans who cherish their Second Amendment right are looking to a second New York case, NYSRPA vs. Corlett (now captioned, NYSRPA vs. Bruen*) on which to pin their hopes for reaffirmation of the significance of the Heller imperative. The case will be heard in November 2021 and decided probably at some point in early summer, 2022.Our concern is whether and to what extent—even with a complement of three new Justices, all Trump nominees, who would seem to adhere to the methodology of the late eminent Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, when analyzing and deciding cases—the Bruen case will be decided in a manner that will reinvigorate and clarify the rulings and holdings and reasoning of Heller and McDonald.To get a good handle on the New York Bruen case, and to assess various outcome scenarios, it is necessary to understand what transpired in the earlier New York Gun Transport case, along with a few major post-Heller D.C. gun cases and others.Our focus going forward will be directed to the elucidation of four matters:

• THE IMPORT OF GOVERNMENT FIREARMS’ LICENSING SCHEMES GENERALLY AND THOSE OF NEW YORK PARTICULARLY
• THE FRAMING OF THE SPECIFIC LEGAL ISSUE BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IN THE BRUEN CASE
• STANDARDS OF REVIEW EMPLOYED BY THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURTS AFTER HELLER
• A PERSPECTIVE ON THE JURISPRUDENTIAL APPROACHES OF THE JUSTICES

As for the first bullet point, firearms licensing schemes are a fact, and Heller’s position on them isn’t crystal clear. The mere fact of them and the propensity of Courts to align themselves with Government to stamp their imprimatur upon them are inherently in tension with the import and purport of the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, a tension that Heller did little rectify.As for the second bullet point, the Court has recast the issue for review. This recasting of the issue is critical to the decision to be reached and we will speculate on why the Court recast the issue and analyze what that may portend.As for the third bullet point, many lower Courts have routinely fallen back on judicial standards of review that majority opinion in Heller considered and rejected. The High Court may wish to clarify the standard that should be employed in Second Amendment cases where the Government actions impact the core of the right.As for the fourth bullet point, while the legacy Press constantly refers to the High Court as comprising 6 Conservative-wing Justices and 3 Liberal-wing Justices. That is an incorrect statement by the legacy Press and it is one constantly projected by the Press to express the need, as the Legacy Press sees it, for a contingent of new Justices, in the mold of the late Associate Justice, Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, and in the mold of the three remaining liberal Justices, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. These liberal-wing Justices, as often described by the Press, all ascribe to the view of the U.S. Constitution as a “Living Constitution,” (See, e.g. Acton Institute Article), which really calls for the death of the U.S. Constitution. These liberal-wing Justices' utilize a methodology for deciding cases that looks beyond the original text of the Constitution. These Justices believe in an expansive view of Constitutional analysis that routinely interjects ever-changing international law and international norms into their juridical pronouncements. This analysis is antithetical to and anathema to the methodology employed by the late Justice Antonin Scalia who realized that to interject international law and normative views of foreign countries into judicial decision-making is to denigrate the U.S. Constitution, subordinating the Supremacy of the Constitution and the Sovereignty of the United States to that of a Global initiative and Global objectives, at odds with the preservation of the U.S. Constitution in the manner the framers of it intended. Thus, these liberal-wing Justices find a strict reading of the Bill of Rights, for example, to be inconsistent with international law and norms and, so, rather than reject international law and international norms and standards, they would reject the language of the Constitution. This is most blatantly illustrated in their desire to reduce the fundamental Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms as codified in the Second Amendment, to a nullity. Thus, they seek to undercut the seminal Second Amendment Heller and McDonald case rulings and holdings, and their opinions demonstrate their clear animosity to the methodology employed by the late Justice Scalia in deciding cases: originalism and textualism. Associate Justices Thomas and Alito also adhere to the methodology of originalism and textualism, which demands strict adherence to the plain meaning of the Constitution and especially of that critical component of it: the Bill of Rights.Chief Justice, John Roberts, who wields considerable power as the Chief Justice, is not to be seen as an avid proponent of the Second Amendment, and, apart from Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, whose commitment to the defense of exercise of the Right embodied in the Second Amendment is established beyond doubt through a large body of Supreme Court Opinions, the commitment of the newest members of the Court—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—to the sanctity of the Second Amendment and to the other Nine Bill of Rights is not firmly established. And, as for Justice Kavanaugh, along with Chief Justice John Roberts, their dubious commitment to the preservation of the Second Amendment is manifest from a perusal of their handling of the New York Gun transport case. These latter two Justices demonstrate significantly less commitment to and decidedly less ardor toward the Second Amendment than do Associate Justices Thomas and Alito and as did the late esteemed Associate Justice Scalia. This is expressed in their failure to adhere unerringly to the methodology of originalism and textualism that serves to preserve the Constitution as written, upon which the continued existence of the Nation, as a free Constitutional Republic, necessarily depends.Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justice Kavanaugh do not employ—with the same devotion as do Justices Thomas and Alito, at any rate—the juridical methodologies of textualism and originalism, heralded by the late Justice Scalia; nor do they apply Supreme Court legal doctrines, uniformly and evenhandedly. This is apparent from their handling of the legal doctrine of “mootness,” which led to a less than optimum result in their handling of the New York Gun Transport case as a consideration of and decision on the substantive merits of the case were dispensed with.We discuss these matters in-depth in our upcoming articles._________________________________*When the Corlett case first wended its way up through New York’s Court, the Defendant, Keith M. Corlett, happened to be serving as the Superintendent of the New York State Police, the 16th Superintendent. But at some point, after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take up the “Corlett” case for review, Kevin P. Bruen replaced Corlett as the New York State Police Superintendent: the 17th Superintendent of the New York State Police. The case now reflects Bruen as the proper Defendant-Respondent and properly the case should be referred to as the Bruen case even though many journalists who discuss the case continue to refer to the case as originally captioned. See New York State Police website.____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

SIX MONTHS INTO THE HARRIS-BIDEN ADMINISTRATION AND THE PROCESS OF DISMANTLING A FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC IS WELL UNDERWAY

NEO-MARXIST INTERNATIONALISTS AND NEOLIBERAL GLOBALIST ELITES TAKE A JACKHAMMER TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION*

PART FOUR

The last thing the Neo-Marxist Controlled Congress and Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist handlers of the dimwitted Biden and Harris want to contend with is an armed citizenry. For an armed citizenry is wholly incompatible with the Marxist-globalist agenda and with the construction of a uniform, unified autocratic world government they yearn to create from the hollowed-out shells of old Western Nation States. The U.S. Constitution must go, and a free Republic and sovereign People must go with it, into the dustbin of a forgotten history, making way for and replaced by a “Brave New World,” a technological New World Order, where billions of people, the Hoi Polloi of the Earth, now reduced to mindless, senseless, subservient automatons, no more than—and in a real sense—much less than the AI high-functioning robotic objects operating in this new world, co-existing all around them. Do you think this can't happen? The Deca and Centi-Billionaire Globalists are building these Cities of Tomorrow, right now and then plan to herd the public into them—tens of thousands of people will undoubtedly go willingly, at first, at least, buying into the soft-sell of how wonderful it is is to“live” in a “Smart-City” of the Future—and, eventually, all others will be compelled to do so, corraled against their will into a seemingly placid, tranquil, serene secure landscape. It is unlikely that Bill Gates and other mega-billionaires are buying up huge tracts of land simply to sate their penchant for farming, if that is truly the case, even if the public is told this. Can Gates truly be interested in farming? Is this for the purpose simply to grow food? Really? Huge agricultural combines such as Monsanto and huge food distributor companies like Conagra, already exist. Has Gates, probably at the behest of the Bilderberg Group et.al., of which he is a part, in fact must be a part, given his fabulous wealth, provided him and other Billionaires with their marching orders. The goal in the near term, after developing these so-called Smart Cities, is then selling the idea to the Hoi Polloi as a wonderful place for the Hoi Polloi to inhabit.  See, e.g., globest.com, pymnts.com, techrepublic.com, and iberdrola.com, smartcitiesdive.com, and the ruthless and thoroughly deceitful international management consulting firm, McKinsey, is getting into the act. In fact, a tremendous ad campaign is underway to sell this idea to investment groups, and, ultimately, to the public. See, e.g., SmartCitiesworld.com and Springer Open, and blog.bismart.com. Is this effort grounded on truly creating a better world for billions of common people? Does it even really have to do with making money? When a person has accumulated tens of billions or even hundreds of billions of dollars, does a craving for billions more exist? Is that the motivation of these people? Is the motivation to benefit mankind? Or, rather, is the motivation all-too-human: to ensure a better, safer, more secure world for the multi-billionaire ruling elites, that can only be obtained by herding the billions of common people into vast enclosures, through which these masses can be best surveilled and controlled, effectively imprisoned. This is to be sold to the Hoi Polloi as better living through technology, of course. But, when the truth about the impetus for creating these so-called smart cities slowly dawns on some people at least, it will be much too late to resist. And, what then? Eventually, masses of people will be connected to vast neural networks, kept in check within ever smaller and smaller enclosures, perhaps one-room affairs, or large wards containing beds, of a sort, to which people will live their lives virtually, essentially asleep, needing very little nutrient and water, essentially existing as vegetables. And, what is the third step in this evolving strategy of control? Perhaps these billions of people will be dispensed with altogether. Since there is no need for them, even to perform limited custodial services as the simplest of robotic apparatuses could perform those functions and many such mechanical servants already do perform those services and quite well.But, the goal of shepherding billions of people into enclosures, a process to be replicated throughout the world, cannot be smoothly engineered through the present conceptual idea of a nation-state. This social construct must also be dispensed with as an inefficient use of and in fact waste of monies and resources and an ineffective societal device for controlling large populations of common folk. Obviously, the notion of the dignity of the individual and the idea of the sanctity of the human soul not only lose significance in this technologically balanced, unified, uniform, and well-ordered, and well-engineered, smooth-running, exceptionally streamlined society but are devoid of meaning. The next step in this development of a perfectly stable, well-ordered technologically streamlined world would involve the elimination of most of humanity, as superfluous, a drain on scarce resources. The slow dismantling of and hollowing out of the very concept of the nation-state has been gathering steam for some time.This process has been underway in EU for decades. The European Union operates as the initial experiment in the demise of nation-states. The process was sold on several nations of Europe as not involving the ceding of political and legal control over to a central government operating in Brussels, but, ceding a nation's economic control over to a transnational governing body, benefitting all the member nations. That was how the architects of the EU originally sold the idea of a European Union to the original member nations of Europe. But that was merely a ploy and pretext, and one that soured as Countries like Greece, Spain, and Portugal eventually discovered that, when it came to economic fortunes in the EU, there were winners and losers no less so than there were before the artifice of a supra-transnational European Union of nation-states began implementation. But the true raison d’être behind the creation of the EU went far beyond the notion of an economic union of member nation-states that was sold, deceitfully, to these member states. The goal of the grand architects of the EU involved nothing less than the eventual dissolution of the idea of sovereign, independent nation-states. The grand design of the EU involves the reconfiguring of the member nation-states of the EU into a single monolithic transnational unified, uniform construct, with a super-government reigning body ensconced in Brussels, Belgium. See the official European Union website page, delineating the major organs of Government. And this transformative process has been gaining steam, especially in the 21^st Century, as Brussels has run roughshod over the member nations and their populations. And with ultimate political, social, cultural, and juridical control over the governments of these nations, as well as financial and economic control over the governments of these nations, it became easier to begin the process of erasing the national identity of these individual nation-states. This involves a two-step process. The first step involves destabilizing the societal and cultural structure of the member nations. This is accomplished through insinuating into the member nations of Europe, uneducated, poverty-stricken individuals from alien cultures, namely from the middle-east and from northern Africa. The denizens of those regions of Africa and the middle-east naturally resist the process of assimilation, as the cultures of the nations of Europe are at once incomprehensible to them, and incompatible with their own cultural and religious milieu. The governments of the member nation-states of the EU are denied the ability to effectively control the breakdown of the societal order. Any attempt to do so is met with resistance from the Neoliberal Globalist elites and from the International Neo-Marxists, both of whom share the same goal: the annihilation of all nation-states, and the application of the Neo-Marxist dogma serves that common goal. Neo-Marxists argue that such efforts to control denizens from North Africa and the middle-east that are running amok in the various member nations of the EU are to be perceived as immoral, and contrary to the dictates of the nonsense dogma thrust on the EU member states and in the U.S., as well: i.e., the dogma of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, terminology as meaningless to those elements from the middle east and North Africa, insinuating themselves into Europe, as that terminology is the citizens of the EU's member nation-states who wish only to hold onto their culture and national identity and culture and are prohibited from doing so by the ruling elites' overseers in Brussels and their toadies in some of the member states that weaseled their way into power: for example, Emmanuel Macron of France, and Angela Merkel of Germany, and Mario Draghi of Italy, to name a few.Yet, even as most of the populations of the member states are not  exactly ecstatic over the idea of ceding national political, social, cultural, and legal power over to a central transnational governing body in Brussels, whatever the ostensible benefits of an economic union might present—which is, at best, debatable—some have successfully resisted this unlawfully usurpation of political authority. Looking clearly and honestly at the structure of the EU governing organs, it is now clear to most populations of the member states that that the architects of the EU had engaged its member states with a Devil’s bargain as the these independent, sovereign nation-states would be required to cede all governing powers over to Brussels, not merely some governing power—i.e., economic power. Indeed, to cede economic power is, for all intents and purposes, to cede all other power—political, social, judicial.Countries like Hungary and Poland, though, have had enough of the EU and the unlawful encroachment of Brussels over their national sovereignty. Afraid of a general backlash, the Neoliberal Globalist architects of the EU treat those Nations as pariahs. The Neo-Marxist intelligentsia conjured up a specific derogatory expression to describe these malcontents, calling them seats of “illiberal Constitutionalism.”Legions of media puppets of the EU’s rulers attacked these Nations. The AP, for one, audaciously proclaimed: “Democratic standards in the European Union are eroding in several member countries, particularly in Hungary and Poland where judicial independence is under threat, the EU’s executive commission said Tuesday in its annual report on adherence to the rule of law.”This bit of propaganda, not surprisingly, emanates out of Brussels, the seat of the Globalist ruler “elite.” It is the very assertion of independence that Brussels abhors—a right that, curiously enough, is a right of every sovereign nation. Brussels, through the AP, is declaring that the member nations are not to be construed as truly sovereign countries—at least not anymore—and, in so saying, admits that the creation of the EU is predicated on the gravest of lies—telling each member State that it shall retain its inherent structure, as an independent sovereign nation, which means retaining all political and judicial power, when in fact, the EU governance requires the ceding of all of it, and slowly through the years and decades since the inception of the EU, has been drawing from their member nation-states powers that belong solely to those States. As the populations of all the member States are well aware of the Government in Brussels' unlawful usurpation of powers and authority, some of those member States have drawn a line in the sand, and said this cannot continue. The sovereign Nation-States of Hungary and Poland are two such that have basically told Brussels' tyrants to go to Hell. Unsurprisingly, the tyrants in Brussels haven't taken kindly to the reassertion of power and authority by Hungary and Poland. And the Globalists and Neo-Marxists here in the U.S. are chiming in to support EU's tyrants. Tucker Carlson makes the point in Budapest that it is time that Americans wake up to the fact that they are in danger of losing their Constitutional Republic if they don't reassert their sovereign authority over Government. In fact, our Constitution makes clear that true power and authority rests in the American people, not in Government. Limited and demarcated powers and authority made patently clear in the U.S. Constitution point to the fact that the Federal Government is the servant of the people, not the other way around. But, the Neoliberal Globalists and Internationalist Neo-Marxists don't give a damn whatever the Constitution has to say about the matter in whom sole, ultimate, and supreme authority resides. And the Bill of Rights, apart from the Articles, emphasizes in whom ultimate power and authority reside. The pack of lies coming from the Press that Donald Trump was an Autocrat is belied by the cavalier manner in which these Globalists in the U.S. Government, through their puppet, the senile Joe Biden, has systematically amassed powers in defiance of and in contradistinction to the clear meaning of the plain language of the Articles, and blatantly defies Congressional Statute, of which the Biden's open borders policy is a clear example of, or simply ignores Constitution and Congressional Statute, and operates as if the U.S. Constitution doesn't even exist. Tucker Carlson's visit to Budapest drives home the point that too many Americans have allowed themselves to be blindsided by the antics of tyrants here at home, in Congress and in the Executive Branch, who claim they aren't tyrants even as they go about terrorizing a goodly section of the populace that refuses to submit to their tyranny. Now the Press is going after Hungary and Tucker Carlson for fear that the American public will take notice of the loss of their Country and their liberty to Autocrats and demand an accounting of the actions of these Neo-Marxist Autocrat members of Congress and of the actions of the Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist-run Executive Branch of Government.As an example of the Internationalist Neo-Marxist attack against Countries that dare to reassert their National sovereignty and National Identity, the Neo-Marxist Wilson Center think tank attacks the concept of ‘nationalism’ openly and arrogantly, stating, “Hungarian nationalism, indeed all the Central and East European nationalisms, are driven by martyrologies of defeat.” In the article, the Wilson Center makes use of the obligatory Neo-Marxist verbiage, ‘inclusion,’ drawing a contrast with and denigrating the concept of  ‘assimilation,’ as too confining and outmoded, reminiscent of nation-states. No surprise there. The Wilson Center goes on to say: “The word ‘inclusion’ rather than “‘assimilation’ is used in order to shift the focus onto the nation and the process of accepting minorities into a community, rather than on the actions of the minorities who are making the adaptation. Assimilation implies a solution, a kind of permanency, whereas inclusion suggests a process with ruptures and redefinitions. Policies of inclusion can be severed or reinstated more easily than assimilation.” See also the article in the Atlantic Council; the Council contemptuously refers to Hungary and Poland as “as a hotbed of nationalism and authoritarianism, a leading edge of bad trends in Europe generally.”Not to be outdone, the Neoliberal Globalist Jeff Bezos publication, The Washington Post, gets into the act, too, scorning Tucker Carlson for his visit to Budapest and for his meeting with Hungary’s Prime Minister, Vicktor Orbán. Of note, the Washington Post defends Brussel’s criticism of Orban, asserting:“. . . the reason that E.U. leaders have criticized Orban as authoritarian is that he has embarked on an unabashed and explicit effort to shift Hungary away from the traditions of liberal democracy, in which power is assigned through free and fair elections. Orban is criticized as authoritarian because he has embraced autocracy.”Tucker Carlson conducted an interview of Hungary's Prime Minister a few days ago. See Fox News Article, titled, “Hungary's Viktor Orban tells Tucker Carlson: ‘Western liberals can't accept’ right-wing dissent.” During the interview, the Prime Minister said in pertinent part:“‘The Western liberals cannot accept that inside the Western civilization, there is a conservative national alternative which is more successful at everyday life, at the level of them—the liberal ones,’ he said. ‘That's the reason why they criticize us. They are fighting for themselves, not against us. But we are an example that a country which is based on traditional values, on national identity, on the tradition of Christianity can be successful—sometimes more successful than a leftist-liberal government. . . . But you can’t say, okay, it’s a nice country. I would like to come and live here because it’s a nicer life, it is not a human right to come here. No way. It’s our land. It’s a nation, a community, family, history, tradition, language.’”These remarks drove the Marxists in the Press apoplectic with rage. They couldn't let this pass. How dare an American news host take control of the Marxist/Globalist narrative, and attack their unholy Radical Left Gospel of  “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion!”And they let loose their venom on both Orban and Carlson, and, by extension, on American conservatives, as well—those Americans who have the audacity to cherish their history, heritage, culture, and Judeo-Christian ethical foundation and a free Constitutional Republic that the founders of the Nation bequeathed to America's descendants. The New York Times' posted two Op-Ed pieces on the matter, both of which were published in the newspaper on August 6, and 7 2021, respectively. One article deserves especial attention, for its discussion of an essay by George Orwell, ‘Notes On Nationalism,’ That article by New York Times Op-Ed Columnist, Jamelle Bouie, sports the sarcastic title, “Tucker Carlson Has a New Hero,”—a title that manages to convey in six words, the author's contempt for both Fox News Host, Carlson, and Hungary's Prime Minister, Orban. Jamelle's Bouie's article is, though, not to be remarked upon for the unrestrained disdain in which he holds Carlson and Orban, of which the Op-Ed elicits much, but rather, for its attack on the notion of  ‘nationalism,’ which Bouie, perceives as contrary to the spirit of intellectualism and therefore, contrary to rational thought. And he sees the expression of nationalist fervor as a thing as relevant in today's world as corsets and buggy whips and as worthy of emulation as the Dictators of history that Bouie ties to the term. To support his attack on ‘nationalism,’ as something to be despised, he cites George Orwell—but not Orwell's famed novel, ‘1984,’ much-cited today by Progressives, Marxists, Anarchists, and the like, on the Leftside of the political spectrum, and by those on the Right of the political spectrum. Bouie cites, instead, a lesser-known work, a short essay, titled, ‘Notes On Nationalism,’ for the proposition that Orwell considered ‘nationalism’ as anathema to rational thought. But, he made a point of asserting ‘nationalism’ to be a fault as much among the intelligentsia as among the common man.For Orwell, ‘nationalism’ is tied to a narrowness of thought and perception which therefore admits a multitude of sins. But for all that, the term is vague in meaning as is the term ‘patriotism’ which, for Orwell, is a thing to be lauded, not despised, although, here, in the United States at this particular time, the Neo-Marxists do not draw a distinction between the two, unlike Orwell, as the emulation of both is despised by the Neo-Marxists. Orwell writes,“Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.”It is not hard to see that, in our own Country, the Neo-Marxists at once will dismiss their insatiable desire, even lust, for the acquiring of absolute power for themselves, and are therefore nationalists, in a true Orwellian sense, and eschew any notion they are patriots, as that notion is tied inextricably to the American Revolution of 1776, which they revolt against, as they definitely have no devotion to the United States as a free Constitutional Republic, and they definitely do not believe the American way of life to be the best in the world given their desire to dismantle every vestige of the past and to rewrite history in accordance with their mythology. And, since they do indeed have wish to force Marxist Collectivism in this Country and world-wide, they can neither considered to be ‘patriots’ in the Orwellian sense, which happens to be consistent with the sense of the word that America's Conservatives ascribe to.In that Essay, ‘Notes On Nationalism,’ George Orwell further explicates the meaning of ‘nationalism’.  He says, “A nationalist is one who thinks solely, or mainly, in terms of competitive prestige. He may be a positive or a negative nationalist – that is, he may use his mental energy either in boosting or in denigrating – but at any rate his thoughts always turn on victories, defeats, triumphs and humiliations. He sees history, especially contemporary history, as the endless rise and decline of great power units, and every event that happens seems to him a demonstration that his own side is on the up-grade and some hated rival is on the down-grade. But finally, it is important not to confuse nationalism with mere worship of success. The nationalist does not go on the principle of simply ganging up with the strongest side. On the contrary, having picked his side, he persuades himself that it is the strongest, and is able to stick to his belief even when the facts are overwhelmingly against him. Nationalism is power-hunger tempered by self-deception. Every nationalist is capable of the most flagrant dishonesty, but he is also – since he is conscious of serving something bigger than himself – unshakeably certain of being in the right.”But, is this exposition on the meaning of  ‘nationalism’ not an apt description for the political failings of the Neo-Marxist? And, as for the idea of flagrant dishonesty and self-deception that marks the Marxists' inner thoughts and outer actions, we can add that the Neo-Marxists are unabashed, sanctimonious hypocrites whose tenets and precepts aren't even internally consistent and coherent.The New York Times Op-Ed writer, Jamelle Bouie, chides Tucker Carlson for admiring Hungary, and says that this is form of nationalism referred to as transferred nationalism, a term that Orwell coins. But is that so wrong? In fact Tucker Carlson only points to Hungary as an exemplary model because it alludes to a United States that existed for well over 200 years, a United States existing as a free Constitutional Republic, a Republic grounded in liberty, where is not a mere word, but reigns supreme, a Republic where the American people themselves, and only they, are the sole sovereign ruler,  power, and authority in the Nation, over the Federal Government and those who serve in it, at the pleasure of the American people, as the servants of the people, not their overseers. It is this Country, grounded in the tenets of Individualism that the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist abhors and seeks to change both here and abroad; indeed, seeks to transform the entire structure of Western Civilization, grounded on the concept of the nation-state. The Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist elite seek to evoke a horrific inter-nationalism or trans-nationalism to replace each independent, sovereign nation-state, and to inflict their radical makeover of Western political, social, economic, and juridical structures to reflect their warped philosophy; and they intend for that philosophy to embrace and shape the entire world, or at least that substantial portion of it included in the domain of Western Civilization. The world they envision is one in which one's every thought and conduct is conditioned and controlled; a world of incessant surveillance, in every sphere of influence, public and private, within the home and outside it; a world that tortures and subjugates body and spirit and that destroys mind and reason and will.The Neo-Marxist is a textbook case example of George Orwell's nationalist—an internationalist mindset that seeks to remake the entire world in accord with its tenets and precepts, and that will suffer no contrary viewpoint; will tolerate no dissenting voice; will abide no demonstration of uniqueness, of individuality; that will brook no interference, no opposition. The Neo-Marxist is one so enamored with him or herself—so certain of the truth of his or her beliefs, and so convinced of the perfection of the morality that undergirds those beliefs, that debate, any debate, is deemed to be unnecessary and superfluous, or worse, to admit of blasphemy or heresy, and must not be entertained, lest the purity of Marxism be contaminated and one's mind be confounded by impure thoughts. One must submit to the orthodoxy or be crushed into submission. This is nationalism as internationalism, transnationalism—the embrace of nationalism as universalism to overtake, overshadow, overpower every other system of belief, on any conceivable topic—Marxism, this new Neo-Marxism, not Classic Marxism, will shape any topic; have something to say about any subject, however prosaic or abstruse; and those entrusted to define and interpret this new Marxism are the lofty Priests of the new Marxism, those who inhabit the highest Caste, and woe be to that person who dares to disagree or, worse, to interfere with the musings of these High-Lord Muck-a-Mucks.Orwell writes,“As nearly as possible, no nationalist ever thinks, talks, or writes about anything except the superiority of his own power unit. It is difficult if not impossible for any nationalist to conceal his allegiance. The smallest slur upon his own unit, or any implied praise of a rival organization, fills him with uneasiness which he can only relieve by making some sharp retort. “Every nationalist is haunted by the belief that the past can be altered. He spends part of his time in a fantasy world in which things happen as they should – in which, for example, the Spanish Armada was a success or the Russian Revolution was crushed in 1918 – and he will transfer fragments of this world to the history books whenever possible. Much of the propagandist writing of our time amounts to plain forgery. Material facts are suppressed, dates altered, quotations removed from their context and doctored so as to change their meaning. Events which, it is felt, ought not to have happened are left unmentioned and ultimately denied.”All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. . . . Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage – torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians – which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by ‘our’ side. [Think of last Summer's riots in Marxist-led Cities and States].“Every nationalist is haunted by the belief that the past can be altered. He spends part of his time in a fantasy world in which things happen as they should – in which, for example, the Spanish Armada was a success or the Russian Revolution was crushed in 1918 – and he will transfer fragments of this world to the history books whenever possible. Much of the propagandist writing of our time amounts to plain forgery. Material facts are suppressed, dates altered, quotations removed from their context and doctored so as to change their meaning. Events which, it is felt, ought not to have happened are left unmentioned and ultimately denied. . . .  [P]ropaganda is, of course, to influence contemporary opinion, but those who rewrite history do probably believe with part of their minds that they are actually thrusting facts into the past. “Indifference to objective truth is encouraged by the sealing-off of one part of the world from another, which makes it harder and harder to discover what is actually happening. There can often be a genuine doubt about the most enormous events. . . . One has no way of verifying the facts, one is not even fully certain that they have happened, and one is always presented with totally different interpretations from different sources. . . . The general uncertainty as to what is really happening makes it easier to cling to lunatic beliefs. Since nothing is ever quite proved or disproved, the most unmistakable fact can be impudently denied. Moreover, although endlessly brooding on power, victory, defeat, revenge, the nationalist is often somewhat uninterested in what happens in the real world. What he wants is to feel that his own unit is getting the better of some other unit, and he can more easily do this by scoring off an adversary than by examining the facts to see whether they support him. All nationalist controversy is at the debating-society level. It is always entirely inconclusive since each contestant invariably believes himself to have won the victory. Some nationalists are not far from schizophrenia, living quite happily amid dreams of power and conquest which have no connexion with the physical world.”Jamelle Bouie should be careful of whom he cites for support when he demeans and debases a reputable news host and the Prime Minister of a Nation.Bouie defers to the Neoliberal Globalist propagandist messaging that “Orbán's Hungary is corrupt, repressive and authoritarian, a place where democracy is little more than window dressing and the state exists to plunder the public on behalf of a tiny ruling elite.” But consider what Hungary when through in the mid-Twentieth Century, as reported in History.com:“A spontaneous national uprising that began 12 days before in Hungary is viciously crushed by Soviet tanks and troops on November 4, 1956. Thousands were killed and wounded and nearly a quarter-million Hungarians fled the country.The problems in Hungary began in October 1956, when thousands of protesters took to the streets demanding a more democratic political system and freedom from Soviet oppression. In response, Communist Party officials appointed Imre Nagy, a former premier who had been dismissed from the party for his criticisms of Stalinist policies, as the new premier. Nagy tried to restore peace and asked the Soviets to withdraw their troops. The Soviets did so, but Nagy then tried to push the Hungarian revolt forward by abolishing one-party rule. He also announced that Hungary was withdrawing from the Warsaw Pact (the Soviet bloc’s equivalent of NATO).On November 4, 1956, Soviet tanks rolled into Budapest to crush, once and for all, the national uprising. Vicious street fighting broke out, but the Soviets’ great power ensured victory. At 5:20 a.m., Hungarian Prime Minister Imre Nagy announced the invasion to the nation in a grim, 35-second broadcast, declaring: “Our troops are fighting. The Government is in place.” Within hours, though, Nagy sought asylum at the Yugoslav Embassy in Budapest. He was captured shortly thereafter and executed two years later. Nagy’s former colleague and imminent replacement, János Kádár, who had been flown secretly from Moscow to the city of Szolnok, 60 miles southeast of the capital, prepared to take power with Moscow’s backing.The Soviet action stunned many people in the West. Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev had pledged a retreat from the Stalinist policies and repression of the past, but the violent actions in Budapest suggested otherwise. An estimated 2,500 Hungarians died and 200,000 more fled as refugees. Sporadic armed resistance, strikes and mass arrests continued for months thereafter, causing substantial economic disruption. Inaction on the part of the United States angered and frustrated many Hungarians. Voice of America radio broadcasts and speeches by President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles had recently suggested that the United States supported the “liberation” of “captive peoples” in communist nations. Yet, as Soviet tanks bore down on the protesters, the United States did nothing beyond issuing public statements of sympathy for their plight.” The people of Hungary know their history, and their parents and grandparents knew tyranny firsthand and the history of brutal Soviet oppression and subjugation won't be forgotten. It was no less the oppression of an independent sovereign Nation that is once again under attack, but not from Orbán. Rather this oppression is coming from the EU. It may not be through military force that the EU's Globalists Transnational Government, dictating policy from Brussels, has sought to oppress Hungary and the other nations of the EU that have opposed the usurpation of foreign authority on national sovereignty, but these overseers in Brussels have no less sought unlawfully to impose their iron rule upon Hungary, and the people of Hungary rejected that. Is it so wrong to admire one Nation's resolve against tyranny? But, Leftist writers like Jamelle Bouie are obviously oblivious to what it is in a Country that truly constitutes a trend, a direction toward tyranny. Bouie says,

“But at this moment in American life, it’s conservatives who have set their sights abroad. Parts of the movement have even adopted a kind of anti-Americanism, a contempt for the United States as it exists. These conservatives still call themselves “patriots” — and disdain their opponents as “traitors” — but theirs is an abstract loyalty to an idealized country. “When they contemplate the actual United States,” Beauchamp wrote in Vox, “they are filled with scorn.”

It makes sense that as this tendency develops, so too does the yearning for a country that can be hailed as a model and a lodestar — the soaring and gilded counterpoint to our fallen and decadent society.” 

But that too is projection. And sooner or later, the conservatives who hail Hungary under Orban as an attractive alternative to the United States will see that their vision of that country is as false as their image of this one is.”

“Projection”? Really? That notion is absurd. What it is that draws Americans' attention to Hungary, and why many Americans admire Hungary, is not due to the psychological device of “projection” that the Times' writer Jamelle Bouie recites in his Op-Ed, but to the fact that this small Nation has taken a stand against unlawful usurpation of power by the EU, as political power belongs solely to Hungary, and rightfully so since Hungary is an independent sovereign Nation. It IS Hungary's will to resist unlawful encroachment of power that Americans find a thing to emulate. As Hungary has gained its independence from the Neoliberal Globalist forces in Brussels that dare to crush Hungary's independence, the United States has begun a process of decline in all aspects, politically, socially, economically, militarily, geopolitically, juridically, as those same Neoliberal Globalist forces, together with the Neo-Marxist rabble, seeks to unwind all sovereign, independent Western nation-states and to subsume them in a new transnational world order. The Neoliberal Globalist (these so-called) ‘elites’ and Internationalist Neo-Marxists have taken their cue from the EU, which is what they emulate and seek to replicate in the U.S.: A transnationalist governmental scheme, embracing all the major Western nation-states. In this scheme, there exist no national borders and no defined national identity. These powerful forces that crush seek no less than the annihilation of a powerful, independent sovereign Nation-State, one framed as a free Constitutional Republic in which the citizenry are sole sovereign, and whose power and authority as sole sovereign over Nation and Government derive from and are grounded in a carefully considered, extraordinary Constitution, establishing a Government with clearly defined and demarcated powers, all the rest of which, including Natural Rights existing intrinsically in Man, several of which are codified in the Nation's Bill of Rights, are reserved alone to the several States and to the People. This, the Leftists' Internationalist Marxist intellectual elite and the Neoliberal Globalist elites intend to obliterate. They see this as a good thing and with Donald Trump who sought to preserve the Nation in the form the founders created, callously swept aside through a rigged election, the forces that crush have wasted no time dismantling the U.S. Constitution, erasing all vestige of the Nation's past, destroying the Nation's culture along with the Nation's Judeo-Christian ethic, insinuating itself into every political, quasi-political, and semi-political structure, and institution of State, Federal, and local Government, compelling all private organizations and businesses to prostrate themselves to the new world order to be, deliberately destabilizing society, confounding the public, and denying to the common man the unfettered exercise of his or her natural Rights. This, they see as ‘Liberal Democracy’, something to be applauded.But, the trend toward ‘Liberal Democracy’ is nothing more than a seeming innocuous code for the annihilation of the Nation-State, and the creation of a new political, social, economic, and cultural structure to embrace the entirety of western civilization. The depth and breadth of this audacious effort to reconfigure the entirety of Western Civilization is not confined to Europe or to the U.S. or to the Commonwealth Nations. It embraces the entirety of Western Civilization—it amounts to the most audacious reconfiguration of Western Civilization yet conceived, resulting not in freeing the populations of the West, but, perversely, subjugating those populations, reducing them to abject poverty and to the strictest of control. And to this day, it is remarkable the ease to which the Press and social media redefine concepts or create new concepts out of whole cloth and refer to freedom fighters, such as Orban of Hungary, and Mateusz Morawiecki of Poland, and, yes, Donald Trump, too, as autocrats and despots and authoritarians.It is easy for the seditious Press to point to specific leaders who seek to save their Nations from the insidious encroachment of international Marxism and Neoliberal Globalism, for the public never sees the faces of the true rulers. They guard their secrecy jealously. The public only sees the faces of their current crop of puppets—whom their propaganda organs extol as righteous beacons of “liberal democracy: people like Angela Merkel of Germany, Emmanuel Macron of France, the European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen; and other western puppet leaders of the secretive ruling “elite” Rothschild clan, et.al., including marionettes such as Justin Trudeau of Canada, Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand; and, in our own Country, don’t you know—the decrepit, cardboard cutout mannequins of the secretive “elites,” Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.The U.S. is being similarly attacked by the toady media outlets of the Neoliberal Globalists' hidden leaders, and the U.S. is headed for the same usurpation of Nation-State independence as the nations of the EU, despite the apparent pushback in some countries. This unlawful usurpation of power is happening simultaneously throughout the globe.The eventual shakeout, if it comes to pass, will see the political, social, economic, cultural, and juridical structures of government much different than in the past few centuries. The “nation-state” construct will be dissolved. Through the embrace of and charade of economic Neoliberal globalism and Neo-Marxism, the world will be carved up between two ascendant unstoppable totalitarian regimes: on the one hand, a vast Communist Chinese empire and, and, on the other, a reconstituted, completely transformed West, brought under a single, uniform, unified, monolithic supra-national totalitarian governing structure. An uneasy truce will exist between the two, with fractures occurring from time to time, as inevitable flareups and squabbles between the two salient empires occur in parts of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.For, a reconstituted, completely transformed West, brought under a single, uniform, unified, monolithic supra-national totalitarian governing structure to be able to successfully, withstand, if at all, the military, economic, and geopolitical might of Communist China, the West's Neoliberal Globalist elites understand that the linchpin for creating a formidable transnational totalitarian Western empire or bloc rests with bringing the EU into the fold of the U.S. and likely that would require Russia as well. China will continue its attempts to neutralize the military and economic power of the U.S. The unleashing of the Communist Chinese Coronavirus plague bioweapon on the world—predominately targeting the U.S., an act of war if there ever was one—has devastated the economy of the U.S. and has provided the impetus for exerting Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist control over the thought and action of the citizenry. The Neoliberal Globalist “elites” were likely in on this which might explain the odd reticence in engaging in a serious investigation of China’s conduct from the inception: involving gain of function research, of which Dr. Anthony Fauci was clearly aware of, and has much to explain to the American people. See, e.g., Fox News story on this, and Wall Street Journal report. This would suggest that the Neoliberal Globalist elites, along with the Neo-Marxists in Congress knowingly, willingly compromised the security of the Nation to amass personal wealth. In other words, the Globalists in the U.S. allowed China to treat their Companies, along with the U.S. Government as a commodity to be traded like any other commodity on the open market. China preyed upon this weakness in America's business and Government leaders; an insatiable lust to amass personal wealth even at the expense of the well-being of the Nation. The well-being of the American public and compliance with our Nation's laws and Constitution apparently doesn't factor into the equation. They have sold out the Nation. Communist China is the Nation's enemy, not merely an economic, military, and geopolitical competitor. Article 3, Sections 3 and 4 of the U.S. Constitution sets forth that:“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.”What might be done were Congress itself and the Executive Branch of Government complicit in committing treason? Who is it that might give testimony under oath against a member of Congress or of others in High Office? The Constitution doesn't seem to provide for this eventuality, given the sheer scope and audaciousness of the offense. In fact, it is only through the effects of and tremendous scale of the harm done that any American should see the harm that has been done to the Nation, the U.S. Constitution, and to the American people. But, perhaps it is precisely because of the massive scale of the harm that many Americans fail to take appreciable notice of the extent of it or, one might say that these events are less to be construed as incalculably horrific human misery compounded one tragedy + one tragedy + one tragedy, and so on, each to be pondered, but merely to be seen as a matter of banal Government statistics. In an article published on the website reason on January 7, 2009,  the writer, Ronald Bailey, writes:“ ‘The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic.’That's what Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin allegedly once said to U.S. ambassador Averill Harriman. And Stalin was an expert on the topic since his regime killed as many 43 million people. It turns out that the mustachioed murderer may have been expressing an acute insight into human psychology. Earlier this week, the Washington Post's always interesting Department of Human Behavior columnist Shankar Vedantam reported on the research of University of Oregon professor Paul Slovic who looked at how people respond to humanitarian tragedies. As Vedantam explains:In a rational world, we should care twice as much about a tragedy affecting 100 people as about one affecting 50. We ought to care 80,000 times as much when a tragedy involves 4 million lives rather than 50. But Slovic has proved in experiments that this is not how the mind works.When a tragedy claims many lives, we often care less than if a tragedy claims only a few lives. When there are many victims, we find it easier to look the other way.Virtually by definition, the central feature of humanitarian disasters and genocide is that there are a large number of victims’‘The first life lost is very precious, but we don't react very much to the difference between 88 deaths and 87 deaths," Slovic said in an interview. ‘You don't feel worse about 88 than you do about 87.’”The inexorable weakening of the U.S. economy, the death of hundreds of thousands in this Country due to the unleashing of the Chinese Communist Coronavirus in the U.S., whether through reckless or depraved indifference or through cold, calculated deliberation, and as its after-effects are still much with us, and with the rapid unraveling of the social order through the machinations of a well-coordinated and well-funded Neo-Marxist reeducation campaign affecting every institution of our Nation, even our military, and through this Harris-Biden Administration's deliberate, calculated unleashing of millions of destitute illegal aliens into and throughout our Country, many of them diseased—all this human misery and all this major calamity confronting the Country in a Post-Trump Nation bespeaks treachery to Country, to Constitution, and to the citizenry by myriads of humanoid creatures in High Government Office, in the Press, in social media, in our Nation's institution of public education, in high finance, and in academia, that is of another order of magnitude.A backlash, which the Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxist Internationalists must surely have seen coming, is unlikely to forestall the inexorable dissolution of a free Constitutional Republic, unless Republican legislators—and not the Cheney/Romney/Kinzinger et.al. sort—regain control of Congress in 2022, and the Constitution remains intact. Otherwise, this Nation will continue down the road to dissolution—its skeletal remains to be consolidated with and absorbed into the skeletal remains of the other major Western Nation States. But in the Nation’s death throes a bloodbath is likely to ensue. Americans will not readily surrender their firearms. It is because the U.S. has a well-drafted Constitution—and the longest surviving Constitution of the modern Nation-State and one grounded on the tenets of Individualism—that the adherents of Collectivism, i.e., the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalist elites find frustratingly and confoundingly difficult to contend with, despite the powers they wield in America and those they continue to gather up.Enough Americans, tens of millions of Americans—fortunate to have been spared academic indoctrination—resist attempts to dismantle a Free Constitutional Republic—all this in spite of the ever-increasing usurpation of power of the federal Government; the disintegration of a truly independent Press; the entrenchment of Neo-Marxist dogma in society; and the rabid attempt to federalize Constitutional structures historically belonging to and reserved to the several States, under the Tenth Amendment: control of public education; protecting the public health’s and providing for the public’s safety; conducting elections free from federal government interference; making marriage laws; punishing criminals; establishing local governments; and providing police and fire protection.Some powers, and the most important of late, relate to the controlling of borders. The Federal Government has the duty to protect the Nation’s borders from invasion. To the contrary, the Harris-Biden is openly inviting tidal waves of illegal aliens into our Country many of whom bear infectious diseases and deadly exotic pathogens; most of whom are destitute; all of whom are freeloaders; and too many of whom are murderous, psychopathic drug and sex traffickers or otherwise, incorrigible common criminals, including rapists, muggers, arsonists, child molesters, and other assorted lunatics.The present open border policy is not only inconsistent with federal statute it is a violation of the President’s oath of Office under Article 1, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, and it is a violation of duties of both the President and Congress under Article 4, Section 4 of the U.S.  Constitution.Yet the present inhabitants of the Executive Branch of Government pretend the Constitution is infinitely malleable and can mean whatever they wish it to mean, or they simply dismiss the Constitution out-of-hand. That raises the question: who is the Chief Executive of the Nation? Article 2 of the Constitution makes clear that there is, at any one time, one and only one Chief Executive. And the Chief Executive IS the ultimate decider of policy of the Executive Branch. That person is expected to give Orders, not take them.The present occupier of the seat of U.S. President, Joe Biden, is merely the titular Head of State whether in fact he was legitimately elected U.S. President. And there is considerable reasonable doubt as to that. But one thing about Biden, there can be no reasonable doubt and that has to do with whom it is who is making the decisions.No one honestly believes this sorry excuse for the Head of the Greatest Nation on Earth is making any decision for himself apart from deciding the flavor of ice cream he has a hankering for on any given day. For serious doubt exists whether the man is capable of rational thought any longer when it comes to serious matters of State, or whether Biden truly cares about, or even has the capacity to care about, heavy matters of State.And Congress is no better. All too many members of Congress treat the blueprint of the Nation as an ossified relic that ought to be and at some point in time must be formally discarded, and in the interim these Marxists interpret the Constitution Congress in any fanciful way they wish, or otherwise ignore the Constitution’s strictures outright, especially those strictures involving that aspect of the Constitution referred to as the Bill of Rights.We know the Neo-Marxist Congress and the true policymakers in the Executive Branch wish to scrap the Bill of Rights. They do not conceive of the Rights as codifications of natural law anyway. They do not accept the Bill of Rights as a set of fundamental, primordial rights existent in man before the creation of the Republic.Americans are witnessing the rapid decline and ultimate cessation of sacred Rights hitherto exercised. They are witnessing the de facto repeal of basic liberties that cannot lawfully be repealed or denied but are being de facto repealed or otherwise denied. And that portends the inevitable demise of the Republic; for once the Bill of Rights goes the Nation goes out with it. And there is evidence galore for this. We have already seen the Fourth Amendment's dictate against unreasonable searches and seizures essentially eradicated due to Congressional lack of oversight of both Government and of the Internet media monopolies and other technology companies that has resulted in the vacuuming up of every iota of electronic communication, and the attacks against the First Amendment's Right of Free Speech is well underway through censorship of books and curtailing of information on the world web that doesn't comport with the Neo-Marxist dogma and the fluid notions of liberal democracy that the Neoliberal Globalist elites wish to convey to the public. And the public is just beginning to obtain a glimpse of a concerted plan to curtail civilian citizen ownership of firearms, contrary to the dictates of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Implementation of this plan will probably begin in earnest in the coming months by Congressional Marxists, and the Harris-Biden Administration.Even during the first few days of the Harris-Biden Administration, Americans have seen the issuance of dozens of executive orders and other executive actions that the storefront mannequin Biden signed off one after the other. Congress, too, simply, is indifferent to or is defiant of the very laws it has enacted and is contemptuous of the dictates of the U.S. Constitution.The Marxist-controlled Democrat Party Congress is on board with or is one with the Harris-Biden Administration on its single-minded goal to dismantle the Republic. And most of the Republicans have themselves acquiesced or capitulated to or are in league with the Neo-Marxist game plan, if surreptitiously.As events unfold, it won’t be long before the U.S. becomes a hollowed-out shell of a Nation-State itself, not unlike most of those nations of the EU—ripe for a merger with the EU or whatever the EU eventually morphs into. And the remains of the major commonwealth Nations— Great Britain, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada will follow suit.Six months into the Harris-Biden Administration and we the Anti-American Neo-Marxist Counterrevolution in full swing. The Nation is rapidly transitioning from a healthy, independent sovereign Nation-State and free Constitutional Republic borne of the American Revolution of 1776 into a political, economic, social, and moral decrepitude. Tens of millions of Americans know this to be true.But, having unceremoniously ushered Donald Trump from High Office through the application of massive, unprecedented, and outrageous electoral chicanery, the Neo-Marxists and immensely powerful, well-organized, and incredibly wealthy Neoliberal Globalists are moving apace to destabilize society through a policy of open borders, control of the Federal Government, the Press, social media, the banks, the business sector, many State Governments, Marxist organizations such as the ACLU, and so on and so forth.At some point, Americans will have to take a stand to halt the plunder of their Nation and of their sacred Constitution, and of their sacred, inviolate Rights. Either they take a stand, or they shall lose everything and for all time: Country, Constitution, Liberty, their very Soul. And of that, there can be no reasonable doubt.___________________________________*Article substantially expanded, August 8, 2021___________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

IS THE SECOND AMENDMENT RACIST? SOME “THINKERS” TELL US IT IS.

ANOTHER CRAZY MARXIST NOTION ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT

PART THREE

“Gun violence is a public health crisis in communities of color, and the Second Amendment has roots in slavery.” —opening remark in an article titled, “Racial equity agenda must include gun control,” as published in the Leftist website, “Crosscut,” on March 8, 2021.In tandem with the incendiary myth of “critical race theory,” thrust on the public and on our children by a Marxist-controlled Federal Government, a Marxist-controlled public educational system, a seditious, legacy Press, a Marxist-inspired Press, and an arrogant Marxist academia, there is the erroneous and dangerous myth by the Nation’s Obstructors and Destructors that the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights has its roots in racism: “The Second Amendment is deeply rooted in America’s racist past, and fundamentally connected to the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and others. But to make this connection, one must be a “strict constructionist,” someone who looks beyond the Constitution’s written word to the underlying motives of the founders.At the Second Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, in 1787, Southern delegates were fearful the U.S. Constitution they were drafting would restrict their right to own, sell and transport slaves. In response, Northern delegates crafted a document in which nearly one-quarter of the clauses appeased the slaveholding South, and the words “slave” or “slavery” never appeared. The Second Amendment was key among these appeasements.Patrick Henry, a Virginia slaveholder, opposed ratifying the Constitution, fearing it would cede state control of slave patrols (politely called “militias” by the founders) to the federal government. James Madison, favoring ratification, said in a debate with Henry, “If the country be invaded, a state may go to war, but cannot suppress insurrection. If there should happen an insurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to be invaded. They cannot, therefore, suppress it without the interposition of Congress.”Take either side, Henry’s or Madison’s, local or federal, and the same fundamental issue remained: preserve slavery at all costs.” Id., supraThis, in essence, as set forth in Ford’s article, is the rationale behind the myth perpetrated and perpetuated by America’s Neo-Marxist zealots, i.e.: “Since the Second Amendment is to be perceived as inherently racist, it must be abolished.”On its face, this is a bizarre, absurd notion, hard to take seriously, but a dangerous one nonetheless because there are many in this Nation who do take it seriously. It is bubbling up and through the Nation, permeating the Nation's universities, seeping into the grade schools and high schools, embracing, as well, the equally ludicrous idea that the United States is a Nation of white Race Oppressors and of black slave Oppressed.  And, although the Neo-Marxists are loath, these days, to use the phrase, “Critical Race Theory,” in the Press and on broadcast and cable news, given the groundswell against this propaganda, now that the public is well-aware of the intent of the Marxists to indoctrinate the Nation's youth, it cannot be denied that “Critical Race Theory” lies at the core of the “1619 Project,” which IS the new comprehensive lesson plan to replace the traditional teaching of history in our Nation's public schools. “Critical Race Theory”  is the salient idea at the core of the Neo-Marxist 1619 Project. See article in CATO.This new attack against the Second Amendment is predicated on the inane theory that the right of the people to keep and bear arms was created by Racist white men to keep oppressed black men enslaved. This idea is of a piece with everything else that Neo-Marxists fault America for: the entirety of our Nation's history, heritage, and culture that they seek to tear down, to pave the way for the shell of what it remains of a once-proud, powerful, and wealthy and healthy, and exuberant independent, sovereign Nation and a free, sovereign people, to be merged into a transformative, transnationalist, Neo-Marxist, Globalist political, economic, social, and cultural governmental scheme, reducing the citizenry as a whole to a sad existence of poverty, misery, and, curiously enough, slavery, too.But of all the schemes falling under the irrepressible, boisterous Neo-Marxist mantra of “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion,”  it is the elimination of the Second Amendment that is absolutely essential to the Neo-Marxist game plan if their Counterrevolution to the American Revolution of 1776 is to have a concrete effect and lasting success. This little but insistent fact about the need to get rid of the fundamental, unalienable, immutable, illimitable right codified in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is papered over by America’s Neo-Marxists.Claiming the Second Amendment has its roots in racism is simply one more avenue of attack America’s Neo-Marxist leverage against a Country forged on the tenets of Individualism and on a Judeo-Christian Ethic, the predicate basis of the U.S. Constitution; the blueprint of a truly free Republic in which the American citizenry itself is the sole sovereign, and those that serve in Government are the Nation’s mere caretakers.Marxists will make any preposterous argument they can and will undertake any action they can get away with to undermine both a free Constitutional Republic and the indomitable spirit of the American people. And these Marxists are moving ahead quickly, clearly fearful of what the 2022 midterm elections foreordain. So, whether or not the Neo-Marxists believe the nonsense they spout is really beside the point. They apparently think that, or, perhaps, they simply hope that the majority of Americans will swallow this nonsense. And this will be the Marxists' downfall. They take it as axiomatic that most Americans are either uninterested, passive absorbers of banalities and inanities or are abject morons who will uncritically trust whatever it is they hear on the “news.” But this is part and parcel of Marxist thinking.

AS LONG AS AMERICANS REMAIN ARMED AND TRUE TO THEIR HISTORY, HERITAGE, CULTURE, AND MORAL PRECEPTS, AND REJECT, OUTRIGHT, THE INANITY OF THE MARXIST MESSAGING, THE MARXISTS WILL FAIL.

The concepts of a free Constitutional Republic, and a free, independent, sovereign Nation, and an American citizenry as the Nation’s sole sovereign were all borne of the American Revolution of 1776 and these concepts became concrete; a reality; the essential backbone of the United States of America. A free Constitutional Republic, and a free, independent, sovereign Nation, and an American citizenry as sole sovereign—are all seated in fact—resting in the psyche of the American citizenry, residing forever in ancestral memory; and are not so easily dislodged from ascendency, so long as the American people remain armed.It was firearms in the hands of steadfast Americans that won the American Revolution of 1776, and it will be by dint of firearms in the hands of steadfast, resolute, American citizens now, 250 years later, that Americans will be able to preserve their free Republic, their liberty, and their sovereignty against a horrific, usurpacious, rapacious, abrasive, sanctimonious Marxist-led Government; and against this Marxist Government’s fellow travelers in the legacy Press, in social media, in academia, in sports and entertainment; and against an astonishingly gullible, insular, malignant Marxist mob. Mammoth evil forces have a firm hold over our Country, metastasizing rapidly throughout its length, and breadth, and depth.Only through the preservation of an armed citizenry will Americans be able to successfully resist this Anti-American Marxist Counterrevolution of 21^st Century. And these Marxist Anti-American Counterrevolutionaries know this all too well. They are very aware of the indomitability and invincibility of an armed citizenry, and they know they must crush Americans' resolve if they are to succeed in their goal of annihilating every vestige of America's past.

A TRULY MONUMENTAL STRUGGLE IS UPON US.

Some Middle Class and Upper-Middle Class Americans who have bought into the myth that the Trump Presidency was the root of all evil—as foisted on the American people by a seditious, obsequious Press, a malevolent, audacious Democrat Party leadership and their hangers-on, by a pompous, academia, and by a rapacious, angry, rabid mob of Marxist and Anarchist BLM and ANTIFA types, and spoiled college-educated children well- trained and versed in the Marxist ideology, wearing the Marxism Badge as if it were a designer bracelet or necklace—are slowly but, assuredly, coming to their senses, discerning the full extent of their error, realizing they have been played for dupes all along, as they see what a Marxist-controlled Government, not the Trump Presidency, has wrought: common criminals, and lunatics, and psychopaths running amok; our Southern Border opened to over one million-plus illegal aliens, and murderous drug cartels, in clear violation of our our immigration laws, and many of these aliens infected with the Chinese Communist Coronavirus, and all of them being shipped, throughout our Country, by our own military; ICE agents and Custom and Border Protection agents being handcuffed, denied the ability to perform their federal statutory duties, requiring them to protect the Nation's borders and the interior or of our Country; community police officers throughout the Country thoroughly demoralized, defunded, and undermanned; the economy floundering through runaway inflation; millions of American citizens treated as pariahs in their own Country; our National Security threatened by a dangerous and emboldened Chinese Communist regime; the family unit and traditional religion being denigrated; the Marxist Harris-Biden Administration and the Marxist-Democrat Party getting set to pass a multi-trillion dollar give-away package to friendly State Governments so they can continue their profligate spending habits; destruction of our energy self-sufficiency under the guise of protecting the Climate. . . and on, and on. Many of these Middle and Upper-Middle Class households who claim a liberal-minded pedigree are leaving their Marxist States in droves, realizing too late that, voting into Office seemingly enlightened politicians, have, through their seemingly oh so lofty moral values transformed their communities into garbage dumps, and they leave the poorest families to contend with the mess as they leave for more idyllic areas in Florida, Texas, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho, and others, so they can destroy those States too, with their ostensibly well-meaning liberal attitudes. Soon there will be nowhere left for these people to move to. Hopefully, many more of these liberal, holy-than-thou people, will come to their senses and think twice before voting more Marxist-Democrats into Office.The threat to a free Republic and to Democratic principles was never threatened through Trump's Presidency. He sought to preserve the Nation in the form the founders gave to us and he was moving the Nation in that direction after the disaster wrought by his immediate predecessor, Barack Obama, and no less by George Bush and Bill Clinton. It was, rather, in the feverish rant of those who sought to rid themselves of Trump, knowing the threat he posed to them and to their goal of a one-world Marxist Governmental scheme, in which Americans would be reduced to poverty and subjugation, that the continuation of a free Constitutional Republic and the application of Democratic principles was, and, at present, IS, truly threatened. These Marxists have been attacking the Bill of Rights head-on, unabashedly, incessantly, relentlessly, remorselessly. And, with the aid of their fellow travelers in the Press, and in social media, they have been succeeding on several fronts.Speech is censored; the fundamental Right to be free from the insidious, pervasive, perfidious encroachment and insinuation of the Government and of monolithic, mercenary corporations, now operating at the behest of Government, into the private life of the citizenry is continuously threatened, and may be difficult if well-nigh impossible to safeguard against. But will Americans surrender their access to firearms? To date, despite decades of attempts by the Marxists to effectively defeat the fundamental, unalienable, natural, and sacred Right of the people to keep and bear arms, these Marxists have been able to dislodge firearms from the civilian citizenry and have been unable to change Americans' attitudes and perceptions toward firearms and toward the absolute right of Americans to own and possess them for purpose of self-defense and to thwart the onset of tyranny.Yet, Marxists in Congress and the Marxist Harris-Biden Administration continue to flaunt both statute and the U.S. Constitution, with abandon, and they are indefatigable in their intent to wrest Americans’ firearms from them. But can they meet with success on that front, as they have met with success on denial of Americans' Right to be free from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and as they are meeting with apparent success in denying Americans' their fundamental Right of free Speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as the Government, through a few compliant and sympathetic technology monopolists, has made substantial inroads in undercutting Americans' Right to speak their mind, free from Government and social media interference?Americans are beset by tidal forces intent on destroying not only the structural foundations of the Nation as a free Constitutional Republic, along with the Nation’s long-standing political, social, and educational institutions, but are intent on destroying the very ancestral memory of the people of the United States. To that end, the Marxists find it necessary to undercut the Bill of Rights and especially to annihilate the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, which is codified in the Second Amendment.The existence of an armed citizenry is antithetical to those who espouse Collectivism, in any of its many iterations, e.g., be it Marxism, Socialism, Communism on the Left or Fascism on the Right; for, Collectivism requires subjugation of the masses to the will of a strong centralized authority. An armed citizenry, in its very inception, poses an imminent, intrinsic threat to that centralized authority and so cannot be tolerated.The political, social, economic, financial, cultural, and juridical structure of Government and society that this Nation's Anti-American Neo-Marxists envision and that they are working toward is grounded on the tenets of COLLECTIVISM.The Arbalest Quarrel has written extensively about the two polar-opposite ideologies, INDIVIDUALISM VERSUS COLLECTIVISM; meticulously laying out the specific precepts, principles, and tenets of both, laying bare the differences, demonstrating that there can be no compromise between the two ideologies.See, e.g., the article titled, “The Modern American Civil War: A Clash of Ideologies,” posted on our website on October 6, 2018. Is it any wonder that the present Grand Pretenders and Great Imposters Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, presiding in the Executive Suite of Government, along with their retinue of secretive policymakers, the true power brokers orchestrating and choreographing Joe Biden’s and Kamala Harris’ every move, would emulate the Authoritarian EU Government in Brussels, and would tread ever so cautiously when confronting the Communist Chinese Regime in Beijing, with whom they share a similar goal: complete mastery over their respective populations?And, slowly, inexorably, they are drawing a noose around the ultimate failsafe against tyranny: the right of the people to keep and bear arms.To date, the Marxists have been working gingerly around the edges in attacking the Second Amendment, since Biden and Harris, through chicanery, assumed the Article 2 Authority. But, as with every other aspect of American life and as with every sacred fundamental, unalienable right that Americans cherish, they, through their secretive Marxist handlers, are assiduously going after civilian citizen ownership and possession of firearms and, of late, with much more than the usual customary jealous, audacious zeal. They are trying their damnedest to now tie the most cherished of Americans' rights—and the most important to the maintenance of a free Constitutional Republic and to the sovereignty of the American citizenry—to the ever familiar, noxious notion of “racism.” This latest charge is as repugnant as it is absurd.But will the power of the seditious, legacy Press and of the monopolists of social media and of the internet in fomenting and provoking substantial rage against the very notion of an armed citizenry, provide conditions sufficient for military and police action against tens of millions of armed Americans? And, what then? Will Americans “call or fold”?Whether the Marxist Counterrevolution to the American Revolution of 1776 yet succeeds in this Country, it will come down to that ultimate decision of a game of poker, but with the highest stakes on the table: Preservation of, or the loss of, a free Constitutional Republic and a free sovereign people.____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved. 

ONLY THE PREPARED ARMED CITIZEN CAN DEFEND OUR FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC AGAINST THE MARXISTS

PART TWO

SOCIAL AND POLITICAL VOLATILITY AND UPHEAVAL IN AMERICA IS DELIBERATE

Perpetrating and perpetuating the myth of “systemic racism” in American society serves the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist goal of creating volatility in society and social upheaval.The Harris-Biden Administration at the behest of their Neo-Marxist and Billionaire Globalist handlers, along with the Marxist Democrat Party leadership, need societal volatility—demand that volatility—if they are to succeed in overturning a free Constitutional Republic, transforming it into an obedient vessel of a in new Autocratic Marxist-Globalist world trans-superstate structure, spanning the entre globe.To that end, they have cunningly devised many strategies. One that they have had most success with involves the application of “race” and “racism” to everything Americans hold dear and holy, corrupting it, desecrating all of it—profanely, erroneously claiming that the very foundation of our Nation is rooted in the subjugation of Africans and their descendants.These Neo-Marxists have deliberately thrust on Americans a fairy tale surrounding slaves and slavery, claiming that race and racial identity is the defining feature of American society; that racism and the incitement of racial hatred are endemic to America; that “white extremism” and “white supremacism” are prevalent throughout society, endemic to the core of our Nation even though the fact of the matter is that white extremism and white supremacism is de minimis, representing no tenable threat to the stability of American society. Such instability and volatility that exists and is extant in the U.S. is that manufactured by Marxist Democrat Party leadership and the Harris-Biden Administration, itself, not by infinitesimally small and hardly influential groups like the KKK.The volatility and instability evident in society is a product of Government policy. It is seen in the Harris-Biden Administration’s open borders policy. It is seen in its dismissive attitude toward soaring violent crime permeating society and toward a curious permissive attitude held toward criminals and psychopathic and psychotic lunatics, given incredible latitude to prey on hapless, innocent Americans. And it is seen in the Administration’s cavalier attitude toward agitators belonging to rabid Marxist, Anarchist groups—in particular, “Black Lives Matter” and “Antifa” and other such groups—that have caused and continue to cause mayhem and substantial damage to the institutions of a free Republic. But, of extremist “racist” groups on the Right of the political spectrum, where are they? If the KKK and other “racist” hate groups have threatened a free Republic recently, where does evidence of the damage they cause exist? Answer: there is none. And of the January 6 disturbance at the U.S. Capitol Building, where does evidence exist of a “racist” motive; where does evidence of insurrection exist; a carefully designed, coordinated, and executed plan to take over the Government? Answer: There isn’t any.But Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and her gang are busy at work manufacturing a narrative of white extremism and white racism behind the disturbance at the Capitol, even as such evidence THAT DOES EXIST, points to possible culpability on Pelosi’s own part in having allowed the disturbance to occur, so that she and the other Neo-Marxist Democrat leaders, along with the quiet acquiescence of the Republican Leaders, could use the disturbance as a pretext to institute autocratic actions against the entire Nation. See, e.g., article in en-volve and article in Forbes.The perpetration of, propagation of, and perpetuation the myth of “racism,” “race hatred,” “white extremism,” and “white supremacism” serves the Neo-Marxists’ and Neoliberal Globalists’ end goal: dismantling a free Republic and installing a Marxist totalitarian construct to replace it, to be merged eventually into a transformative transnational world governmental scheme.Thus, in propounding a basis to upend a free Constitutional Republic that Democrat Party Marxists and the Kamala Harris and Joe Biden marionettes desire to accomplish and fully intend to accomplish so long as they can maintain power, it behooves them to resort to chicanery to confuse Americans and to create dissension among Americans.And these Destructors of a free Nation-State—with the assistance of a loyal, avid legacy Press, and with the cooperation of Wall Street financiers and “Big Tech,” and with the FBI, DOJ, DHS, ATF, and other bloated Executive Branch Departments, bureaus, agencies, on their side, including the turgid intelligence apparatuses that are supposed to be accountable to the American people through Congress but aren’t—are pulling out all the stops to succeed in dismantling a free Republic so they can then erect a Marxist totalitarian regime, and they can accomplish that in short order to short-circuit the reelection of a populist President and populist Senators and House Representatives who would return the Country to its rightful heirs and owners: the American people.In much that the Democrat Marxists and the Executive Branch puppets do to bring about a rupture of society they must, at present, resort to psychological measures. Only later, once they have achieved their goal of undermining the confidence and will of most Americans, will they resort to violence to break the back of the remaining third of the Nation, tens of millions of American citizens who are well armed, and well versed in the use of firearms, and who are of the mindset and who have the wherewithal to defend themselves and their Country and their Countrymen against all enemies both foreign and domestic—including a repressive and oppressive Marxist regime.The salient tool of the propagandists is language and the manipulation of it to affect a desired response in the target population, a willing compliance to authority, and to obtain a desired outcome—the destruction of American culture and society and subjugation of the masses; ergo the Propagandist resorts to the manipulation of “race.” And he operates with complete abandon in generating volatility in society through the device of “systemic racism” and “white extremism.”

WHY DO DEMOCRAT MARXISTS AND EXECUTIVE BRANCH PUPPETS SUFFOCATE AMERICANS WITH THESE LUDICROUS NOTIONS OF ‘RACE’ AND ‘RACISM AND ‘SYSTEMIC RACISM’?

The Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists utilize the vehicles of ‘race’ and ‘racism’ and ‘systemic racism’ because they know Americans are acutely sensitive to the concepts—hence the expansive use of these words to drive a wedge among Americans, to cause an ever-widening rift among Americans that cannot be bridged; to change Americans’ perceptions of themselves, to soften them up, and make Americans amenable to the transformative influences of Marxism. And the extensive, intensive use of these concepts in the media is having the desired effect.Thus, the worst elements among the so-called black race, go about rampaging, pillaging, and running amok, knowing full well the police will likely not arrest them, or if the police do arrest them, then the prosecutors will dismiss the charges against them, or the courts will find them not guilty, or merely slap them on the wrist if they are convicted of a criminal act at all.And the so-called white race finds itself uniformly scorned, ridiculed, shamed, and debased, in effect becoming a victim class itself, along with the “colored” race. And, in the end the entire American commonalty is brought low.

WHAT IS ‘RACE,’ REALLY, AND IS IT “REALLY” REAL?

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says this about ‘race’:The concept of race has historically signified the division of humanity into a small number of groups based upon five criteria: (1) Races reflect some type of biological foundation, be it Aristotelian essences or modern genes; (2) This biological foundation generates discrete racial groupings, such that all and only all members of one race share a set of biological characteristics that are not shared by members of other races; (3) This biological foundation is inherited from generation to generation, allowing observers to identify an individual’s race through her ancestry or genealogy; (4) Genealogical investigation should identify each race’s geographic origin, typically in Africa, Europe, Asia, or North and South America; and (5) This inherited racial biological foundation manifests itself primarily in physical phenotypes, such as skin color, eye shape, hair texture, and bone structure, and perhaps also behavioral phenotypes, such as intelligence or delinquency.Both in the past and today, determining the boundaries of discrete races has proven to be most vexing and has led to great variations in the number of human races believed to be in existence. Thus, some thinkers categorized humans into only four distinct races (typically white or Caucasian, Black or African, yellow or Asian, and red or Native American), and downplayed any biological or phenotypical distinctions within racial groups (such as those between Scandinavians and Spaniards within the white or Caucasian race). Other thinkers classified humans into many more racial categories, for instance arguing that those humans “indigenous” to Europe could be distinguished into discrete Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean races.The ambiguities and confusion associated with determining the boundaries of racial categories have provoked a widespread scholarly consensus that discrete or essentialist races are socially constructed, not biologically real.” This Essentialist notion of race was taken as self-evident true, and it tore Germany and the rest of the world apart, leading to a conflagration commencing in 1939 with the outbreak of the Second world war.Curiously, the Great War from 1914 to 1918, also a conflagration, did not involve “race.” Many of Germany’s Jews fought alongside Germany’s non-Jews, seeing themselves as fervently German, no less so than the “Aryan” or “Nordic” German.Jump to present-day America. The use of ‘race’ as a weapon—this time by the Harris-Biden Administration and Marxist Democrats—are again on full disgusting and noxious display.The propagandists have taken a cue from the race proponents of Nazi Germany although with a decidedly peculiar twist.This time it isn’t the German Nordic white “Herrenmensch” who is extolled but the purportedly black “Untermensch,” albeit the rabid Anti-American Anti-white current head of the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ, Kristen Clarke, has unabashedly argued that it is the “black race” that is markedly superior to the “white race.” See article in LA Times, referring at the end of the article to remarks of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, which explains why Republicans opposed her confirmation to head the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ.

“In opposing her nomination, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in a statement Monday that Clarke had a ‘long history of statements that place the nominee on, frankly, the far-left fringe of the political spectrum . . . This is not the right nominee for a crucial post at a crucial time. ’” See also article in the North State Journal:

“Kristen Clarke, Joe Biden’s nominee for assistant attorney general of the United States, once promoted racist pseudoscientific quackery, arguing that the human brain was structured in a way that makes Black people superior to white people, and that “human mental processes” in the brain have chemicals that imbue one race with “superior physical and mental abilities” and “spiritual abilities.”After confirmation, Clarke says, as reported in fox news, that she doesn’t “necessarily” hold to those beliefs. In other words, Clarke still professes a belief in this nonsense, but she cannot be overt and explicit about it. For those who would interject “race” into politics, then it must be faced head-on, rationally, logically, especially in those instances where one accepts the reality of “race” in a concrete, absolute biological sense, and dares to extol the righteousness and superiority of this or that “race.” But what we are seeing is that the would-be Destroyers of our Nation have used the concept of ‘race,’ and ‘racism’ and continue to use “race” and “racism” as an odious political device, a tool, a bludgeon, a battering ram directed against our Nation, against our People, and against our Constitution—with the aim of destroying all of it and replacing it with something loathsome, something detestable, reprehensible. And they seek to erect their evil societal construct to ensnare and enslave us all.____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

MARXISTS SEEK TO DISARM CITIZENS, ELIMINATE ALL NATIONAL HOLIDAYS, MONUMENTS, AND THE NATION'S FLAG!

WILL THIS BE OUR LAST FOURTH OF JULY INDEPENDENCE HOLIDAY?

PART ONE

America's Neo-Marxists’ and Neoliberal Globalists’ campaign endlessly and mercilessly to destroy a free Constitutional Republic and a Sovereign American people. Their ignominious design is multifaceted.One facet involves denigration of, renaming of, rebranding of, misappropriation of, or outright elimination of American’s cherished National and Religious Holidays: Columbus Day, Labor Day, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, President’s Day, and Christmas.Concomitantly these Marxists have created or seek to install a set of fake holidays, replacing traditional ones with idiotic surrogates, including “Juneteenth” (which they succeeded in installing), along with May Day, Earth Day, Indigenous People’s Day, and so forth and so on. For a longer list, see, e.g., the website, “war on press.” See also, the article in the website, “state symbols usa.”Even relatively minor Holidays, such as Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, are under the gun meeting with constant Marxist-led derision, as being incompatible with the nightmarish reality Marxists and Globalists intend to impose on Americans.In fact, use of the very words ‘mother’ and ‘father’ may one day become obsolete and forbidden because Marxist Democrat Party leaders maintain they aren’t “gender-neutral.” Only gender-neutral verbiage will be allowed in the Bizarro world of these Democrat Party Marxists. Fancy that! See “msn news article,” citing Washington Examiner. See also article in “Political Patrol;” article in the Daily Signal; and article in “pj media,” illustrating the sheer enormity of the attempt by Marxists to interject artificial language constructs on us hapless Americans, notwithstanding the crass stupidity of the attempt.None of this bodes well for the future of America if the Democrat Party maintains its majority after the midterm elections of 2022.Even now, Americans are seeing the rapid unraveling of their Republic taking place every day, as Marxist propaganda constantly and obnoxiously pervades newspapers, radio, TV, and the internet.This poisonous messaging is being indelibly imprinted on the public psyche. There is no escaping it. There is no respite from it. It is a nightmare from which no American can awaken. It is brainwashing on an industrial scale: disorienting, disturbing, nauseating, and inescapable.Given months of Marxist Democrat Party attacks on every aspect of American life, the Fourth of July Holiday, this July 4 Holiday cannot help but feel incongruous.Behind a veil of fragile inviolability, a lurking menace of a Marxist takeover of our Nation looms.But, as Independence Day 2021 also looms, the Marxist Democrat leadership is loath to disparage it outright, at least for the moment. But will the Independence Day Holiday remain free from Marxist Democrat defilement; will it exist next year if only because it comes prior to the 2022 midterm elections; and, if so, will it then exist the year after if the Marxist Democrats prevail, after the midterm elections, thereby maintaining their majority in Congress? The answer is, “not likely,” at least not in the sense that Independence Day will thereafter have any true import, for it will no longer retain its cherished historical meaning as a Holiday of Remembrance. The Holiday, if it continues to exist, would exist, only, if at all, as a caricature of what it once represented, a pale, fleeting distant memory, a memory for some, for a while, perhaps, of what it once represented; its import and purport eventually disappearing from memory forever because the Neo-Marxist/Globalist Counterrevolution to the American Revolution of 1776 would have succeeded.America's Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists must annihilate the Fourth of July Holiday because it operates each year, every year, as recognition of and a defiant expression of Patriots who rallied, on July 4, 1776 against the tyrannical Government of Great Britain’s George III and against the power behind the throne—the Bank of Rothschild.But for the act of brazen defiance against tyranny, the Nation that would shortly become a sovereign independent Nation-State, would not exist. The landmass of North America and its people would remain a colony of the United Kingdom, evolving eventually into a Country of a kind, but not a true independent sovereign nation because it would remain intricately tied to the United Kingdom (U.K.), as part of the United Kingdom Commonwealth of Nations, alongside at least sixteen other such nations: most notably Canada, Australia, and New Zealand—all of which formally recognize and proclaim the English Monarch as Head of State.And if that were the case, had America’s colonists lost the American Revolution, one must wonder to what extent the Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists would create the fuss they are creating today.George III and the Rothschild Central Banking clan had seen something awry in the Colony, which is why the British attempted to disarm the Colonists. And the Colonists responded with a volley of musket shots directed at the British to punctuate their refusal to surrender their firearms.When July 4 rolls around this year, Americans will be able to demonstrate their patriotic fervor—possibly for the last time—raising the American Flag high, and many Americans will also raise historical renditions of “Old Glory,” in gratitude to the valor of the colonists,’ and of their glorious battle for liberty and of their resounding defeat of tyranny.Children in many jurisdictions will be taught to hate our Country and to despise themselves if they happen to have the wrong skin color. They will be told that Independence Day has no significance other than to represent something negative, something horrible, something to be erased from ancestral memory, to be replaced with the false and poisonous claim that the Fourth of July must be but a reflection of glory for “the white race” and, concomitantly a reflection of racism against the “the colored races.”Many of our Nation’s public schools have a new curriculum ready for implementation for just this purpose; grounded on Marxist “Critical Race Theory” and on its twin sister, the 1619 Project. Both Marxist schemes are designed to psychologically condition and to brainwash the Nation’s youth to abhor their Country and their Country’s history, heritage, traditions, culture, and Judeo-Christian ethic.It is TYRANNY ANEW that the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists intend to impose on Americans.These Marxists and Billionaire Globalist monopolists weave a distorted impression of American history, arguing erroneously that colonists in 1619 sought to foster a new Country but a Country in which “white colonists” could exploit and engage in wholesale oppression of Africans and their descendants—through the construction of an independent, sovereign “Slave Nation.” Thus, July 4 must, for these Marxists and Globalist monopolists hold no significance other than to exalt the creation of a massive institution of slavery, targeting Africans and the indigenous people of North America.But, slavery, such as it existed, at that time, in 1619 was, at most, incidental to, not essential to the life of the inhabitants of Jamestown or to a powerful, independent sovereign Nation that would come to be, over a century later.Slavery did continue, of course, and had its most prolific expression in “the South” because the South relied on cheap labor, “African slaves,” to fuel the engine of an agrarian society. The Industrial North had no such need for slave labor and had none and fought to deprive the South of its Agricultural engine. And when the North prevailed against the South, it commenced a terrible campaign of retribution, repression, and oppression against the “Rebels” who had dared secede from “THE UNION.”Yet, suppose the Confederacy had defeated the Union, and seceded from the Union, what then?In any case, slavery would have eventually ceased since, with time, slave labor would have become both inefficient and unprofitable with advances in technology. The Agricultural South, with its huge plantations, would flourish through the use of machines to farm, not on human beings.To be sure, machines need to be occasionally oiled and greased, and old components changed with new ones. But machines don’t require food, clothing, housing, or medical care.To be sure, machines need to be occasionally oiled and greased, and old components changed with new ones. But machines don’t require food, clothing, housing, or medical care.Moreover, one machine with one operator could do substantially more work than a hundred African slaves and complete work more quickly. And with the cessation of slavery, racism would diminish and eventually dissipate, as it has done.Martin Luther King’s dream of a colorless society would still come to fruition and the color of one’s skin would have no bearing on one’s worth as an individual. Why, then, would Marxists bother to dredge up something long since dead and buried? They would do so because it is necessary to do so if a Free Constitutional Republic is to be dismantled, and a Marxist Totalitarian Regime erected in its place.But the Republic cannot be dismantled in the absence of massive social and political upheaval. It is an upheaval that the Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists want, and it is an upheaval that the Democrat Party Leadership and the Harris-Biden Administration, at the behest of the Marxists and wealthy, powerful, ruthless Globalists, intend to accomplish, that they must fan and nourish if they are to realize their goal of a one-world Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal scheme.When you gather with family and friends this Fourth of July weekend, share this valuable and timely information we are giving you. Use this Holiday to remind others that we must constantly be aware that hard-fought freedoms are never assured.The American citizen must remain keenly aware that dangerous, jealous enemies of a free sovereign people reside within and outside the Country, coordinating their actions, ever scheming to wrest those freedoms from the American citizenry, to reduce the citizenry to penury, servitude, oppression, subjugation, a life, more a mere and meager existence of perpetual misery.____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved. 

IS THE SECOND AMENDMENT RACIST?

ANOTHER CRAZY MARXIST THEORY

PART ONE

“Gun violence is a public health crisis in communities of color, and the Second Amendment has roots in slavery.” This is the opening remark in an article titled, “Racial equity agenda must include gun control,” as published in the Leftist website, “Crosscut,” by Clyde Ford, March 8, 2021.In tandem with the incendiary myth of “critical race theory,” thrust on the American public, and especially on our children by an entrenched Marxist-dominated and controlled Executive Branch and Democrat-Party controlled Legislative Branch of Government, quietly but inexorably and insidiously penetrating, permeating, and percolating through the Nation’s public educational system and even through the military—and all with the help of a seditious, legacy Press, an arrogant Marxist academia, and the inordinately wealthy, powerful, and abjectly ruthless Neo-liberal Globalist technology mega-monopolies—is the application of erroneous and dangerous critical race theory to the Nation’s fundamental Rights and Liberties.A new myth recently being propagated by Obstructors and Destructors of a free Republic and being projected into the psyche of the American citizenry is that the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights has its roots in racism:“The Second Amendment is deeply rooted in America’s racist past, and fundamentally connected to the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and others. But to make this connection, one must be a “strict constructionist,” someone who looks beyond the Constitution’s written word to the underlying motives of the founders.At the Second Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, in 1787, Southern delegates were fearful the U.S. Constitution they were drafting would restrict their right to own, sell and transport slaves. In response, Northern delegates crafted a document in which nearly one-quarter of the clauses appeased the slaveholding South, and the words “slave” or “slavery” never appeared. The Second Amendment was key among these appeasements.Patrick Henry, a Virginia slaveholder, opposed ratifying the Constitution, fearing it would cede state control of slave patrols (politely called “militias” by the founders) to the federal government. James Madison, favoring ratification, said in a debate with Henry, “If the country be invaded, a state may go to war, but cannot suppress insurrection. If there should happen an insurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to be invaded. They cannot, therefore, suppress it without the interposition of Congress.”Take either side, Henry’s or Madison’s, local or federal, and the same fundamental issue remained: preserve slavery at all costs.” From “Crosscut,” supra.This, in essence, as set forth in Clyde Ford’s article, is the argument perpetrated on the American people by Anti-Second Amendment Marxist zealots and, very recently, perpetuated by these Anti-American, Anti-Constitutionalist elements with a frantic, frenetic sense of urgency, for they are hell-bent on making as many substantive changes to a free Constitutional Republic as their fevered sociopathic minds can conceive.In their non-stop campaign to convert a Nation grounded on the precepts, principles, and tenets of INDIVIDUALISM, into a Marxist Hell grounded on the precepts, principles, and tenets of COLLECTIVISM, the latter of which are found operative in Countries such as China, Russia, Cuba, and Venezuela, and, too, are to be seen operative in the European Union since the Nations that comprise the EU are presided over by a COLLECTIVIST Government, presiding in Brussels, Belgium that has usurped much of the power that once resided in the Governments of the individual Countries of the EU and is continually usurping more power. Such is the goal of Marxism and Neoliberal Globalism. And these Marxists and Neoliberal Globalist monopolists intend to bring the people and resources of the U.S. under their umbrella.In their vision of the ideal political, social, economic, and cultural societal construct, individual thought and expression are not only discouraged, but are not to be tolerated; and a Sovereign people whose sovereignty is made clear in the words of the Constitution and whose sovereignty is assured by virtue of their God-given Right to Keep and Bear Arms in defense of Self and Family against those two-legged predators who would dare to harm them physically and in defense against an oppressive, repressive bloated Government that would dare to intimidate them, and to subjugate them, and to reduce them to penury. An armed American citizenry is, to these Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists, an anathema. And these reprehensible and ruthless forces are constantly devising ways to defeat exercise by the citizenry of their unalienable, immutable, illimitable, natural right to keep and bear arms.Although not a new idea, having had its beginnings going back at least as far as the last two decades of the Twentieth Century, the myth has gained renewed attention and vigor from Progressive and Radical Left social media, and Left-wing news organizations, and Marxist academicians. The myth of the Second Amendment having a racist origin, being propagated today is not accidental.The claim of ‘racism’ is, in fact, a major strategy employed by both the Marxists and Neoliberal Monopolist Globalists as they go about attacking and undermining the very foundation of a free Constitutional Republic. These Anti-American, Anti-Constitutionalist forces apply the appellation of RACISM with complete abandon, and amplify it, most notably to:

• OUR NATION’S HISTORY
• OUR NATION’S FOUNDING FATHERS
• OUR NATION’S FOUNDING DOCUMENTS
• OUR NATION’S HERITAGE
• OUR NATION’S INSTITUTIONS
• OUR NATION’S CULTURE
• FREE MARKET CAPITALISM
• OUR NATION’S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES
• THE BASIC ETHICAL TENETS OF CHRISTIANITY

Yes, even our BILL OF RIGHTS, CHRISTIAN SENSIBILITIES, and JUDEO-CHRISTIAN ETHIC AND ETHOS are being senselessly and mercilessly attacked by America’s Marxists, and America’s Neoliberal, Globalist monopolists as “RACIST.” And in that, the American people are being systematically robbed of everything they hold dear. And why are these Destructive elements in our Nation employing the charge of racism to everything Americans cherish? These destructive forces and influences of ATHEISM and ANTI-NATIONALISM are attacking such things because these things denote the importance of and, indeed, the essence of American identity and American cohesion rooted in FAMILY, COUNTRY, PERSONAL AUTONOMY, INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, AND INTEGRITY OF SELFHOOD.The forces of atheism—Marxists and Neoliberal Globalist Monopolists—can have none of that! They have replaced the aforesaid sacred, invaluable treasures of our Nation, upon which the very BEING of our Nation and our ancestral memory depends, with a radically new political, social, and economic paradigm:DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSIONOf all the schemes falling under this paradigm of “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion—a paradigm operating, too, as an irrepressible and boisterous MANTRA of the Destructors of our Nation, the fact that they are now applying the charge of “racism” very specifically to one fundamental, unalienable, immutable, natural right, demonstrates the importance these Destructors place on the Second Amendment.During the first couple of months in Office, the present Administration, comprising Marxist and Neoliberal Globalists, has consciously ignored tending to the immediate elimination of the Second Amendment, even as they are cognizant of it, having, during the 2020 campaign, made clear their abhorrence and abject fear of it. So, it has never been far from their mind.But now, unmistakably and undeniably, as the Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists have consolidated their power in Government and, therefore, consolidated their power over the American people, they have directed attention back to that favorite nemesis: THE SECOND AMENDMENT OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS.Of course, they planned to do this all along, but, had the Harris-Biden Administration attacked the Second Amendment head-on during the first few weeks of ascendancy, that would have drawn the ire of most Americans immediately, and they were not prepared to do that.The secretive handlers of the newly vested Great Pretenders, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris, wanted Americans to grow accustomed to THIS PAIR in the Executive Suites. Hence, even as the Great Pretender, Biden, signed many more Executive Actions in his first few weeks in Office than had any other past U.S. President, it was hands off the Second Amendment, even as the Second Amendment was always uppermost in mind, as the salient concern.The Harris-Biden Administration handlers believe they can proceed now, as they feel much of the populace has been softened up through weeks of propagandizing—through the constant drone of DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION, playing hypnotically through the various media organs, and they have made much headway, even as they stumble here and there and as they are facing a considerable public backlash against the insinuation of “CRITICAL RACE THEORY” in so many institutions: POLICE AND THE MILITARY; PUBLIC GRADE SCHOOL AND SECONDARY EDUCATION; HIGHER EDUCATION; BUSINESS AND FINANCE; and, now as it is coming to light, THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY, too.The problem for the Obstructors and Destructors of our Nation is that, despite the consolidation of power, they know full well that however well they might cajole Americans to accept many of the Marxist programs, and notwithstanding their successes in whittling away the right of free speech, and freedom of association, and notwithstanding their major successes in destroying the privacy of one’s personal effects, the Counterrevolution of 2021 cannot have a concrete effect and lasting success as long as Americans possess firearms.Claiming the Second Amendment has its roots in racism is just one more avenue of attack, preposterous as the claim is. Marxists will say anything, however absurd or inconsistent their remarks, if it furthers their agenda, and they need to make haste on defeating the Second Amendment before the 2022 midterm elections and the very real possibility of losing control of Congress. This is their most difficult but most critical task.After all, an armed citizenry is the first and last bastion of a Free People—the final FAIL-SAFE mechanism to ensure the continued existence of a Free Constitutional Republic and a Sovereign American people.It was force of arms—THIS AND THIS ALONE—that enabled a ragtag group of colonists to defeat the might and power of Great Britain, that made possible at all the success of the AMERICAN REVOLUTION OF 1776. No less, it is only by force of arms that the American people can hope to prevent the AMERICAN MARXIST COUNTERREVOLUTION OF 2021 from succeeding. It isn’t that Americans will be compelled to resist Marxists and Neoliberal Globalist Monopolists by force of arms. It doesn’t have to come to that. It is in the exercise of the right that the threat to a TYRANNICAL MARXIST GOVERNMENT. Tyrants cannot and will not abide a population of armed citizens. TYRANTS NEVER HAVE ABIDED AN ARMED CITIZENRY AND NEVER WILL. Biden himself may not realize this. It is likely that this man, who is in a state of incipient, cascading, and permanent cognitive decline, understands little of anything that a secret cadre of handlers give him to read to the American people or permit him to utter extemporaneously. And Harris, who is so enamored of the thought of succeeding to THE THRONE—no less than Hillary, before she came crashing to Earth, and remains disgruntled over the reality of her defeat to Trump, to this day—has, as is apparent, no firm conviction about anything other than her own ambitions, and certainly no love of Country.But most Americans do have firm convictions concerning the necessity of preserving the Republic; realizing that loss of the Republic means loss of Country. Only in the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms can both a free Republic and the authority of the American people as sole, supreme Sovereign be preserved. And the reality of this sits firmly in the psyche of the American citizenry, and it is a thing not so easily dislodged. And the Marxists and the Neoliberal Globalists know this all too well and that makes them frustrated and, therefore dangerous, for in their anguish to dissolve the Country as a Free Constitutional Republic and to bring the American people to their knees, they might light a powder keg.____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

WHY IS IT THAT THE HARRIS-BIDEN ADMINISTRATION AND CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS REALLY WANT TO TAKE AWAY YOUR GUNS?

PART ONE

GUN OWNERS; TRUMP SUPPORTERS; ANTI-MARXISTS; ANTI-GLOBALISTS—ARE THESE THE HARRIS-BIDEN “DOMESTIC TERRORISTS?”

The propagandists for the Democrat Party-controlled Government are nothing if not expert in the art of subterfuge, deflection, artifice, and duplicity. Turning the Bill of Rights on its head, they claim the Country will be better off once the American people just accept constraints on the exercise of their fundamental rights and liberties.But for whom would the Country be better off: for the American people or for the Neoliberal Globalists, along with their cousin Marxists, who intend to dismantle a free Constitutional Republic and merge the skeletal remains of the United States into something truly obscene: a transnational new governmental world order akin to the European Union?Already Biden has made overtures to Brussels, resurrecting the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership or “T-TIP,” an arrangement that had stalled under the Trump Administration as did the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP.The true, if unstated, purpose of the G-7 Summit was to reassure Brussels that the U.S. was back on track to complete the agenda commenced in earnest thirty years ago—an agenda that had been making substantial headway under Obama, and that would continue under Hillary Clinton. But that agenda came to a screeching halt when Trump was elected U.S. President, to the surprise and shock and consternation of Neoliberal Globalists and Marxists both inside the Country and outside it, and no less to the chagrin of China, as well.But with the mentally debilitated, and easily manipulated Joe Biden firmly ensconced in the Oval Office, the Globalist and Marxist agenda could get back on track. The EU would get what it wants from the U.S.; China would get what it wants from the U.S.; even Russia got what it wanted. And who was left out of the mix? The American people, of course.But then, the Harris-Biden Administration and their cohorts in the Democrat Party controlled Congress, together with the seditious Press and social media and information technology titans haven’t bothered to ask the American people for their perspective on any of this. They really don’t care. They have effectively shunted Trump aside and they are treating tens of millions of American dissenters as potential “Domestic Terrorists” who refuse to go along with the game plan. The Globalists and Marxists will suffer no dissident thought or action. They are intent on stamping out all dissent. And this portends something serious on the horizon for the well-being of the Country and for the well-being of the American people.

WITH A RADICAL DEMOCRAT PARTY-CONTROLLED GOVERNMENT AND A BELEAGUERED, BESIEGED, WEAK REPUBLICAN CONTINGENT IN CONGRESS, AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE BEEN BOXED INTO A CORNER AND MUST TAKE MATTERS INTO THEIR OWN HANDS TO REGAIN CONTROL OF THEIR COUNTRY?

The secretive powers operating in the Harris-Biden Administration, along with the Democrat Party have forced Americans into a tight corner. The forces that have boxed in Americans know this to be true. They did this intentionally. They have thrown down their gauntlet. They fully expect a backlash. And they fully intend to counter it.The forces that crush have instituted a comprehensive and insidious program designed to contain and constrain dissenting Americans.Their program must have taken shape during the early days of the transition of Government in 2021. And it is now available for all to see. The PROGRAM—really a POGROM—targeting Americans who refuse to get on board with the game plan is contained in a lengthy document, titled: “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism.”This Document, recently made available to the public,  serves a dual purpose for the Harris-Biden Administration. It operates, one, as a Declaration setting forth the raison d’être for a Marxist Counterrevolution in this Country to overturn the American Revolution of 1776, and, operates,  two, as an express and brazen threat to the autonomy of the American citizen. Never before in American History has the Federal Government professed to declare war on its own citizens. In that regard, the “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism” goes much further than even the infamousU.S. Patriot Act, in presenting a direct threat to an American citizen's fundamental Rights and Liberties. See also the article on the U.S. Patriot Act by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.But who are these “Domestic Terrorists” that the Harris-Biden Administration has declared war against? In the broadest sense, a “Domestic Terrorist” is any American who professes disagreement with the Globalist/Marxist agenda.

ATTEMPTS AT OBFUSCATION DO NOT DISGUISE THE FACT THAT “DOMESTIC TERRORIST” REFERS TO ALL AMERICANS WHO ACTIVELY DISAGREE WITH AND WHO DISSENT FROM THE HARRIS-BIDEN AGENDA.

The expression “Domestic Terrorist” drags in a sizable portion of the American citizenry, at least a third of the Country, that cherishes the Nation's founding, formative Documents—the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution’s Articles, and the Bill of Rights—and takes them at face value, in accordance with the plain meaning of the language therein.And, what do these Documents proclaim and prescribe? They proclaim and prescribe the preeminence of liberty and personal autonomy and of the existence of natural, God-given rights that exist intrinsically in each person; rights that precede the formation of nations and of governments and make clear that the American people, themselves, and not the Government they happen to form, are the Sole Sovereign of their Nation, and that they alone have the God-given right to control their own destiny.This presents a conundrum for the Harris-Biden Administration, which is to say, a profound dilemma for those secretive, powerful insiders who are orchestrating and choreographing the Administration’s every move.One thing is clear: Those elements presently in control of the reins of the Federal Government do not perceive themselves as servants of the people but, rather, as master over them.The Harris-Biden Administration, the Democrat Party controlled Congress, the Bureaucratic Deep State, the Legacy Press, and the major social media and technology monopolies have dismissed the founding, formative documents of our Country, out-of-hand, and, in so doing, have effectively declared war on the American people.But, a sizable chunk of the American people, though, cherish and extol the tenets, principles, and precepts contained in the Nation’s sacred Documents. That means the American people pose a threat to Government. They must therefore be brought to heel lest they exert their sovereignty over the Government. Imagine that!The Nation’s founding Fathers—yes, dare we use the expression, “THE FATHERS” of the Nation—understood well that a massively large, powerful centralized Government would, if left to its own devices, eventually, inexorably, inevitably usurp from the people,  that sovereign power belonging only to the people.The Founding Fathers knew that, while a Federal Government with limited powers, assiduously demarcated among three salient Branches—Legislative, Executive, and Judicial—may serve to forestall usurpation of power unto itself, the rise of tyranny would be inevitable. It would only be a matter of time. Only the presence of an armed citizenry could prevent this from happening, as the Founding Fathers well knew; hence the reason for the codification of the right of the people to keep and bear arms in an Amendment to the Constitution.It should come as no surprise to any American that the Destroyers of a Free Constitutional Republic would therefore mount a furious assault on the sacred right of the people to keep and bear arms.Not since the Nation’s inception in 1776, have the Obstructors of the Country come so close transforming it from a free Republic into an Authoritarian State—made all the easier through the use of information technology: technology that is capable of exerting vast control over content creation and dissemination of information, and the censure of it; technology that makes possible, the surreptitious, collection of private information and omnipresent surveillance of the Nation’s citizenry.The pillar of free speech, codified in the First Amendment and the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, codified in the Fourth, are both suffering slow strangulation as a result of the application of technology on a massive scale.The public has little to say about the application of, and has even less control over, technological advances that allow Government to nullify the unreasonable searches and seizures clause of the Fourth Amendment.And powerful Liberal Progressive and Marxist interests in the Federal Government flagrantly violate the First Amendment’s freedom of speech clause, operating through major social media monopolies, that share Progressive Left and Marxist sympathies and goals. The result is a blatant, shameless, unethical, illegal censure of speech.These elements in Government and business, operating in concert, have been successful at constraining public discourse, in recent years, to an extent never before countenanced. And they intend to upend this Nation’s Constitutional Republic now and for all time.Concomitant with censure of speech, and contrary to the dictates of the First Amendment, destructive forces in Government and in the technology monopolies have unleashed a campaign of propaganda to turn American against American and to indoctrinate children and adult alike. No institution is free from the onslaught; not even the military.

WITH FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES ESSENTIALLY ERADICATED, AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH UNDER CONTINUOUS, RUINOUS, HARASSING ASSAULT, ONLY FREEDOM TO OWN AND POSSESS GUNS REMAINS, OBSTINATELY RESISTANT TO GOVERNMENT ATTEMPTS TO CONSTRAIN EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT.

Only the right of the people to keep and bear arms effectively resists systematic and debilitating attempts by Progressive and Marxist influences to annihilate the exercise of this fundamental Right. But why is that? The reasons are plain. First, Americans recognize that no other Right defines them or the Country they are sovereign masters of, as the Right to own and possess firearms. So, Americans furiously defend that Right—more so than any other. Second, firearms are after all tangible implements, not intangible, digital objects, like words. It is not so easy for Government to purloin away one’s firearms as they have purloined away Americans’ private conversations and private documents and as they have systematically whittled away at the right of free discourse and free association among Americans of like kind.It’s impossible to take physical control over a citizen’s firearms surreptitiously. A person either has possession of them or he does not. And he will not so easily part with them. This angers the would-be Destroyers of a free Constitutional Republic to no end.How does one effectively separate a person from his firearms without causing a bloodbath in the Nation? This isn’t simply a matter of academic exercise for the Destroyers of our Country. They are well aware that the presence of—the continued existence of—armed citizens poses a direct, imminent threat to the installment of a Marxist totalitarian State and submergence of the remains of a free Republic in a Globalist Marxist new world order. But they also know that any attempt at a wholesale round-up of firearms would result in revolt—that is to say, armed revolt!It follows that no compromise on the right of the people to keep and bear arms is logically sensical despite the remonstrations of “antigun” groups carping endlessly over the need for more “commonsense gun laws”—as if they mean only that and nothing more. The idea is absurd on its face. It is all mere rhetoric designed to deceive. Americans have had more than enough of this nonsense.The question is: Now that Americans know the extent to which a free Constitutional Republic is in the crosshairs for destruction, and that the Federal Government has essentially declared war on its own citizens' sacred Rights and Liberties, what are Americans going to do to safeguard their Bill of Rights and their sovereignty over Government?___________________________________

PART TWO

A TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT CANNOT LONG CONTAIN OR CONSTRAIN AN ARMED CITIZENRY.

If the American people are well-armed, then they can effectively, successfully resist Governmental attempts to control thought and action; they can effectively resist concerted efforts by tyrants to subjugate them; and they will always resist such efforts. But, if the American people are disarmed, they are defenseless before both two-legged predators and a predatory, tyrannical Government. So, the American people must continue to be well-armed. It is that simple.Thus, among those Destructive forces—neoliberal Globalist and international Marxist elements—who strive for firm Government control over the citizenry, the Right of the people to keep and bear arms must not be merely constrained, exercise of the Right must be curtailed. But, because it is immensely difficult to curtail citizen ownership and possession of firearms outright, absent wholesale bloodshed, which is to be avoided, the liberal Progressive Left and Marxists have been forced to undercut the Right of the people to keep and bear arms through a gradual escalating legislative process.The Federal Government’s assault on the Second Amendment started in earnest almost ninety years ago, with the enactment of the National Firearms Act of 1934. As with all antigun legislation, the pretext for the enactment of the NFA was an attempt to prevent criminal gangs from engaging in shooting rampages with certain classes of weapons, primarily fully automatic weapons and so-called short-barreled shotguns and rifles. The impact this law had on crime reduction was and is negligible. Its greatest and gravest impact was on infringing law-abiding American citizens' right to possess those firearms.Apart from actions by several State Americans to continue to enact laws to restrict and constrain the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms, the public was provided with a respite from the enactment of wholesale restrictive Federal firearms legislation for a period of sixty years, when Congress enacted the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. That Act contained a subsection titled innocuously, the “Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act” a.k.a. “Assault Weapons Ban,” the latter descriptor of which is more accurate and to the point.Once again, the public was told that the purpose of an assault weapons Ban was directed to curbing violent crimes committed with a certain category of guns. It did no such thing. It was all a lie, having nothing to do with constraining criminal use of firearms.All the Act succeeded in doing and was designed to do was to target average, law-abiding Americans, not to reduce violent gun crime. The salient if tacit purpose of the Act was to ban lawful ownership and possession of a wide range of popular semiautomatic weapons in the hands of tens of millions of law-abiding Americans. The Act wasn’t designed to prevent gun crimes. And the banned firearms were not even utilized in the vast majority of gun crimes anyway.The law was set to expire ten years later, in 2004. It did expire and not surprisingly, it wasn’t renewed. The public wasn’t deceived and demanded access to semiautomatic firearms.Notwithstanding the expiration of the Assault Weapons Ban, that didn’t stop Anti-Second Amendment forces in Congress to try to enact new laws restricting Americans’ access to semiautomatic firearms. They were relentless in their pursuit to curtail the exercise of the right codified in the Second Amendment. And they continued their effort up to the present time. To date, all such attempts have failed, and that has frustrated the forces that seek to destroy this free Constitutional Republic and its sovereign people. It was therefore left to Anti-Second Amendment State Governments to fill the gap and States like New York and California did so, with relish.With the neoliberal Globalist Obama in the Oval Office, to be followed by Hillary Clinton, the Destroyers of an independent sovereign United States felt confident that they could gradually tighten the noose around the neck of the American people so that, by the time the citizenry realized they had lost their Nation, along with their Bill of Rights, it would be much too late for them to do anything about it.But Hillary Clinton didn’t make it into Office. Donald Trump did. And once the sobering reality of that had sunk in for the neoliberal Globalists and the Marxists, they no longer took for granted that they could work leisurely and quietly to reconfigure the institutions of the Nation; disregard the dictates of or redefine the meaning of the Constitution to suit their goals; and implement their plans for a takeover of the Country incrementally.The forces that crush entire nations went to work on our own; frenetically, ceaselessly, assiduously, to sabotage Trump’s policy initiatives; engaging in a virulent media campaign of vicious personal attacks on him, on his family, on campaign officials, and on Americans who voted for and who avidly supported him, who had realized the singular importance of the Trump initiatives and policy goals and promises in getting the Nation back on track to regain its historical roots and sensibilities. Yet, all the efforts to dislodge Trump from Office met with abject failure and Trump was successful in realizing many of his goals.The forces that crush entire nations couldn’t understand Trump’s emotional strength; his resourcefulness, his fortitude; his resilience. The more vociferous and vicious the attacks became, the more implacable did Trump become.The public saw that Trump’s “America First” domestic and foreign policies actually benefitted the American people, Americans of all races. Trump was primed to win a second term in Office.The neoliberal Globalists and international Marxists would have not of that. And they pulled out all the stops to prevent that from happening.So, as a last resort, the enemies of the American people, both within the Republic and outside it, including likely the CCP and the EU Government in Brussels, machinated and conspired to prevent Trump from serving a Second Term. And they succeeded. Now, with Trump out of the way, and with Bush-era Republicans or otherwise meek Republicans offering no meaningful, substantial resistance to the agenda of Marxist Democrats, those Congressional Democrats are wasting no time consolidating their power over the Country and over the American people, before the 2022 midterm elections.

DEMOCRATS' TEN-PART PROGRAM TO CONSOLIDATE POWER AND GAIN CONTROL OVER THE NATION AND ITS CITIZENS

The Democrats' program involves, one, systematically corralling the voices of tens of millions of Americans; two indoctrinating the public in the tenets of Collectivism; three, consolidating control over the military and police; four, continuing to create mass upheaval and volatility in society with the assistance of criminal gangs, and Marxist and Anarchist agitators; five, maintaining dossiers on every person residing in the United States; six, inducing fear in the minds of all Americans that Government may designate them as “Domestic Terrorists” and commence to hound and harass them; seven, asserting Government control over the operation of the entire electoral process in order to control the outcome of elections; eight, continuing, indefinitely, an open borders policy, allowing a continuous deluge of illegal alien migrants and murderous drug cartel gangs to invade our Country, thereby further disrupting society; nine, creating the conditions for hyper-inflation to proceed, to reduce the mass of America to abject penury; and, ten, curtailing exercise of the right of the people to keep and bear arms so as to preclude the ability of the American people to revolt successfully against the inception of tyranny.Concerning the last item of business, expect to see concerted efforts by the Harris-Biden Administration, to implement executive actions, albeit as a “temporary fix” to restrict the possession of semiautomatic weapons. This is being coordinated with efforts by the Democrat-controlled Congress to shoehorn semiautomatic weapons into the NFA, or, perhaps, to enact new stand-alone legislation, or to enact a ban on possession of semiautomatic firearms through obscure means, by placing a gun ban in some larger omnibus bill.Whatever transpires, the American people should be prepared for a very rocky ride in the months ahead as the economy continues to deteriorate, as social volatility and unrest in society crank up, and as the Second Amendment undergoes an assault in a manner heretofore not seen.____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

HALBROOK’S “THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS” IS MORE THAN A SCHOLARLY TREATISE, IT SERVES AS A WARNING: A NATION PRESERVED OR A NATION EXTINCT

By Roger J. Katz, Co-FounderArbalest Group, LLCMany Americans know Stephen Halbrook as a foremost legal expert on the Nation’s Second Amendment. It is a designation richly deserved, and his latest book, “The Right To Bear Arms,” couldn’t come at a more opportune and pressing time in our Nation’s history as the American people find themselves, at this moment, at a most perilous crossroads.The central theme of Halbrook’s comprehensive, well-researched book is that the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution is the linchpin of a free Constitutional Republic and of a sovereign people.Since the exercise of the “Right to Bear Arms” is the foundation for a free Constitutional Republic and a sovereign people, then the only reasonable inference to be drawn from a reading of “The Right To Bear Arms,” is that our Nation cannot continue to exist as a free Constitutional Republic with an American people as the sole and ultimate ruler of their Government, absent robust exercise of the right codified in the Second Amendment.Exercise of the Right to Bear Arms is, then, not merely useful to the preservation of the Nation as a free Constitutional Republic and to an American people as the Nation’s sole sovereign, it is intrinsic to and therefore essential to the maintenance of both. Halbrook knows this, and his book is a forceful voice in the assent of this point.Those forces intent on destroying a free Republic and a sovereign people know this too. That’s why they seek unabashedly and with single-minded, cold, callous intent to remove the Right from the Nation’s lexicon; to eradicate the Right from the U.S. Constitution; to erase the Right to Bear Arms from Americans’ ancestral memory.This isn’t mere supposition. It is fact. It is part and parcel of an elaborate, diabolically conceived, meticulously crafted, and assiduously implemented campaign of those elements dead set on destroying American society as it presently exists and a free Republic as the Constitution mandates. This concerted campaign of destruction is being carried out by seditious actors both inside Government and outside it. In the desire to achieve their goal, they are deliberately fomenting discord and dissension among the American people. They may talk about unifying Americans. They intend the opposite.Through a massive and unprecedented campaign of psychological conditioning and manipulation of Americans’ thought processes, mass confusion ensues. That is their intention. That is the hoped-for result. And, if they are successful, hysteria and mass psychosis will result. That will lead inevitably, inexorably to societal discord and upheaval, complete societal collapse, and thence to the dismantling, dismemberment, and dissolution of a free Constitutional Republic.Media propagandists are relying on intellectual naivety to warp, subvert, and corrupt the innate moral goodness of Americans, filling their minds with bankrupt political and social ideologies of Collectivism, Multiculturalism, and Moral Relativism, with the aim of creating in the American psyche, a marked disdain for, and even abject hatred and abhorrence of the Nation’s rich cultural history, heritage, and Judeo-Christian ethic.It is in this frame of heightened acuity to the imminent danger facing the Nation and its people, that Halbrook’s book, “The Right to Bear Arms,” takes on added importance.Halbrook captures well the imminent peril that besets the Country through the words that comprise the subtitle of his book. He poses the question:“A Constitutional Right of the People or a Privilege of the Ruling Class?” The question, although merely rhetorical to Americans who cherish the Right, would be considered pertinent to those who don’t cherish it.Framing the subtitle of the book as a question rather than as an exclamatory sentence is no accident or mere afterthought.By posing the subtitle as a question Halbrook tells Americans they have an important—indeed, crucial—choice to make today, just as the framers of the Constitution had a crucial choice to make almost 250 years ago, when, after having emerged victorious after a hard-fought war for independence from tyranny, they found themselves faced with a new, similarly arduous task: hammering out the form of the central Government of the new Nation—the form of the U.S. Government—a “Federal” Government that would not eventually transform into a hideous, rapacious tyrant like the one they fought gallantly and ferociously against, and, surprisingly, to both their British adversary and other nations, to their foe's embarrassing, ignominious, and thorough defeat.The answer to the question, to whom does the Right to Bear Arms apply, was clear enough to the founders, but it was the import of the question that lay at the heart as to why the Right was etched in the Constitution. The framers of the Constitution had to acknowledge that the sanctity and well-being of a free Constitutional Republic and the sovereignty of the American people would rest, ultimately, less in the checks and balances, placed in the Articles of the U.S. Constitution, demarcating the distinct and limited roles of each of Three co-equal Branches, and more, much more, in the incorporation of the “Right to Bear Arms” in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights.And therein rests the singular importance of Halbrook’s latest book, “The Right To Bear Arms.” The main title of the book serves not only as an apt, brief descriptor of the nature of the content of the book, but operates as the raison d’être for the author’s expenditure of significant time and effort to write it.Halbrook’s book is  well-researched, thorough, and yet markedly readable and it serves as a cohesive, coherent, and comprehensive, response to those academicians, news and media groups, members of Congress, bureaucrats, and Billionaire funded, organized, “grassroots” organizations desirous of forsaking a free Constitutional Republic, in favor of a form of Government that serves what the founders of the Republic sought fervently to avoid: the interests of privileged, wealthy aristocrats, a few “elite.” Such an idea was anathema to the founders, as Halbrook makes plain.The “Right of the people to Bear Arms” is inextricably tied to the fate of the Country.The question pertaining to whom that Right belongs that might seem rhetorical to Americans in the past, and that would seem so to tens of millions of Americans alive today, as well, who hold dear to the sacred and natural Right of the People to Bear Arms, is perceived, though, as a legitimate question to many millions more Americans: those millions who, unfortunately, have fallen prey to the endless stream and chatter of media propaganda.Those brainwashed Americans view the Right to Bear Arms as a thing archaic; old-hat; anachronistic; something that may have been meaningful to Americans living in a bygone era of our Nation’s history, perhaps, but a “Right” that has no relevance today; a “Right,” indeed, that should be thought of merely as a mere privilege at best; something to be taken as detrimental to the kind of America the destroyers of a free Republic wish to bring about if such “Right” were continued to be exercised en mass.It is to this group of Americans, especially, that Halbrook’s book, “The Right To Bear Arms,” should be required reading, quite apart from lawyers, jurists, and legal scholars; professors of American history, military history, sociology, anthropology, and political science; and those lay members of the public who do cherish the Right to Bear Arms, and who would obviously be most drawn to Halbrook’s new book.Lest there be any mistake, Halbrook makes clear at the outset to whom the inviolate Right to Bear Arms belongs. He writes,“The Second Amendment refers to ‘the right of the people.’ And who are “the people?” The term ‘people,’ was defined as ‘persons’ in general . . . and the people was defined as ‘the commonalty,’ as distinct from men of rank. . . .”The Right to Bear Arms, as understood by the framers of the Constitution, belongs, then, to the common people. It is not a thing to be enjoyed by and was never conceived by the framers of the Constitution, as a thing accruing to the benefit of a privileged few.The underlying theme of the book is thus directed to the commendable task of staking a reasonable, rational claim in whom this “Right to Bear Arms” belongs when legions of naysayers that control the Nation’s many airwaves, newspapers, periodicals, and social media organizations and enterprises, today, say otherwise.But Halbrook also makes the pertinent point that the“Right to Bear Arms” always existed in the commonalty. It isn't something arising only through ratification of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment codifies the Right to Bear Arms. It isn't the progenitor of it. The Right precedes the embodiment of it in the Second Amendment.The framers of the U.S. Constitution understood that the “Right to Bear Arms” is a PREEXISTING RIGHT of the commoner. It was never perceived as a thing “invented” by the framers. Halbrook makes this point explicitly, cogently. “‘The right of the people’ is significant. The term ‘right’ expresses a preexisting right, not a new right invented for the Bill of Rights. To declare that ‘the right’ to do or be free of something shall not be abridged, infringed, or violated presupposes that the right already exits.”But what is one to make of the dependent “militia” clause? Halbrook addresses that question as well, and, cogently and succinctly, lays to rest, any residual notion that some scholars may have, concerning the meaning of the “militia” clause as it appears in the Second Amendment. Halbrook states,“If keeping and bearing arms was a ‘right’ only of the militia when in actual service, the Framers certainly would have so stated. It would have been odd when guaranteeing ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms,’ had the Framers really meant ‘the right of the militia to keep and bear arms when authorized and activated by government.”Halbrook’s explanation might serve, inter alia, as a tacit and not so subtle remonstration directed to a remark by retired Associate Justice John Paul Stevens who had called at one point in time for outright repeal of the Second Amendment, knowing full well the plain meaning of it. Stevens has also suggested, in the alternative, that the language of the Second Amendment should be modified. In his book, “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution,” the retired Associate Justice suggests altering the Second Amendment to read, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms when serving in the militia shall not be infringed.”The Framers would be aghast at the audaciousness of anyone, let alone a retired jurist, who would suggest tampering with the “Right to Bear Arms” and who would do so blatantly, shamelessly, who would dare deny to the people—the commonalty—the Right that properly belongs to them, only; that exists inherently in them; and must remain always with them; to be exercised by them, in their individual capacity, without prior restraint, constraint, or condition. In fact, Stevens' suggested modification of the Second Amendment would simply reduce it to a nullity. This is something Stevens knows full well, and that is no doubt his intent in calling for a modification of it, in lieu of outright de jure repeal of it. De jure or De Facto repeal of the Second Amendment doesn't matter to him. He just wants to be done with it, as he fears an armed citizenry no less so than the privileged ruling elite whom he represents and whom Stevens knows can never successfully corral and thereby restrain and contain the commonalty in whom true sovereignty truly belongs and in whom the founders meant for sovereignty over Nation, alone, to remain.Much of Halbrook’s book details the history behind the Right and serves as an interesting backdrop to the imperative for it. The book makes for a fascinating read that brings us to the present day with the seminal Heller and McDonald case holdings that Halbrook also addresses.At the end of the book, as one contemplates the captivating, indisputable facts detailed in it, one comes to an understanding of why the Right to Bear Arms must belong to the commonalty and must never be wielded by a privileged few.If Americans allow the rhetoric of today to cloud their judgment, this Country will truly devolve into a tyranny of the aristocratic elite, even if that fact is masked in the emotionally charged, false, even ridiculous, rhetoric of the claimed need to repair the damage done to a “racially oppressed victim class” by a so-called “white privileged racial oppressor.” Such is the purport behind the Marxist derived “critical race theory” that the secretive powerful, privileged ruling class has induced a seditious media to thrust into the public domain and onto the psyche of Americans, and such is the purport behind The New York Times' fictional “1619 Project” that has insinuated itself into school curricula across the Nation. It is all a hoax. It is all an elaborate, fanciful fabrication, but it is one carefully cultivated and perpetuated through a dutiful, obsequious media and Congress, permeating throughout society, and lavishly funded by that very secretive, inordinately powerful and wealthy “privileged ruling class” that the founders were most concerned about. And it is this dangerous “privileged ruling class,” the ruling aristocratic elite, that Halbrook informs the reader of, and it is this “privileged ruling class,” against whom the American commonalty must forever be wary. The aim of this “privileged ruling class” is not to unshackle a purported “victim race” but rather to shackle and subjugate the American commonalty in totality, a seeming black oppressed and a seeming white oppressor alike. The founders would have seen through the subterfuge. Their descendants would do well to see through the subterfuge, too.Americans, the Nation's commonalty, must remain true to their heritage or face perpetual subjugation and stagnation; and that will happen if they fall for deceptive, emotionally charged fallacious rhetoric. The Right to Bear Arms must remain, sanctified and inviolate, a preexisting, essential Right inhering within the essence of the commonalty, a thing not be reserved to, preserved by and enjoyed by nor meant to be reserved to, and preserved by and enjoyed by a privileged few elite, who would then convert the Right to Bear Arms into a mechanism of oppression and repression, a mechanism to be turned on the American commonalty to secure the blind obedience of, dominance over, and obeisance from that very commonalty. And therein lies tyranny, regained.To prevent this, the commonalty MUST INSIST on its PREEXISTENT innate Right to Bear Arms. It will lose everything the founders have bequeathed to it, and everything Americans have since fought and died for, to keep, if they don’t insist on their preexistent Right to Bear Arms, endowed to them by the Loving, All-Powerful, All-knowing, and Morally Perfect Divine Creator.It is either this or that: To Keep the Right or Lose The Right for all time. It is THE ONE or it is THE OTHER. It is NOT BOTH nor can it be NEITHER. And there can be no compromise on this, no half measure. IT IS ALL OR NOTHING AT ALL. One sees this clearly enough, and clearly laid out, upon a reading of “The Right To Bear Arms.”____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

“THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS”: STEPHEN HALBROOK’S NEW BOOK IS A MUST-READ!

By Stephen L. D’Andrilli, President,Arbalest Group LLC.The title of Stephen P. Halbrook’s new book is the very question at issue in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett, which the United States Supreme Court recently decided it would hear in its next term. The timing and importance of both the book and this case couldn’t have been better! See Arbalest Quarrel article on the Corlett case, titled, “Supreme Court to Take Up New York Second Amendment Case At Last!” In Corlett, the applicant for a concealed carry handgun license was denied a license for lacking “good cause” – a purely subjective requirement established by New York State’s highly discretional firearms licensing scheme. The decision, in this case, could strike down, as unconstitutional, Government infringement on a fundamental right – both in New York and in other “may-issue” states throughout the Country where similar practices prevail. What happened in Corlett could happen to you, too!It has been over a decade since the High Court ruled on a major Second Amendment case.In 2008, in District of Columbia vs. Heller, “held that the Second Amendment protected an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia and to use that firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.”The judicial interpretative methodology used by the Court’s majority was based on “text, history, and tradition” and the Court’s majority rejected the judge-empowering interest-balancing inquiry, too often used by liberals, which defers to legislatures to decide if various interests outweigh recognition of a Constitutional right.Two years later, in McDonald vs. City of Chicago, “the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protected the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense and that the Second Amendment was fully applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment.” The Court also made clear that this right is deeply rooted in the nation's history and tradition.The High Court rejected out-of-hand the City’s argument that the Court, “in effect . . . treat the right recognized in Heller as a second-class [“watered down”] right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees that we have held to be incorporated into the Due Process Clause. The Court also, as it did in Heller, “expressly rejected the argument that the scope of the Second Amendment right should be determined by judicial interest balancing.”It’s mind-boggling that some federal and state courts resist these Supreme Court holdings and render conflicting decisions, dismissing fundamental rights that are plainly stated in the Constitution, while inventing others that do not exist in the Constitution.Halbrook’s book serves as a literary weapon in support of our Second Amendment right by clearly identifying what the Second Amendment means and requires.The Corlett case and Halbrook’s book comes to us at a time when the Bill of Rights in its entirety – all ten of them – are on trial!The very soul of our Nation and the meaning of what it is to be “an American” is constantly and relentlessly challenged by well-organized and well-funded Progressive Left-Wing and outright Marxist and Anarchist groups such as BLM and Antifa.These groups promulgate and agitate for “Wokeness” and “Cancel Culture.” They demand the Nation’s institutions implement fictional doctrines such as “Critical Race Theory,” and “the 1619 Project.” They attack dissenting viewpoints with insulting claims of “White Extremism” and “White Supremacy.” They create “Defund the Police” and “Dismantle Police” campaigns. They have gone as far as infiltrating our military with their “patriot extremism.” This threatens our Country. If they weaken our military, we are undone. And they deliberately sow discord and suspicion among Americans to weaken the Country to further their Radical Left agenda.Crime is not only on the rise and has reached historical proportions in major cities across our Country. True as that is, Americans were always mistaken in their belief that they can rely on the police to protect them. The police have no duty to provide protection for individuals, except in rare circumstances.The salient function of the police is to provide general protection for the communities they serve, not to guarantee the safety of individuals within the community. They aren’t personal bodyguards for average Americans.See the following three Arbalest Quarrel articles on the role of the police and the role of the citizen on the matter of personal safety, published on Ammoland Shooting Sports News:“Can We, As Individuals, Rely On The Police To Protect Us,” referencing an article co-authored by Stephen L. D’Andrilli and David Kopel B. Kopel, titled, “Personal Safety: Individual Responsibility,” that is as relevant today as it was when it appeared over thirty years ago, in the May 1989 issue of “Women and Guns;” and, two,“Police Have No Duty To Secure The Life Of Americans From Threat Of Physical Harm;” and, three,“The Government Cannot Protect You! You Must Protect Yourself!”But now, with calls made to defund the police and reduce the number of police, the public cannot even rely on the police to provide even a modicum of general protection for the community, which is and always has been their main function. It is the police who are “handcuffed,” not the criminal element.This means that now, more than ever, people must assume responsibility for their own safety and well-being. And many more Americans recognize this, and they want to own a firearm for personal protection.This turn of events disturbs Radical Left politicians and fanatical Radical Left-wing groups as they intend to prevent average Americans from exercising their Second Amendment right of self-defense to carry a handgun, the best means available for ensuring one’s life.Radical Left-wing politicians and groups obviously don’t care about the life and well-being of individuals. That idea is, after all, contrary to the tenets of Marxism. All they care about is furthering their agenda and wielding increasingly more power and control over the American people — a desire that is insatiable.And this comes at a time when Radical Left Soros funded “prosecutors” refuse to prosecute even the most violent criminals, and release more and more of them out on the streets to prey on innocent Americans. But this, too, is part of the Radical Left agenda. It is all designed to keep the public off guard, in a constant state of bewilderment and fear, as the fabric of society unravels.Meanwhile, the police are constrained from providing even minimal community protection, given draconian policy directives and for fear, not unreasonable, that Radical Left politicians will second-guess their every move and treat them as the criminal element rather than as society’s protector.Since Radical Left politicians fear an armed citizenry more than they do hardened criminals, the public is left essentially defenseless. This is contrary to the Nation’s history and heritage, which Stephen Halbrook lays out in a comprehensive, scholarly manner.He explains clearly and convincingly the import of the right to bear arms and its practice, from its origins in England – going back as far as the early 1300’s – through colonial America, and then through ratification of our Constitution and Bill of Rights, up to the present day. His thorough analysis includes references to and explanations of important state and federal court cases.Given the danger presented to the Nation due to a rampaging Radical Marxist agenda, permeating society from the highest levels of the Federal Government to the local government level, and given dramatic increases in violence on our streets, the Nation’s need for Stephen Halbrook’s book is pressing. The material presented directs the public’s attention back to where that attention needs to be directed: toward an understanding of and appreciation of our Nation’s historical roots.The information provided in Halbrook’s book should be shared by everyone – regardless of political or ideological persuasion – all who truly value and appreciate the freedom, liberties, and rights we enjoy in America.Buy a copy and read it now!____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

THE CANIGLIA CASE: U.S. SUPREME COURT APPALLED BY ACTIONS OF RENEGADE GOVERNMENT AND LAX JUDICIARY

Nothing, absolutely nothing, defines the essence of what it means to be an American citizen more than the sanctity and inviolability of Selfhood; in other words, “personal autonomy.” The sanctity and inviolability of Selfhood, i.e., personal autonomy, logically entails freedom from unwarranted Governmental intrusion over person and personal effects. ‘Personal autonomy’ is the sine qua non of what it means to be an American.The notion of ‘personal autonomy’ is embedded in and is the raison d’être of the Nation’s Bill of Rights; the central theme running throughout it, and the predicate basis for it. Without it freedom and liberty in the truest, most basic, and rawest sense are impossible.The Nation’s very existence as a free Constitutional Republic, along with the inherent sovereignty of the American people and the supremacy of the American people over Government, depends absolutely upon it.Caniglia, as treated by both the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and the U.S. District Court of Rhode Island is a “case study” of the mishandling of U.S. Supreme Court precedent by lower Federal Courts—glaringly so. And, as a result, those lower Federal Courts erred in the decision they reached. This happenstance isn’t all that unusual, unfortunately,Too many lower Federal and State Courts—their judgment clouded by unyielding and flawed ideological, philosophical prejudices, impulses, and biases pertaining to the import and purport of the Bill of Rights—routinely misread and misapply U.S. Supreme Court rulings and holdings.This is likely intentional. Many of these Courts know exactly what they are doing but go ahead misapprehending and misapplying High Court rulings, misconstruing High Court reasoning, and blatantly ignoring High Court precedent anyway, cloaking their flawed reasoning, rulings, and logic in abstruse legalese. This is seen most prominently in the mishandling and misreading of the seminal Second Amendment Heller and McDonald case rulings. And it occurred most recently in the Fourth Amendment Caniglia case.

WHY DID THE U.S. SUPREME COURT DECIDE TO REVIEW THE CANIGLIA CASE?

It is rare for the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a case, any case, for review. Petitioners cannot, as a matter of right, demand that the High Court do so.Rarer still does the Court come to a unanimous agreement in cases that it does review. Nonetheless, all nine Justices came to a unanimous agreement in Caniglia.This happenstance is all the more remarkable today, where differences in jurisprudential and methodological approaches to case analysis exist and where philosophical differences between the two wings of the High Court are so vast and so stark as to make well-nigh impossible nine Justices coming to a mutual agreement on anything.A broad gulf exists between the liberal wing and the conservative wing of the Court, and that wide divide and bright-line are mirrored in Congress and in the Nation at large.Also remarkable is the fact that Caniglia is short in length and that several Justices wrote independent concurring opinions, joining in the concurring opinions of the others, suggesting they were much of one mind.For all these reasons and for one more, that the case at bar involves an issue that goes to the very core of a fundamental right, with ramifications on several others, the Caniglia case begs for close scrutiny.Caniglia speaks volumes about the importance—at least in some instances, as in the case at bar—where the liberal wing of the High Court, attaches as much importance to the sanctity and inviolability of one’s personhood, and, by extension, to one’s personal effects, as does the conservative wing of the Court.Also, as noted by many writers, Caniglia touches upon, albeit briefly, so-called “Red Flag” laws. Justice Alito mentions this in his Concurrence, asserting: “This case also implicates another body of law that petitioner glossed over: the so-called ‘red flag’ laws that some States are now enacting. These laws enable the police to seize guns pursuant to a court order to prevent their use for suicide or the infliction of harm on innocent persons. . . . Provisions of red flag laws may be challenged under the Fourth Amendment, and those cases may come before us. Our decision today does not address those issues.”Since the liberal wing of the High Court is loath to strengthen, or for that matter, loath to preserve exercise of the right of the people to keep and bear arms, Alito asserts his hope that the Constitutionality of “Red Flag” laws might at some point be addressed by way of the Fourth Amendment, rather than via the Second since the liberal wing is sensitive to the Fourth Amendment. He seems to direct this point to his brethren in the liberal wing. That would explain why he bothered to mention “Red Flag” laws in his Concurrence. After all, Petitioner's firearms were unlawfully taken from him, and Petitioner did raise the Second Amendment issue in his complaint at the U.S. District Court level. The Second Amendment was certainly implicated even if the Second Amendment issue wasn't addressed at the U.S. Supreme Court level.Red Flag laws are the sort of thing that the Progressive Left in our Nation and the far more extreme Marxist faction have pushed for in the last few years in their ongoing overzealous attack on the Second Amendment to the Constitution—a full-frontal assault on the Second borne from their singular, rabid abhorrence of it and of their marked frustration with it, exemplified in caustic and frenzied desperation to do away with it once and for all time. Progressives and Marxists see this as necessary because, for them, the very existence of an armed citizenry is an anathema, something totally at odds with their agenda, the ultimate goal of which is the realization of a single, all-powerful, one-world government. Achievement of that goal is impossible as long as the Nation’s Bill of Rights, and especially the Second Amendment, continues to exist.Progressives and Marxists all ascribe to the principles and tenets of COLLECTIVISM, encompassing a vast domain and array of political, social, economic, and cultural precepts all of which are antithetical to the core principles and tenets of INDIVIDUALISM, upon which the free Constitutional Republic was constructed. INDIVIDUALISM is the polar opposite of COLLECTIVISM, as the precepts of COLLECTIVISM are precisely what the founding principles and tenets of our Nation ARE NOT grounded on.The tenets and principles of INDIVIDUALISM extol the virtues and qualities of Personal Autonomy and Personal Responsibility. Morality emanates from an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, benevolent, loving, Divine Creator. COLLECTIVISTS deny this. They argue that morality is an artificial social and political and cultural construct, and they infer that the Nation’s Bill of Rights, are, as well, nothing more than a set of social and political constructs devised by Government that may be lawfully dispensed with by the Government that creates them.As the principles and tenets of COLLECTIVISM gain prominence and impetus in America, concomitant with control of the Legislative and Executive Branches firmly in the hands of Progressives and Marxists, the principles and tenets of INDIVIDUALISM lose prominence and recede into the background; eventually to be erased from the public's awareness. and, thence, from the public's memory.To accomplish the task of eroding the historical, cultural, and ethical foundations of our Nation, the Progressives and Marxists will leave neither Americans nor their institutions alone. They intend to use their power to encode an entirely new set of precepts in the psyche of Americans, grounded in the precepts of COLLECTIVISM. This requires controlling both thought and conduct. Progressives and Marxists intend to preclude all dissent and to corral and redirect all impulses toward an embrace of COLLECTIVISM.Progressives and Marxists argue that all behavior and thought that does not cohere to dictated Governmental norms is deviant and contrary to the running of a well-ordered society and must not and will not be tolerated. Progressives and Marxists insist that Americans must learn to behave to the New Order. Americans must acquiesce to Government encroachment in and intrusion upon all aspects of their lives.Naturally, Progressives and Marxists would be and are suspicious and jealous of those Americans who wish for nothing more than to be left alone and who insist on being left alone; Americans who cherish and revere above all else the right of the individual TO BE individual; free from suffocating rigidity of thought and conduct thrust upon them by the mindless drones of a NEW DOGMA, who compel blind, obsequious obedience to the dictates of “DIVERSITY, EQUITY” and INCLUSION—the new mantra of the Authoritarian Progressive and Marxist extremists.“RED FLAG” laws—the common vernacular for the more accurate, legal expression, “EXTREME PROTECTION ORDERS” —have become a prominent fixture in the mind of the Anti-Second Amendment, seditious Press and in the mind of other Anti-Second Progressive Left and Marxist elements in our Nation.With control of the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch of Government presently in the hands of Radical Democrats, these Progressives and Marxists have now launched a full-frontal assault on the Second Amendment, borne from their singular, rabid abhorrence and naked fear of it and from their marked frustration with it. Their recent actions, of which the American people have obtained as yet just a foretaste, are exemplified in caustic and frenzied desperation to do away with the Second Amendment altogether.Group Responsibility and, concomitantly, Group Dynamics are features of and critical to the tenets of Collectivism. Collectivism eschews the notion of personal autonomy and personal responsibility in favor of Group identity where the Self is immersed in and lost in the Societal Collective, the Hive.The impetus behind the enactment of and application of “Red Flag” laws is to quell even minimal threats to the cohesiveness of the Collective, the Societal Hive. To contain the “Threat to Self and Others” by dispossessing a person of his firearms is the purported goal of “Red Flag” laws, or so those who ascribe to their enactment say. But containing the perceived “Threat to Self and Others” is itself a basic tenet of Collectivism. For, personal autonomy is itself the basic threat to Self and Others.Progressives and Marxists believe that the Individual Self is only adequately contained when the Self is fully immersed in and merges with THE GROUP, in THE COLLECTIVE, i.e., when one loses Oneself to the Group. Only then is the threat of SELF ‘TO ITSELF’ and ‘TO OTHERS’ contained, neutralized. And, as the ‘FIREARM’ is identified with and emblematic of SELF and with “PERSONHOOD,” and with “PERSONAL AUTONOMY,” in a clear and emphatic way, the FIREARM, the “GUN,” must be removed from the “SELF.”And this brings us back to consideration of the critical importance of the Caniglia case.The truly frightening thing about the actions of the police in Caniglia, and with the lower Federal Courts’ handling of Caniglia is not the allusion to the creeping, dire influence of “Red Flag” laws on one’s personal identity and autonomy, horrible as those laws are, but, rather, that the Police didn’t even comply with those laws, and the lower Federal Courts didn't so much as suggest that they should have done so. The police didn't obtain a judicial warrant but unlawfully intruded upon Petitioner's home; unlawfully confiscated his personal property, his firearms; and unlawfully intruded upon Petitioner's right of personal autonomy, the right to the integrity of Body, Mind,  and Soul.This is particularly worrisome and distressing because Rhode Island did enact a Red Flag law. The Red Flag law of Rhode Island is found in the General Laws of Rhode Island, Title 8, Chapter 8.3—Extreme Protection Orders, Sections 8-8.3-1—8-8.3-14 et. seq.These laws lay out in minute detail:Filing of the Petition for an emergency protection order; Contents of the petition; Temporary Order Proceedings; Hearings on the Petition, including grounds for issuance, and the Contents of the Order; Service of One-Year Extreme Protection Orders; Termination, Expiration, including Renewal of Orders; Firearms Return or Disposal; Penalties; Liability; Required Notice on Orders and Confidentiality of Proceedings; Appeal; and Severability.In particular, R.I. Gen. Laws § 8-8.3-8, provides that, (a)Any firearm seized or surrendered in accordance with this chapter shall be returned to the respondent upon his or her request, within ten (10) days, when:(1) The respondent produces documentation issued by the court indicating that any extreme risk protective order issued pursuant to this chapter has expired, terminated, or has not been renewed. Respondent shall not be required to acquire any additional court order granting the return of seized or surrendered firearms; and(2) The law enforcement agency in possession of the firearms conducts a national criminal records check and determines that the respondent is not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm under state or federal law.Rhode Island’s Red Flag laws, had they been adhered to, would have provided at least a modicum of due process, at least in respect to Petitioner's firearms, because judicial intervention would have been necessary before the Government could dispossess an American citizen of his firearms. In Caniglia, though, the Red Flag laws weren’t applied. They could have been, but they weren’t.In Caniglia, the police not only unlawfully confiscated Petitioner’s firearms but forced a psychiatric evaluation on the Petitioner. The police unlawfully invaded the sanctity of Petitioner's house; they unlawfully deprived Petitioner of his personal property; they violated Petitioner's personal liberty in unlawfully compelling him to undergo a psychiatric evaluation; and they violated the sanctity and the inviolability of one's own Self in violation of the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The police further compounded their unlawful actions by refusing to return Petitioner's firearms to Petitioner upon Petitioner’s release from the hospital the following day when he lawfully demanded the police to release his firearms to him. Petitioner was compelled to retain the services of an attorney to retrieve his firearms.  Yet the lower Federal Courts saw nothing wrong in any of this. Ostensibly relying on a U.S. Supreme Court case that they took completely out of context, the District Court and U.S. Circuit Court essentially relied on common law, and, applying it ad hoc, deprived an innocent man of his fundamental right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of both personhood and personal property. The danger of reliance on interest balancing is immediately seen in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ assertion that,“Although an individual has robust interests in preserving his bodily autonomy, the sanctity of his home, and his right to keep firearms within the home for self-protection, these interests will sometimes have to yield to the public's powerful interest ‘in ensuring that 'dangerous' mentally ill persons [do] not harm themselves or others.’”Isn't it nice of the Court to acknowledge the right of personal autonomy, the sanctity of home, and the right to keep firearms within the home for self-protection? These are fundamental rights that the Court felt the Government, in its wisdom, could violate when “in ensuring that ‘dangerous’ mentally ill persons [do] not harm themselves or others.’”But, was Petitioner mentally ill? Hospital staff found he wasn't mentally ill, and promptly released him. And it certainly wasn’t so obvious to all the police who came to Petitioner’s house, as they didn’t think so. The facts as recited by the Court itself refutes the accuracy of the Court’s own inference:“When the officers asked him about his mental health, he told them ‘that was none of their business’ but denied that he was suicidal. Officer Mastrati subsequently reported that the plaintiff ‘appeared normal’ during this encounter, and Officer Russell described the plaintiff's demeanor as calm and cooperative. This appraisal, though, was not unanimous: Sergeant Barth thought the plaintiff seemed somewhat ‘[a]gitated’ and ‘angry,’ and Kim noted that he became ‘very upset’ with her for involving the police.The ranking officer at the scene (Sergeant Barth) determined, based on the totality of the circumstances, that the plaintiff was imminently dangerous to himself and others. After expressing some uncertainty, the plaintiff agreed to be transported by ambulance to a nearby hospital for a psychiatric evaluation.” Caniglia vs. Strom, 953 F.3d 112 (lst Cir. 2020).One might make a strong argument that Petitioner’s surprised reaction at seeing the police showing up at his house was completely understandable and rational.Justice Thomas who drafted the main opinion, laid out the serious error of both the Government and the Courts at the outset of the opinion. Justice Thomas opines,“Decades ago, this Court held that a warrantless search of an impounded vehicle for an unsecured firearm did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U. S. 433 (1973). In reaching this conclusion, the Court observed that police officers who patrol the ‘public highways’ are often called to discharge noncriminal ‘community caretaking functions,’ such as responding to disabled vehicles or investigating accidents. Id., at 441. The question today is whether Cady’s acknowledgment of these ‘caretaking’ duties creates a standalone doctrine that justifies warrantless searches and seizures in the home. It does not.”The horror of the Caniglia episode is that the Government deprived a man of his fundamental right to liberty, personal autonomy, personal property, the integrity of the body, and the integrity of Self, and, all of this without application made to the Court for a warrant that even the most draconian of a State's Red Law procedures required. When the police officers arrived at Petitioner's home, in response to Petitioner's wife's request, they should have stated to Petitioner's wife that, absent a warrant from the Court, they could not lawfully compel Petitioner to undergo a psychiatric evaluation; nor could they lawfully confiscate the Petitioner's firearms. Petitioner's wife had made clear she did not feel threatened by her husband, and there was nothing in Petitioner's behavior upon which the officers could reasonably infer that Petitioner constituted a threat either to himself or to his wife.The police should have informed Petitioner's wife that if she truly felt the need to dispossess her husband of his firearms she should petition the Court for an Order. That the police failed to adhere to the law, illegally compelling Petitioner to undergo an immediate psychiatric evaluation and then confiscating Petitioner's firearms anyway, when telling Petitioner that they would not do so, and in fact could not legally do so. The actions of the police and the acquiescence of the District Court of Rhode Island and of the U.S. Court of Appeals to the Government's actions, illustrate just how far this Nation has slid on the road to tyranny.This is not to suggest that “Red Flag” laws aren't to be seen as a dire threat to the Nation's fundamental rights and liberties. They are. But if, as in the Caniglia case, the State can deny a man his liberty and property, ignoring even the constraints of bad law, as “Red Flag” laws are, as Rhode Island’s Red Flag is, and if a heedless, feckless Judiciary gives the State the Court's imprimatur to establish that such actions are acceptable, even commendable, then our Nation has found itself in uncharted, perilous waters, unlike any our Nation has countenanced before.In Caniglia, the Government operated completely outside the law, invading and violating both a person’s sacred, inviolate “Self” and his personal property. This was awful. Yet, the Rhode Island Federal Courts, rather than calling out the Government for their lawless acts, demonstrated a profuse and odd proclivity to defend those lawless actions. If Government can get away with that, Government can get away with anything, for, at that juncture, neither the Constitution nor Statute means anything. Written laws are seen as nothing more than a set of guidelines at best, to be followed or not as the Government wishes; and, at worst they are simply empty vessels existing simply to give the populace a false sense of security from the specter of tyranny looming over it, even as that tyranny has long taken root and has acquired a firm hold on the Land, and long after the American citizenry has been demoralized, degraded, and subjugated.Since this is something the Progressives and Marxists want, what they are working toward, what they are attuned to, what they identify with, what they long for, they see the annihilation of a free Constitutional Republic and the debasement of a once-proud sovereign people as a good thing, a positive thing, as they never believe in the sanctity and inviolability of the human being anyway. All they believe in and are concerned with is the well-being of the COLLECTIVIST HIVE, and they believe a dominant and domineering, omnipresent, omnipotent, centralized Government, giving marching orders to the States and to the people is the best vehicle for ensuring the well-being of the HIVE, the HERD. And a BEEHIVE or a HERD OF ANIMALS is how these Progressives and Marxists perceive the American citizenry, and an overbearing,  Government is just the sort of mechanism for keeping an unruly herd of animals or a nameless, swarm of bees in check. But this is something that the U.S. Supreme Court—all nine Justices—could see manifesting in the actions of the Rhode Island police and in the reasoning and rulings of the U.S. District Court of Rhode Island and as those rulings were affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The High Court must have seen the danger a renegade Government and a conniving or oblivious Judiciary pose to the preservation of a free Constitutional Republic and to a Sovereign People when Government operates completely outside the law to deprive an innocent American citizen of his personal property and worse when that Government and Judiciary deprive a man of the sanctity and inviolability of bodily integrity and Personal Selfhood.To see even the liberal wing of the Court aghast by the actions of both Government and the Rhode Island Judiciary must give one pause.But how long will the U.S. Supreme Court retain even a vestige of independence if the Progressive Left and Radical Marxists, that presently control two Branches of Government, take firm control of the Third Branch as well?____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

NEW YORK SENATOR CHUCK SCHUMER’S RESPONSE TO RESIDENTS’ CONCERN OVER FUTURE CONGRESSIONAL “GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION” LEAVES MUCH TO BE DESIRED

Concerned American citizens, residents of New York, recently reached out to the new Senate Majority leader, Chuck Schumer (D-NY) expressing legitimate concern over Democrats’ goals pertaining to “gun control legislation.” They looked to the Senator for clarification and for assurances that the Democratic Party has no intention of gutting a sacred, cherished, fundamental, natural right codified in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.It was, perhaps, in the hope of hearing something new, something refreshing, something positive for a change—anything but the usual depressingly familiar contrived nonsense—that may have prompted the query to the new Senate Majority Leader in the first place. If that was the questioners’ hope, they were sorely disappointed. But give Schumer credit for something, as he did, at least, respond.In a carefully worded letter, ostensibly written with the intention to allay the legitimate fears of American gun owners that the right of the people to keep and bear arms remains an endangered species, one, indeed, on the verge of imminent extinction, under both a Democrat-Party controlled Congress and Democrat Executive Branch, the Senator merely regurgitates the usual Party-line patter, platitudes, clichés, and banalities that Americans had heard from the Democratic Party leadership ad nauseum for the past three decades, and now, as then, delivered in the same distant, smug, superficial, disingenuous, and oily tone. Schumer writes,“Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control legislation. Like you, I believe the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution's Second Amendment.While I respect the Second Amendment to the Constitution, I believe that we have a collective interest in keeping guns out of the hands of those who want to harm the innocent. I believe it is possible to strike a reasonable balance.I have long advocated for faster and more accurate background checks so legal purchasers can receive their guns quickly while ensuring criminals do not illegally purchase and possess firearms. After the tragedy at Virginia Tech in 2007, I took a leading role in passing the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act through the Senate. This legislation, supported by the National Rifle Association, authorizes funds for states to compile required background data into the shared NICS database. Ensuring that this information is comprehensive and up to date will better prevent criminals from illegally purchasing and possessing firearms.I have also fought to create new opportunities for law abiding citizens to exercise their right to use guns. That includes working to expand hunting grounds in NYS by creating a financial incentive to allow private landowners to allow hunters to access their property.”Senator Schumer’s letter demonstrates neither an understanding of the import of the sacred, fundamental, natural, and immutable right of the people to own and possess firearms nor does it exhibit a true appreciation for the level of concern that prompted Americans to contact Schumer.On the surface, Schumer’s letter may come across to some as polite and respectful, but beneath the surface, the letter exhibits a cold and callous impatience and an odd, almost clinical detachment, along with more than a smidgeon of condescension that detracts from what little of worth, if anything, can be derived from the letter’s content. And it is that content that we discuss here.But, before proceeding with an analysis of Schumer’s remarks, we wish to point out that subsequent to Schumer’s response to New York residents’ request for clarification as to Democrat Party’s intentions pertaining to antigun legislation, Joe Biden made abundantly clear to the American citizenry of his own intention to go after the right of the people to keep and bear arms. He did so in a carefully worded statement delivered to the Press in the Rose Garden, on April 8, 2021, and we assume that, whatever the Democrat-controlled Congress has in mind in terms of dealing with civilian citizen gun ownership and possession, those Congressional plans will be consistent with, and in full accord with, and likely coordinated with Biden’s Presidential actions.In his delivery to the Press, Biden declares that he will be signing several executive orders to address gun violence, and that he will be directing his administration to tighten restrictions on so-called ghost guns, or untraceable weapons that can be constructed from parts purchased online. See USA Today report on this. And, a CNN report on Biden’s Rose Garden address mentions that Schumer will be scheduling votes on gun legislation, demonstrating the Biden’s executive actions and Schumer’s Congressional gun legislation plans are being coordinated behind closed doors, after all.So, now after an initial flurry of executive orders and other actions rubber-stamped by Biden, the destroyers of our Constitution and Republic are, as we expected getting around, as we knew they would, to their pet fetish, attacks on the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and they are doing so in a robust fashion.Biden’s remarks delivered with the dry, emotionless, mindless hesitancy, one invariably witnesses from a person in the throes of incipient and imminent mental decline, will be dealt with in turn—along with his executive actions—once he signs them, in a subsequent Arbalest Quarrel article, along with his soon to be released executive orders.We now return to Schumer’s letter. Below are the key points Schumer makes. We first list those points and then address them.

• Schumer claims to support the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically saying, “Like you, I believe the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution's Second Amendment.”
• Schumer claims to believe that we—meaning all Americans— “have a collective interest in keeping guns out of the hands of those who want to harm the innocent. I believe it is possible to strike a reasonable balance,” he says.
• Schumer asserts that he has “long advocated for faster and more accurate background checks so legal purchasers can receive their guns quickly while ensuring criminals do not illegally purchase and possess firearms [that he] took a leading role in passing the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act through the Senate” and that NRA supported this.
• Lastly, Schumer exclaims how much he has “create[d] new opportunities for law abiding citizens to exercise their right to use guns. That includes working to expand hunting grounds in NYS by creating a financial incentive to allow private landowners to allow hunters to access their property.”

The first thing that strikes us and at once rankles us is Schumer’s pretense of being one of us, i.e., an American who cares deeply about safeguarding the sacred right of the people to keep and bear arms, when he most certainly does not.

THE FIRST ISSUE: ON THE MATTER OF SCHUMER’S “BELIEF”

Schumer says he “believes the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution’s Second Amendment.” But does he, really? No!The duplicity of Schumer’s remark is betrayed by and laid bare in the letter’s verbiage as well as in his Congressional “accomplishments,” during his lengthy tenure in Congress, both as a U.S. Representative in the House, and as a U.S. Senator. All of his actions against securing and preserving the right of the people to keep and bear arms are recorded for posterity.But, let us return to Schumer’s “belief,” and,  from a logical and semantic standpoint, elucidate the meaning of ‘belief,’ for believing something to be true, doesn’t make it true. Schumer says he “believes in the right guaranteed in the Second Amendment.”  That is all well and good if we take the assertion at face value, but the right of the people to keep and bear arms is based not on one’s mere belief that it is so, but on the fact that it is so.Whether one chooses to believe in the right or not, the right exists, irrespective of belief. Many “Americans” choose not to believe in the fact of the right, and loudly and endlessly say so, and with marked disdain. So, what? Does a raw belief in something or other, in the evidence of rational reflection, make it so?There are false beliefs and there are true beliefs. Beliefs that cohere with or correspond with states of affairs, a posteriori, are true, otherwise, they are false.There are also truths that follow from pure, reason, i.e., priori, as do mathematical truths and the existence of a Divine Creator.And there are beliefs derived from one’s value system that don’t reflect inherent declarative truths but say much about a person’s motivations that inform their actions.Democrats’ 180-degree about-turn on the issue of illegal immigration is illustrative of this. Democrat Party leaders, including Chuck Schumer and even a past U.S. President, Barack Obama, at the time a U.S. Senator from Illinois, clearly and cogently asserted, “We are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States—but those who enter the country illegally, and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law. They are showing disregard for those who are following the law. We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently and lawfully to become immigrants.” See, e.g., Townhall report.And recall Schumer’s own remarks on illegal immigration—a position cogently and categorically stated—but that he has since disavowed.“‘Illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple’ Chuck Schumer said during a 2009 speech. This was during Obama’s presidency, mind you. ‘People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens,’ he continued. ‘When we use phrases like “undocumented workers,” we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration.’” From the website, Political Insider.So, even accepting for purpose of argument, that Schumer is being honest about his belief here, however dubious, he need not stand by it, just as his early assertions about illegal immigration—delivered with an air of pomposity, false piety, and moral certitude and conviction, at the time, turned out to be as fleeting and as ephemeral as a wisp of smoke.By reducing the right of the people to keep and bear arms to mere belief, and perfunctorily asserting a belief in the right sans even a hint of conviction, Schumer is suggesting he could be wrong about his belief, and thereafter he can and would certainly claim he was simply mistaken about the very guarantee he claims he once believed in. Both he and the rest of the Party can then proceed merrily along their way to erode the American citizenry’s exercise of a fundamental right and continue to enact legislation to constrain the exercise of it. This includes legislation creating onerous costs in time and money, and further burdensome restrictions on use, contrary to private property protections codified in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Such restrictive gun legislation also intrudes on one’s privacy, in contradistinction to the unreasonable searches and seizures clause of the Fourth Amendment.At the moment Schumer, and other Party leaders, demur explicitly and categorically from denying the import of the fundamental, natural, and unalienable right of the people to keep and bear arms, outright, but give them time.Schumer’s goal and that of others who abhor the very notion of an armed citizenry is de facto repeal of the Second Amendment, accomplished through incremental action. By slowly, inexorably legislating away the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms, outright de jure repeal of the Second Amendment—is unnecessary, and at the moment given that outright repeal of the Second Amendment not only immensely difficult but empirically impossible. Once exercise of the right codified in the Second Amendment has been effectively nullified by Congressional legislation, U.S. Presidential executive action, and Administrative agency rulings, Schumer and others of his ilk can give up any pretense that they support the “guarantee” of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. At that point Schumer would have no compunction of admitting his error in ever having held to a “belief” in the Second Amendment, any more than he has disavowed his earlier remarks concerning his stance on illegal immigration. But, if one can change his belief system as easily and as one changes his clothes.But, seriously, if one were to take Schumer at his word that he does honestly believe in the “guarantee” of the Second Amendment, one would expect his past actions to align with the assertion. The website “On the Issues,” though paints a different picture.In a nutshell, this is what Schumer’s belief in the Second Amendment’s guarantee has amounted to when words are compared to actions:

• Enforce gun laws on national security grounds. (Dec 2003)
• Renew assault weapons ban - no legitimate use for them. (Nov 2003)
• Penalize cross-state gun traffickers. (Sep 2003)
• Cutting record-keeping limits fosters gun sale fraud & abuse. (Jun 2001)
• Voted YES on banning high-capacity magazines of over 10 bullets. (Apr 2013)
• Voted NO on allowing firearms in checked baggage on Amtrak trains. (Apr 2009)
• Voted NO on prohibiting foreign & UN aid that restricts US gun ownership. (Sep 2007)
• Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
• Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
• Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
• Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
• Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
• Close the Gun Show Loophole; restrict show sales. (May 2009)
• Ban large-capacity ammunition. (Jan 2013)
• Supports restrictions on right to bear arms. (Nov 2016)
• Co-sponsored background check for every firearm sale. (Jan 2019)

It is difficult to square Schumer’s Congressional actions that demonstrate a marked consistency for constraining the exercise of the right of the people to keep and bear arms with his assertion he believes in the guarantee of the Second Amendment. But, this point leads into the most critical issue that Schumer's letter raises which goes directly to the relationship between the Amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution and the fundamental Rights that the Amendments refer to. For, if THE GUARANTEE of the Second Amendment or of any one of the other Nine Amendments is predicated on, depends upon the incorporation of the Bill of Rights into the U.S. Constitution, this logically implies that preservation of—nay, the very existence of—the underlying Right depends upon or is a function of incorporation of the Amendment into the Constitution, itself. But, is that true? This certainly holds true for some Amendments—namely and particularly some of the Amendments ratified and thereupon incorporated into the U.S. Constitution subsequent to ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791, subsequent Amendments that, in language, are of a procedural nature or that did not entail fundamental, natural rights, unlike those comprising the Bill of Rights. But, does that assumption hold true across the board? Senator Schumer obviously thinks so as do other Democrat Party leaders. And they certainly treat the Bill of Rights as if this were true. But this is where Schumer and other Democrats of like mind are wrong, horribly wrong. And the consequences of their horrendous error allow for, provide the rationale for, are the functional basis for, and are at the very heart of present, furious and rapid actions of the Democrat Party leadership to erase the Bill of Rights; reinterpret the Constitution's Articles, and ultimately disassemble the U.S. Constitution; and if successful, this will lead, cannot help but lead, inevitably, inexorably to a very different America: transforming a free Constitutional Republic, an independent, sovereign Nation-State, a sovereign American people into something monstrous, something hideous; something outside the bounds of rationality; certainly something anathema to the founders' vision of a Nation founded on and grounded on the principles and tenets of Individualism. And the fruits of the founders' vision is seen and clearly recognized in a Nation, that, in the space of well less than three hundred years, has grown to become the most powerful, the wealthiest, the most beneficent, morally sound, economically healthiest, and geopolitically most secure Nation on Earth; truly the envy of the world. And, yet, Democrats and their benefactors are working toward, and lackadaisical Republicans are allowing to happen, a horrific disassembling of our Nation and the enslavement of our people, and in very short order.  

THE SECOND AND MOST CRITICAL ISSUE AND MOST DAMNING EVIDENCE OF SCHUMER’S DUPLICITY: SCHUMER CONFLATES THE NATURAL “RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS” WITH THE NUMBER RANKING OF THE RIGHT, “SECOND AMENDMENT,” PRESUMING, ERRONEOUSLY, THAT THE RIGHT, LIKE THE NUMERICAL CONVENIENCE, IS MANMADE RATHER THAN GOD-BESTOWED.

Schumer, as with other Democrats, have a penchant for claiming to respect the second Amendment but those claims are belied by their actions as they proceed to systematically disassemble exercise of the right embodied in it. They seemingly avoid the duplicity, hypocrisy, and inconsistency between assertion and action by attempting to draw a distinction, albeit tacitly, between the words, “Second Amendment,” and the Right embodied therein.This distinction is aptly illustrated in a passage from a Press Release of another anti-Second Amendment fanatic, Senator Leahy—one of several he released to the public during the U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Hearing of Sonia Sotomayor, back in 2009. Leahy states,“When the Supreme Court handed down its decision in District of Columbia v. Heller last year, I applauded the Court for affirming what so many Americans already believe: The Second Amendment protects an individual right to own a firearm.  The Heller decision reaffirmed and strengthened our Bill of Rights.Vermont has some of the least restrictive gun laws in the country.  One does not need a permit to carry a concealed firearm, and Vermonters are trusted to conduct themselves responsibly and safely. In my experience, Vermonters do just that. Like many Vermonters, I grew up with firearms and have enormous respect and appreciation for the freedoms that the Second Amendment protects. In fact, I own many firearms. Like other rights protected by our Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is a right I cherish.”Recall this is the same man who would later hold a mock Confirmation Hearing for Judge Merrick Garland. He held a mock Hearing to demonstrate his anger over then Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel’s decision not to hold a U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Hearing on Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, knowing full well that Garland, along with “Living Constitution” liberal-Wing Justices of the Court, and with the pseudo-Constitutional Originalist/Textualist, John Roberts, would shred the right embodied in the Second Amendment if given the opportunity to do so.See Arbalest Quarrel article, posted on May 31, 2016.  Merrick Garland’s track record demonstrates clear antipathy toward the right of the people to keep and bear arms. See also Arbalest Quarrel letter directed to Senator Grassley, posted on the Arbalest Quarrel, as an open letter, on April 27, 2016.It is a curious thing and more than a trifle baffling to witness the hypocrisy and rank disingenuousness of those Democrat Party Leaders, like Chuck Schumer, who declare support for the Second Amendment even as their policy goals and initiatives demonstrate their transparent disdain, contempt for, and even loathing of it.But then, it need be mentioned and emphasized that Democrats never refer to the existence of the right of the people to keep and bear arms apart from their reference through invocation of the words: “Second Amendment.” Does reference to the words, “Second Amendment,” in lieu of the words codified in the Second Amendment or as used together with the actual statement of the Right mean something different than straightforward assertion that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed? It does.

WHY DO PEOPLE LIKE SCHUMER CONSTANTLY CLAIM TO RESPECT THE “SECOND AMENDMENT” BUT REFRAIN FROM SAYING THEY RESPECT “THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS”?

Let’s go back to the opening statements of Schumer’s letter, the Senator says he believes in the Second Amendment and he goes on to say in that letter that he believes in the right to bear arms “as guaranteed in the Second Amendment.” He invariably mentions support for the “Second Amendment” but never support for the language Of the Second Amendment, codified IN the Amendment.Schumer is never heard to say in his letter to New York residents or, to the best of our knowledge and belief, anywhere else in any written or oral statement, during his tenure as a U.S. Senator or as a Congressman, that he accepts as true, and beyond refutation that“A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”Is this a mere quibble on our part? No, it isn’t!Schumer and others who detest the very existence of an armed citizenry very carefully refrain from referring directly to the language of the Right, OF and IN the Second Amendment, apart from mere reference TO the “Second Amendment.” This is no accident.The delineation of a sequence of Amendments, from One to Ten, in the Bill of Rights, are manmade constructs.These constructs MUST BE distinguished from the natural, GOD-GIVEN RIGHT, itself.The fact of the matter is the right of the people to keep and bear arms exists intrinsically in man. The Right is existent in man’s very being. It is bestowed on and in man by the loving Creator. The right of the people to keep and bear arms as a natural right is not a creature of Government and is not properly to be construed as such.But it’s easy for a person to mistake a GOD-GIVEN RIGHT for a MANMADE RIGHT, by equating the words, ‘SECOND AMENDMENT,’ a manmade construct and an obviously mutable and destructible construct, with the RIGHT, itself, contained in the AMENDMENT, which is immutable and indestructible.The importance of this distinction has legal and logical consequence and is not to be trivialized.Recall for a moment Biden’s assertion during his Rose Garden address, on Thursday, April 8, 2021, to the Press. Biden asserts, at one point, as his speechwriters required of him, that,“No amendment, no amendment to the Constitution is absolute. You can’t yell 'fire' in a crowded movie theater — recall a freedom of speech. From the very beginning, you couldn’t own any weapon you wanted to own. From the very beginning that the Second Amendment existed, certain people weren’t allowed to have weapons.” From Fox news story, titled, “Biden on the Second Amendment: ‘No amendment is absolute.’” It is one thing to say an “AMENDMENT” to the U.S. Constitution is not absolute, just as no “ARTICLE” in the U.S. Constitution is absolute. But this only means the Articles of the Constitution as with a delineation of numerical “Amendments” are both manmade constructs. Indeed some Amendments to the Constitution, such as the Amendment prohibiting alcohol, could be and were subsequently repealed. But, then, the prohibition on alcoholic beverages was never a natural, God-Given right.The RIGHTS comprising the Bill of Rights are NATURAL—preeminent and preexistent—and, so, are not subject to lawful Governmental manipulation that would transform a FUNDAMENTAL, RIGHT into a mere IMPERMANENT GOVERNMENT BESTOWED OR GOVERNMENT RESCINDED PRIVILEGE.Thus, while it is true that the Second Amendment, perceived as an enumeration in a table, didn’t exist prior to ratification of the Bill of Rights, as Biden asserts, this isn’t to mean the Right, itself, to which the Second Amendment refers didn’t exist prior to the Amendment. The Amendment serves merely as an explicit codification of the Right that always DID exist, just as the Divine Creator DOES ALWAYS EXIST.In that regard, recall that Biden’s writers did not have Biden assert, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” isn’t absolute. Why is that? Biden’s writers and handlers didn’t allow Biden to say that because the right itself, bestowed on Man by the Divine Creator, cannot lawfully be modified, abrogated, abridged, denied, or ignored. The Right, itself, IS ABSOLUTE.On some level, the writers of Biden’s Rose Garden speech must be aware of the distinction between the RIGHT, as DIVINE LAW, and the descriptor that merely alludes to it, because they know the framers understood the Rights, they codified in the BILL OF RIGHTS, are FUNDAMENTAL, and, by that understanding and, by that logic, must be construed as ABSOLUTE, even if Biden’s handlers, who prepared his Rose Garden address to the Press don’t accept the truth of the idea of fundamental, preexisting, natural, God-given Rights.Still, the Bill of Rights is grounded on that idea, and that idea is the foundation of the Nation as a free Constitutional Republic and of the sovereignty of the American people and of the bedrock principles of Individualism.But then, what are Americans to make of the inexorable whittling away of a fundamental Right and an American’s absolute right to exercise that Right?Any action to dilute a God-Given Right by Government, on the ground of arguably ostensible pragmatic necessity must be carefully considered from the perspective of the possible deleterious ramifications and effects of that Governmental action on the sanctity and inviolability of the individual Soul, as a person’s autonomy proceeds from and is governed by NATURAL LAW, not from MANMADE LAW. Pragmatic necessity may dictate restrictions on exercise of fundamental rights, but such pragmatic necessity is by definition unlawful, as contrary to Divine Law. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS DOESN’T EXIST BECAUSE OF OR FOLLOW FROM THE SECOND AMENDMENT. THE RIGHT EXISTS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT, i.e., THE RIGHT EXISTS IRRESPECTIVE OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT MANMADE CONSTRUCT. The Second Amendment, as a codification of Divine, Natural Law, ISN’T identical to, synonymous with, or a substitute for the Divine, Natural Law itself.Schumer, Leahy, and others mistakenly assume that since the right of the people to keep and bear arms was placed into a manmade Document, the BILL OF RIGHTS, and given a number—2—along with other RIGHTS that were each given numbers and also placed into that manmade Document, this must mean that the BILL OF RIGHTS, as with the ARTICLES of the CONSTITUTION, and all subsequent Congressional statutes, agency rules, and executive actions, orders, and edicts are to be construed as nothing more than manmade creations, subject to modification, or abrogation. So, they say. But such a notion is both false and dangerous.Such a notion is false because—and it bears repeating—fundamental Rights do not emanate from man; they emanate from God. And the notion is dangerous because it undercuts the very structure of our free Constitutional Republic that is predicated on the sovereignty of the American people over Government.Schumer and Leahy and others mistake the INSUBSTANTIALITY of the mere words, ‘Second Amendment,’ for the REALITY of what it is that the words denote: THE SUBSTANTIAL, FUNDAMENTAL, IMMUTABLE, ILLIMITABLE, ETERNAL, INDESTRUCTIBLE, NATURAL, DIVINE RIGHT, ITSELF. This is no small matter to reflect upon for it informs every action people like Schumer and Leahy and others take as they attempt to enact legislation to erode Natural Rights that are not lawfully susceptible to erosion precisely because Natural Rights aren’t themselves manmade laws.AMERICAN HISTORY BEARS OUT THE SINGULARLY IMPORTANT IMPERATIVE: NATURAL RIGHTS MUST NOT BE TOYED WITH.The words, ‘Second Amendment,’ as with descriptors for the other fundamental, natural, unalienable Rights, the First, Third, Fourth, and so on—as the framers of the U.S. Constitution knew full well—are merely an acknowledgment of the Divine nature of the Right to which the descriptor alludes; it is that and nothing more than that. American History reinforces the truth of this statement.Among the framers of the U.S. Constitution, there were two factions: The Federalists and the Antifederalists. But, unlike Chuck Schumer and other politicians today, the Constitution’s framers—whether they were Federalist or Antifederalist—all recognized the existence of a body of basic, natural, Rights that exist in Man, independently of Government. Chuck Schumer and the rest of the Democrat Party leadership do not recognize the existence of natural Rights that predate the Constitution and that preexist in Man.The Federalists felt a written document, delineating God-Bestowed Rights—as codification of natural law—need not and ought not to be codified. They felt codification of natural law is at best redundant and therefore unnecessary and, at worst, self-defeating because codification of natural law might be perceived as self-limiting in the sense that only those natural laws expressly stated could lawfully be exercised by Americans as only those rights, explicitly delineated, would be recognized by the Federal Government.The Antifederalists disagreed with the reasoning of the Federalists and, for Americans who truly cherish a codification of natural law, it is fortunate that the Antifederalists won the day.The Antifederalists realized that failure to codify natural law could very well lead future Government servants to deny the existence of natural law if such law weren’t explicitly set down and incorporated into the Constitution.Redundancy was of little concern to the Antifederalists. But if a document delineating natural law were to be perceived as self-limiting, as the Federalists rightfully feared and as they posed to the Antifederalists, that would be problematic, but it was a problem easily circumvented through the addition of language in the Bill of Rights.The Antifederalists resolved the problem by use of a catch-all Ninth Amendmentthat reads: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”Curiously, many legal scholars to this day give little credence to the Ninth Amendment precisely because they eschew the notion of natural law that has not been expressly articulated in the Bill of Rights, demanding therefor that natural law be delimited to those Rights explicitly stated and enumerated and not allow for others. But this just goes to show the Antifederalists’ concern over and demand for a codification of natural law was pertinent and prescient. Imagine if the Bill of Rights had not existed. You certainly wouldn’t hear people like Senators Schumer and Leahy claiming the existence of a natural right to keep and bear arms, would you?Schumer and Leahy only acknowledge the Right because they are compelled to do so, and they are compelled to do so precisely because of the law’s explicit delineation in the Bill of Rights. But, because they invariably refer to the manmade Descriptor of the natural God-given Right, either mistaking the Descriptor for the Right itself or doing so intentionally so as to deceive the public, they conclude, whether intentionally deceptively so or not, that the Right, like the Descriptor, ‘Second Amendment,’ is manmade. In this, they are either, unbeknownst to themselves, victims of logical error, or they know are cunning liars.But, whether through honest mistake or devious, diabolical deception, they plow ahead anyway. Thus, they have no compunction against enacting more and more restrictions on the exercise of the Right of the people to keep and bear arms embodied in the Descriptor, the Second Amendment, with the goal of eventually legislating the Amendment out of existence, and with that, denying to Americans exercise of a fundamental, natural, immutable, and indestructible Right that Government cannot lawfully deny Americans from exercising.But, because the Right is cast as an Amendment to the Constitution rather than as a mere Statute enacted by Congress, they recognize the difficulty in erasing the Right outright, much as they would like to do so. They are left to the need to nullify it slowly, incrementally, through Statute. This they have done and continue to do and that distresses them to no end.

THE THIRD ISSUE: SCHUMER’S OFFER OF PROOF OF SUPPORT FOR THE “SECOND AMENDMENT” IS DUBIOUS

In his letter Schumer says he backed the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 that was supported by the NRA. In fact, Schumer is correct that the NRA-ILA did support this Act, which amended NICS to provide federal funding for the maintenance of up-to-date mental health records in the national background check system. And it isn’t necessary to take Schumer’s word for this, because NRA’s argument for supporting this legislation is found on its own website.But, Schumer also makes much of the fact, in the letter that he has “long advocated for faster and more accurate background checks so legal purchasers can receive their guns quickly while ensuring criminals do not illegally purchase and possess firearms.” Fine. But now let’s jump ahead to the present day; and we see Democrat Party attempting to do what Schumer, in his letter, congratulates himself for not doing: creating roadblocks for American gun owners, to delay completion of firearms transactions; to create unnecessary paperwork, more time and monetary expense, and to create a federal firearms’ registry. See article in Second Amendment Daily News.If Schumer is being honest in his remarks to New York residents, as set forth in his letter, he would not support House bills, H.R. 8 and H.R. 1446, or any antigun bills like them that might happen to wend their way to the U.S. Senate.And we know that Senator Schumer is himself taking the lead in advancing further gun control measures in the Senate. In particular, we wish to ask Schumer why, in fact, he is working toward enacting more draconian gun background checks since he argues in his letter that he has already taken care of that issue. See recent Hill article:“Majority Leader Chuck Schumer pledged the Senate will take on gun control measures in the wake of Monday's Boulder, Colo., mass shooting that left 10 people dead, including a police officer.Schumer, D-N.Y., said the Senate will specifically move to expand gun background checks—an effort that has long evaded passage in the upper chamber.” It’s one thing to prevent criminals from having access to firearms. But why is it that the vast majority of antigun legislation targets tens of millions of average responsible, rational law-abiding citizens? Schumer dodges that question in his letter and dodges, as well, talking about his long history of promoting and supporting extraordinarily restrictive gun laws, impacting on every American but the career criminal.But let’s look closer at home at what Schumer is doing OR NOT DOING on behalf of his own native New Yorkers on familiar New York City home turf from whence he sprang.

THE FOURTH ISSUE: SCHUMER DOESN’T EXPRESS AN INTEREST IN PROTECTING THE CITIZENS OF HIS OWN HOMETOWN EVEN AS HE PROFESSES TO CARE ABOUT NEW YORK STATE

What is Schumer doing to get the Marxist Mayor, de Blasio to get off his duff. If de Blasio won’t allow the police to provide protection for the City, why doesn’t Schumer utilize his considerable clout as Senate Majority Leader to demand that de Blasio see to it that New York’s residents can at least be allowed, what natural law demands: the right to protect one’s own life and that of one’s family. Schumer has done nothing. The website, hotair has this to say about the problem New York residents have in attempting to obtain a firearm for self-defense.“Nervous residents of New York City (at least those who haven’t already fled the area) have been signing up in increasing numbers for firearms permits, many for the first time in their lives. Given the conditions on the ground there, that’s understandable. But making the decision to take advantage of your Second Amendment rights and actually laying your hands on a firearm legally are two very different things in the Big Apple these days. The New York Post is reporting that there’s a significant backlog in permit applications this season, and among those that do manage to get processed, nearly nine in ten are denied. The NYPD’s License Division hasn’t had too much to say about it, but local gun dealers suspect that this isn’t entirely accidental, while a variety of factors have led to the surge in demand.The Big Apple’s staggering surge in shootings amid the COVID-19 pandemic has led nearly 9,000 terrified New Yorkers to apply for gun permits — but the NYPD has signed off on fewer than 1,100, The Post has learned.The 8,088 applications for first-time pistol and rifle permits submitted since March 22 — when coronavirus-related restrictions went into effect — represent a threefold-plus increase over the 2,562 submitted between March 22 and Dec. 31, 2019, NYPD statistics obtained by The Post this week show.But only 1,087 applications were approved, far less than the 1,778 granted during the same period last year, according to the official data.There are two primary aspects of this phenomenon to consider, those being why approval rates are down and why demand is so high. The first one is the more disturbing of the two.Last year, between March and December, the gun permit approval rate was close to 70%. But during the same period in 2020, the approval rate is less than 14 percent. You might be tempted to believe that these figures represent a lot more people applying who turn out to have criminal records or other disqualifying factors, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. Some (probably larger) percentage are being denied, of course, but a lot of the applications simply aren’t being processed. One reason is that many officers from the NYPD’s License Division have been pulled off and sent to other assignments during all of the riots and unrest. But some cops believe that this slowdown is being at least partly driven from the top down.The cause for the surge in demand seems more obvious. Shootings and murders are up significantly in the city, as are robberies. There are still regular massive gatherings in the streets and you never know when the “peaceful protesters” are going to suddenly turn out to be an angry mob that’s trying to drag you out of your car and beat you. People are frightened and looking to defend themselves if they can.In fact, sources inside the NYPD have noted that this slowdown in permit approvals isn’t something that just cropped up recently. It began when the George Floyd protests kicked off in the spring.A source familiar with the situation said would-be gun owners began flooding the department with permit applications shortly after the May 25 police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, which sparked widespread protests, including in the Big Apple.Some of the local demonstrations led to riots and looting, including the ransacking of Macy’s famed flagship store in Manhattan’s Herald Square.No matter what combination of factors is driving this issue, it’s unacceptable. Many of the people who have seen their applications simply disappear into the void have no criminal record should easily have been approved. The Post spoke to owners of jewelry stores that have been robbed repeatedly during the riots who have waited all year for a permit and are unable to get one. But City Hall doesn’t seem the least bit interested in investigating and resolving this problem.”Schumer says not a word about this perplexing, confounding, and outrageous problem on his own home turf. Instead, Schumer concludes his letter by saying,“I have also fought to create new opportunities for law-abiding citizens to exercise their right to use guns. That includes working to expand hunting grounds in NYS by creating a financial incentive to allow private landowners to allow hunters to access their property.”Why should this even be required? It shouldn’t even register on the psyche. The right of private landowners to allow hunters access to their own property should follow from the natural right of a person to have exclusive use and enjoyment of his own property, anyway, both realty and personalty. To say that he will provide legislation to allow this implies that a person doesn’t have the right of enjoyment of his own property unless or until the Government deigns to permit exclusive use and enjoyment of one’s property. That is bizarre in a free-market Capitalist economy, as an extension of a free Constitutional Republic that extols the right of individual ownership of and enjoyment of one’s property, free from Governmental interference.In any event, while Schumer demonstrates an apparent desire to assist human beings to hunt animals on their own property—which they ought to be able to do anyway—he demurs from allowing human beings the effective ability to protect themselves from two-legged animals that prey on innocent humans on the streets of New York City and that threaten the innocent in their own homes and businesses.Good going Chuck! It’s nice to see that you have a good sense of just where your priorities need to be!____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

A DUAL COVERUP: SENILITY OF A PRESIDENT AND THE COMMISSION OF A FELONY BY A SON

What’s going on in our Country? Biden’s administrative staff attempts to cover up Biden’s serious cognitive decline with the ferocity of a mother hen guarding her chicks, and Biden’s secret service detail operates like strong-arm enforcers of an old-world crime syndicate to cover up his son’s illegal possession of and further misuse of a firearm.Recall that, back in December 2020, before shadowy powerful Globalist elites worked their sorcery to transform a clear Trump U.S. Presidential victory into a weird defeat—YE OLDE SWITCHEROO—Joe Biden appeared on Stephen Colbert’s comedy show, to defend his son Hunter who had some explaining to do regarding his taxes.“President-elect Joe Biden defended his son Hunter Biden amid an ongoing investigation into the younger Biden’s taxes.During an interview with Stephen Colbert that aired Thursday night, Biden sat alongside his wife, Dr. Jill Biden, and expressed ‘confidence’ in his son.In raising the subject of Hunter Biden, the liberal comedian Colbert claimed to Joe Biden that ‘the people who want to make hay in Washington are going to try to use your son as a cudgel against you.’‘How do you feel about that?’ Colbert asked. ‘And what do you have to say to those people?’‘I have, we have, great confidence in our son,’ Biden responded. ‘I am not concerned about any accusations being made against him. It's used to get to me. I think it’s kind of foul play but look, it is what it is and he’s a grown man, he is the smartest man I know. I mean, from a pure intellectual capacity – and as long as he’s good, we’re good.’” Fox News “Hot Topic” report, published, December 17, 2020 “As long as he’s [Hunter’s] good, Biden is good,” so said the present “President of the United States back in December 2020. Jump ahead to March 2021. It is quite apparent that neither Hunter Biden, nor his father, Joe, is doing “good.”“The President,” Joe Biden,” for his part, is doing exceedingly poorly. This we know; it is an open secret. Joe Biden obviously has acute and chronic dementia, probably Alzheimer’s, which is the most prevalent form of dementia, according to the CDC.And that sad excuse for a Press Conference, delivered on March 25, 2021, didn’t allay concerns about Biden’s precipitous mental decline. It only reinforced our suspicions about Biden. Look at his eyes when he speaks: vacant; indicative of Alzheimer’s disease. And this is the “President of the United States?” He’s an apt symbol of our Nation’s incipient decline under the Democrats and Bush Republicans.Juxtapose Donald Trump’s commanding presence before the cameras with Biden’s sorry performance at his first Press Conference, and perhaps his last; tame, lamblike; and one cannot but conclude that Biden has neither the bearing and character of a leader of a proud and powerful Country such as ours, nor the physical stamina and mental acuity to stand firm against our Nation’s competitors and enemies: just what the neoliberal Globalist elites and Radical Left Marxists and Anarchists wanted, and what the American people now have.Take a look at this October 2020 article in the New York Post:“Former White House physician Ronny Jackson told reporters Tuesday he was ‘convinced’ that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, 77, does not have the cognitive ability to be commander-in-chief. . . .”“As a citizen, not as a candidate running for Congress, but as a citizen of this country, I’ve watched Joe Biden on the campaign trail and I am concerned and convinced that ‘he does not have the mental capacity, the cognitive ability, to serve as our commander-in-chief and our head of state,’ he went on.”See also article from the Alzheimers Association. See also Webmd and health digest. Health digest points out that: “According to the Alzheimer's Association, the disease progresses as time passes, with symptoms of memory loss and recall of even simple tasks growing worse. There is no cure, and treatment focuses on managing symptoms and slowing the progression.”

HOW TO DEAL WITH A PERSON WHO HAS ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE

Notice how the Press and staff indulge Biden, so as not to upset him; how deferential they are toward him. But then, that is the key when dealing with a person who suffers from Alzheimer’s disease. That is how a caregiver should treat a person suffering from that debilitating mental disease. Indulge that person. Put that person at ease. Never anger or confuse that person. And that is what Biden’s handlers and the Press do. See article in better health while aging: Surviving Alzheimer's Managing Difficult Behaviors Cheatsheet“Put the person with dementia's feelings first. He or she cannot change; YOU have to change, or you have to change the immediate environment.  Collect yourself (no matter how irritated you are). People with dementia are sensitive to others' moods and will pick yours up and mirror it. So take a deep breath. Count to 3. Or do a silent scream in the bathroom. Remind yourself, ‘It's not him/her. It's the dementia!’  Avoid making the mistake of assuming they'll forget your angry moment. Although it's true that people with dementia tend to quickly forget what was said, the emotional impact of an encounter (negative OR positive) lasts much longer! Do: Approach slowly and from the front. You're less apt to startle, confuse, or provoke. Play back the person's emotions and ask questions: ‘You sound upset.’ ‘You look sad. Can I help?’ ‘I know this bothers you. Let's see what I can do.’  Try developing a go-to mantra for soothing: ‘I'm here.’ ‘Everything's OK.’ ‘Not to worry, love.’  Make your body language match your words. Avoid sighing or rolling your eyes. Smile, nod, use a friendly tone, relax your posture. Unspoken factors convey more than half of any message. Try touching an arm or shoulder.” Golden Carers say that cue cards are a good mnemonic aid for those suffering from early-stage Alzheimer’s.“Cue Cards are inexpensive to make and may be tailor-made to the needs of each individual. They are a feasible alternative to hi-tech, expensive tools.

• Cue cards should be in black and white and with or without pictures depending on the individual.
• Cue cards should be written in a large font (as large as the need be) so the individual is able to read them easily.
• Cue Cards should contain words or short sentences.
• Stick to one medium: stick figures, line drawings, cartoon-like, or pictures (Remember that people with advanced dementia are better off with black & white cue cards).
• Laminate for endurance.” 

EVIDENCE THAT SOMETHING IS VERY MUCH AMISS IN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS EVIDENT FROM THE FACT THAT THE ADMINISTRATION ISN’T TO BE REFERRED TO AS THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION ANY LONGER, BUT AS THE BIDEN-HARRIS ADMINISTRATION

Apart from Biden’s odd reference to Kamala Harris as “The President,”—which might have been discussed in closed-door meetings with Biden, suggesting that Biden will soon be stepping down, which might also explain why the mentally confused Biden mistakenly referred to Harris as “the President”—the public recently learned that the “Biden Administration” is now, officially, the “Biden-Harris Administration.” And, during the Press Conference, as if to allay any concern about Biden's precipitous and obvious mental decline, Biden says he plans on running for a second term in 2024. The question about his plans came from one of the friendly Press reporters who likely was tasked or pegged beforehand, in this highly orchestrated Press Conference, to ask that very question, even as Biden, through his surrogates had said, back in December 2019, according to US News and World Report, that Biden would only serve one term. And this term will probably be abruptly curtailed in the next few months, given the rapidity of Biden's decline, which probably is due in great part to the stress of merely sitting as a cardboard cutout in the Oval Office, as Biden is given little to do except, occasionally, to come before the public to mouth a few nonsensical platitudes and false pronouncements in attempt to placate a skeptical American public. CBS News reports,“President Joe Biden said Thursday that it is his ‘expectation’ to run for reelection in 2024. The president was asked if he planned to run for a second term during his first White House press conference, which took place 65 days after he took office.‘My plan is to run for reelection. That's my expectation,’ Mr. Biden said in response to a question from CBS News chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes. The president added that he ‘would fully expect’ that Vice President Kamala Harris will remain on the presidential ticket, and called her ‘a great partner.’” Biden's handlers are working on the fly to change the structure of the Administration to reflect Biden's swift mental decline and to create the illusion of continuity. The Biden  Administration thus devolves into the Biden-Harris Administration.BPR reports,“The White House has now begun officially referring to President Joe Biden’s administration as the “Biden-Harris administration” and has instructed federal agencies to begin referring to it as such as well.”And then what? Is the Biden-Harris Administration to devolve into the Harris-Biden Administration? It is more than just a little disconcerting to hear this. This state of affairs isn’t good for the Country. It isn’t good at all. This isn't something that can be made palatable to the public. For, never before in our Nation’s history has the President of the United States officially disclosed the express sharing of power of the Executive Branch. In fact, this sharing of power can’t ve lawfully be done, even as it becomes plain, that Democrats do not respect the U.S. Constitution, but twist and contort and distort to cohere with their ultimate goal and that of their Globalist puppet masters: transforming a Free Constitutional Republic into a totalitarian oligarchical dictatorship, to be merged at some point into a much larger transnational governmental scheme. But for the nonce it is clear that, so long as we have a United States Constitution, there can be no lawful sharing of power in the Executive Branch of Government. The Constitution is explicit about this.The first sentence of Article 2, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution, sets forth succinctly and categorically that, “The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” There is only one Chief Executive of our Nation and only one who can serve at any one time. If the Chief Executive cannot serve, for one reason or another, then the Vice President of the United States serves in his stead. That is the salient reason why the Constitution makes specific reference to a Vice President, who then presides over the Executive Branch if or when the President is unable to continue serving as President. Thus, The President is either in or he’s out. The President either serves as President or he doesn’t and steps aside. Now, this is not to say that the President cannot delegate power. Indeed, that is the principal purpose of having a “principal officer in each of the executive departments,”  i.e., Cabinet Level officers, as the Constitution also provides for in Article 2, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution.”But, Vice Presidents, themselves, traditionally have had little power. The Constitution does not even suggest that they have an advisory role, as advisory roles go to Cabinet-level officers of the Executive Branch of Government, as the Constitution provides for in Article 2, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. Consider these quotations from “Everyday Power” that exemplify the lack of a defined role for the person who serves as Vice President during the tenure of the President:

• “I do not propose to be buried until I am dead.” — Daniel Webster, turning down the vice presidency in 1839

• “Being vice president is comparable to a man in a cataleptic fit; he cannot speak; he cannot move; he suffers no pain; he is perfectly conscious of all that goes on but has no part in it.” — Thomas R. Marshall, vice president under Woodrow Wilson

• “I am vice president. In this I am nothing, but I may be everything.” — John Adams

• “The second office of this government is honorable and easy, the first is but a splendid misery.” — Thomas Jefferson in 1797, when he was vice president

• “I would a great deal rather be anything, say, professor of history, then vice president.” — Theodore Roosevelt

• “I have no interest in it. Might very well turn it down, indeed, and probably would.” — Al Gore

• AND THIS ONE FROM JOE BIDEN: “I never had a boss. I don’t know how I’d handle it.” – Joe Biden, when asked in about the possibility that they might select him to be Barack Obama’s running mate.

The President can, of course, delegate power to his Vice President as he sees fit, as the U.S. Constitution is silent about this, and delegation of power to the Vice President isn't inconsistent with the dictates of Article 2. Under the Bush Administration, George W. Bush, the 43rd President of the United States, who served from 2001 through 2009, did delegate substantial power to his Vice President, Dick Cheney. That was probably the first time in American history that a Vice President actually exercised considerable power in the capacity of Vice President.It was common knowledge that Cheney wielded considerable power within the Executive Branch, as the left-wing periodical, “the Nation” pointed out, going so far as declaring that Cheney was the most powerful Vice President in the Nation’s history. Be that as it may, it was understood that, despite wielding substantial power, Cheney was still only the Vice President. It was George W. Bush, not Dick Cheney who always appeared front and center before the public, declaring the decisions that he, as U.S. President made, as well that should be for it was George Bush, not Dick Cheney, who was elected U.S. President; and it was clear to the public that George Bush was in fact “THE” U.S. President. There was no sharing of power between the two to even suggest that there existed a Bush-Cheney Administration.  THE U.S. CONSTITUTION ABSOLUTELY FORBIDS THE SHARING OF U.S. PRESIDENTIAL POWER IF THAT IS TO MEAN THAT THE VICE—PRESIDENT OR ANY CABINET LEVEL OFFICIAL MAKES DECISIONS CONTRARY TO THE WILL OF OR IRRESPECTIVE OF THE WILL OF THE U.S. PRESIDENT.DELEGATION OF SOME ACTIVITIES OF THE PRESIDENT? YES, AS THE PRESIDENT FROM TIME TO TIME SO WISHES. BUT SHARING OF POWER? NO! ABSOLUTELY NOT!But at this moment in time, it is fair to ask whether the statement by “the Nation” publication, referred to supra is still true, now that Harris and the Cabinet have taken over the basic functions of the Presidency and that Kamala Harris and Joe Biden are now truly sharing power, i.e., sharing the decision-making authority as the official categorization of a “Biden-Harris Administration” clearly suggests and is obviously meant to suggest.

IF BIDEN’S COGNITIVE ACUMEN IS INDEED IMPAIRED, AS CLEARLY IT IS, DOESN’T THE AMERICAN PUBLIC HAVE A RIGHT TO BE TOLD THAT, AND SHOULD NOT BIDEN IMMEDIATELY STEP DOWN?

Back in March 2017, The Hill pointed out that,“Information that could be damaging is often withheld from the public. When Woodrow Wilson suffered a stroke, his wife and physician covered up his condition rather than installing a designee to assume the powers of the office. FDR’s disability from polio was masked; questions still linger over whether Ronald Reagan’s Alzheimer’s disease had begun to affect him in his second term.It would seem that the public’s right to know would outweigh the right to privacy of the candidates, which begs us to wonder if there should be a standard procedure to determine and reveal the medical history and status of presidential candidates, including their mental health.The same logic applies to determining when a sitting president is unfit to serve. The 25th Amendment of the Constitution provides for succession if the President dies, resigns or is unfit to discharge her/his duties. However, there are no specific criteria to define the latter, an issue that is further compounded when it concerns mental disability.The 25th Amendment has been invoked six times since its ratification, from reasons ranging to the scandals of the Nixon administration to presidents who underwent medical procedures requiring general anesthesia. No one would argue with the possibility of a disabling presidential infirmity for reasons of mental disorder. Psychosis, dementia, depression and addiction could be severe enough to impair a president's ability to discharge his or her duties. However, we lack a process and criteria to apply this constitutional mechanism for reasons related to mental function.”Since assuming Office, has the public ever received a pronouncement from Biden’s attending physician as to the state of Biden’s physical and mental health? Apparently not!But, back in July 2020, The American Spectator reported this about Biden:“It’s clear that Joe Biden is showing signs of mental aging: his speech is garbled, his sentences diverge into asides without coherence, and his numbers and names are scrambled in laughable ways (‘We have 120 million dead from COVID!’ he informed Americans last month).Biden, who was first elected to the Senate 48 years ago, has been known for decades for his verbal gaffes. Democrats usually exploit this flaw to explain away their presidential candidate’s confused speech, claiming his lackluster abilities are evidence of a life-long quirk rather than a sign of cognitive decline.‘It’s not a product of age; it’s just who he is,’ wrote Paul Waldman in the Washington Post last April.” Biden’s mental state hasn’t plateaued since assuming Office. It has only gotten worse, much worse!Pelosi and other Democrats say nary a word about that, but they weren’t reluctant about raising false flags about Trump, during his tenure in Office.As early as October 2017 Democrats raised the false and ludicrous spectacle of Trump’s mental acumen. NBC News reported,“The 25th Amendment is the ultimate constitutional ‘check’ — a corrective mechanism for an American president who is physically or psychologically unable to lead. Most important, it grants legal authority to those closest to power — first, the vice president and Cabinet members, then members of Congress — to stage an intervention. At the very least, these individuals are authorized to call a temporary timeout if the president is judged unfit to govern. Is America today in need of such an unprecedented intervention?” And, three years later, Pelosi and the Democrats were still at it: Heavy.com reported,“During a Thursday interview with Fox, President Donald Trump said, “I’m back because I am a perfect physical specimen and I’m extremely young. And so I’m lucky in that way.”Speaking at her weekly press conference, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded by saying that Trump was ‘in an altered state’ and ‘the disassociation from reality would be funny if it weren’t so deadly.’Pelosi then announced that Democrats would meet on Friday to talk about the 25th Amendment, which, as The Guardian pointed out, ‘contains a clause that allows a president to be removed from office against his will because of physical or mental incapacity.’” Trump fired back at the Speaker, tweeting, ‘Crazy Nancy is the one who should be under observation. They don’t call her Crazy for nothing!’”And, as late as January 9, 2021, the Los Angeles Times shamelessly, scandalously,  disseminated disinformation, asserting that Trump has a ‘delusional disorder.’“As the gatekeepers of our democracy, they need to inquire about whether Trump is potentially dangerous as the commander in chief — including raising questions about whether he has a reality-distorting mental state.One such condition is ‘delusional disorder,’ which is unique among psychiatric conditions in that the area of dysfunction can be highly circumscribed. An individual with this disorder often has a single fixed delusion and otherwise functions normally, setting it apart from illnesses such as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, in which the patient typically experiences broad impairment in social and occupational functioning.” Yet, the Press and the White House remain painfully silent about Biden’s obvious slide into serious dementia, and yet gets seemingly distraught when Russia provides the truthful information that the U.S. Government and the Press deny the public access to, claiming Russia is engaged in a campaign of disinformation. ABC News asserts,“The Department of Homeland Security has found that Russia is spreading disinformation regarding former Vice President Joe Biden’s mental health, according to a DHS bulletin obtained by ABC News.ABC News previously reported that DHS withheld publication of an intelligence bulletin warning law enforcement agencies of a Russian scheme to promote ‘allegations about the poor mental health’ of Biden. The draft bulletin, titled ‘Russia Likely to Denigrate Health of US Candidates to Influence 2020 Election,’ was submitted to the agency’s legislative and public affairs office for review on July 7. The analysis was not meant for public consumption, but it was set to be distributed to federal, state and local law enforcement partners two days later, on July 9, the emails show. It was not— and after an uproar in the media an updated version of the bulletin was released Tuesday, providing details on what the Russian operation looks like.” Granted Russia has its own agenda, but, because Russia makes reference to Biden’s ‘poor mental health,’ is this is to mean that Russia’s pronouncements are, ipso facto, false? Rather, isn’t the U.S. Government and the “free Press” engaging in its own disinformation campaign by deliberately denying the public access to Biden’s serious mental decline? And, if so, why; what does this portend for a free Constitutional Republic and a sovereign people?Honestly, who has the public more to fear? Russia or a seditious Press and a renegade U.S. Government that is dead-set on destroying its own Nation; in emasculating its own military; attacking its own people; denigrating its own history, heritage, and culture; tearing down its own geographical borders and opening the Nation up to a flood of tens of thousands of diseased and poverty-stricken illegal itinerant aliens, international crime cartels, and an assortment of international terrorists; capitulating to a powerful, belligerent China, and to ruthless billionaire neoliberal Globalist elites, and Radical Leftist Marxists and Anarchists; brainwashing the American public; dumbing down America’s youth; barricading the U.S. Capitol with high walls, razor wire, thousands of heavily armed troops and police; engaging in a National terror campaign targeting Americans for holding “wrong” political beliefs, and creating out of whole cloth a new category of persona non grata, referred to as a “domestic” terrorist; and tearing apart the U.S. Constitution and the fundamental, unalienable, immutable, illimitable rights and liberties of the American citizenry.The official declaration of a new Administration, only two months in, and tagged the Biden-Harris Administration is not something to treat as trivial, and to dismiss as unimportant as the idea of shared power in the Executive Branch of the United States was never contemplated by the framers of the Constitution and is clearly illegal under Article 2 of the Constitution. See argument, supra. And it definitely is not cause for celebration.Kamala Harris does not herself appear to suffer from acute dementia, but her judgment definitely raises cause for concern. Here, as reported by Fox News, is a person who giggles at the thought of visiting the Southern Border, as if the colossal mess at the Southern Border is a laughing matter, and yet she is the point person whom Biden’s handlers now have placed in charge of the crisis and chaos on the Nation’s Southern Border, as reported by The Blaze. And, the American public is supposed to feel all warm and bubbly, and safe and secure, knowing that Kamala Harris is now in charge of the crisis and chaos at the Border. Really? And what other major foreign and domestic policy decisions is Harris making on her own that one would expect of the President, as Article 2 of the United States Constitution requires? Well, she discusses policy directly with foreign leaders. See Washington Times article. Taking calls from and meeting with foreign leaders a job specifically for the United States President, not the Vice President. After all, IT IS THE U.S. PRESIDENT, not the Vice President, who takes the Oath of Office, as set forth in Article 2, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, to wit:— “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”So, we have some idea what Kamala is doing. But we must ask: what is it that Joe is doing? What, EXACTLY, does Joe Biden do with his time these days? Joe doesn’t tell us. It is his Press Secretary, Jen Psaki, who tells us. And Psaki informs us that, as the Washington Times reports in the same Washington Times article, supra, the staff “keeps him pretty busy.”“‘The President himself would tell you that we keep him pretty busy, and he has a full schedule this week,’ Ms. Psaki told reporters in a Feb. 8th press briefing. Note the phrasing, ‘we’ the staff, keep the president busy.”The staff keeps Joe busy with a “full schedule”? The staff keeps Biden busy doing what?Whatever it is, apart from signing documents that Biden’s staff gives to him to sign, we would like to know what other things Biden does as purported leader of the Nation, and we would like to hear that from Joe, not from his Press Secretary lest the public is left to reasonably surmise that, whatever it is Joe Biden does with his time these days, it is pretty clear he isn’t running the Country.Maybe the staff keeps him busy playing with “Tinker Toys” or with coloring books. It’s certainly a fair question to ask of the President: Just what it is this man is doing in the name of the American people, as the ostensible leader of the Nation in accordance with Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution?The public never had to ask that question of Trump’s staff. For all the vicious, vile, virulent attacks on Trump, no one ever needed to ask who it was that was running the Country.The seditious Press abhorred Donald Trump, but it wasn’t because the Press thought Trump wasn’t leading the Nation. They knew full well Trump was performing his Article 2 duties as U.S. President, and they hated him for it. They hated President Trump because he wasn't taking orders, and wouldn't take orders from the unelected “experts” of the Federal Bureaucracy. Well, that's just too bad. The electorate didn't vote Trump into Office so that he would simply be a good little fellow who, like Bush, or Clinton, or Obama, would “know his place,“ and would allow the “experts” to run the Executive Branch of Government. That's not why the American people voted Trump into Office. That wasn't what the public expected of or wanted from him. And that wasn't what the framers of the U.S. Constitution ever expected of a U.S. President either. It is the U.S. President who is expected to be the policymaker and the decision-maker, setting the course of the Nation in accordance with the will of the electorate, consistent with the authority vested in the U.S. President under Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution.  If an “expert” wishes to play the part of decision-maker, rather than a mere advisor, then that “expert” should run for elected Office himself, and attempt to convince the public that he is the best man to set policy for the Nation as President of the United States. Unelected, so-called “experts,” ever lurking in the shadows, should not be dictating policy for the Nation as behind-the-scenes surrogates for the Commander-in-Chief of the Nation. They are policy advisors only. They are not policymakers, and they are not decision-makers. Biden is neither a man with vision, nor policymaker, nor decision-maker. He is simply a messenger boy and a decidedly poor one at that as is clear just from listening to the man. Through garbled, incoherent speech, anyone can see that he hasn't a clue what it is he's talking about. And Kamala Harris is hardly more convincing as a messenger boy.And this brings us back now to Biden’s son, Hunter, whom Joe refers to as “the smartest man I know”—this coming from a man with acute dementia. If true, if Hunter is such an intellectual whiz, maybe Hunter should be running the Executive Branch of Government. But then, again, maybe not.This just out as reported by the New York Post:“The Secret Service intervened in an investigation into a 2018 incident involving Hunter Biden and his girlfriend at the time — his former sister-in-law, Hallie — in which she took his gun and tossed it into the trash, thinking he was going to kill himself with it, according to a report.When she returned to retrieve the gun, it was gone, Politico reported on Thursday.Police in Delaware launched an investigation in case the gun, left in a trash can across from a high school, had been used in a crime, the report said.But Secret Service agents contacted the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork recording the sale, Politico reported.The owner, Ron Palmieri, at first balked at the request, suspecting they were attempting to hide Hunter’s ownership of the gun, but ultimately complied and turned over the documents to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the government agency that oversees federal gun laws.The Secret Service said it has no record of agents investigating the incident and said President Biden was not under protection at the time.Then, several days later, the gun was returned by a man who searches trash.There were no charges filed or arrests in the incident.The role of the Secret Service remains unclear.Hunter answered ‘no’ to the question on the transaction asking, ‘Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?’ . . . .Lying on the form is a felony.” Okay, so here we have a man, Joe Biden, who wants and intends to take away “assault weapons” from the civilian population—that is to say semiautomatic firearms—from tens of millions of law-abiding, responsible, rational American citizens. And, the public learns that Joe’s son, Hunter—someone who suffers from chronic illicit drug addiction as Hunter Biden readily admits, and as the Guardian newspaper, for one, reports—has gotten hold of a handgun which he isn’t supposed to have possession of precisely because of his addiction, but obtained a gun anyway because he lied on Federal ATF Form 4473, Firearms Transaction Record (Form 4473) regarding his drug addiction. Lying on ATF Form 4473 is a felony. This is bad enough. But what is worse is that the Secret Service, operating ostensibly on behalf of the President of the United States, has, it is apparent, misused its substantial power and authority in an inglorious, disgraceful attempt to cover up the President’s son’s felony, and, in doing so, compounding the wrongdoing and making a blatant hypocrite of Joe Biden in the bargain.Biden, you see, prides himself on being tough on gun issues and on keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them. It's the one thing, perhaps the only thing, that he has retained any lasting memory of and conviction about. And, given his recent remarks, both he and Harris seek to impose new, extremely stringent firearms measures on responsible, rational, law-abiding citizens—making it unlawful for the average, responsible American civilian citizen to possess any semiautomatic firearm.What, then might American citizens make of all of this?We have seen duplicity and hypocrisy by Democrats and their friends in the Federal Bureaucracy before, and with disturbing regularity. And that duplicity and hypocrisy continue.The public has certainly seen more than a few examples of egregious unethical and illegal behavior on the part of high-level DOJ and FBI, who have made unethical and illegal behavior common practice. During the entirety of Trump’s tenure in Office, the DOJ and FBI became a political tool of those both within the DOJ and FBI and outside it who waged a concerted war to destroy Trump, his Administration and those closest to him; all in a shameful, ignominious, unlawful attempt to undermine the will of the electorate who voted him to Office.And now we see apparently unlawful behavior on the part of the Secret Service running interference for the President and his wayward son to hide the evidence of Biden’s son’s illegal purchase of a firearm.With scarcely more than two months into the so-called Biden Presidency (now Biden-Harris Presidency)—the coup d’état completed—it wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say our Country is going to Hell in a Handbasket.Excuse us. Our Country isn’t going to Hell in a Handbasket; we are already there!____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

THE BIDEN PLAN FOR THE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REMAKING OF THE AMERICAN LANDSCAPE: PARTS ONE THROUGH FOUR OF ESSAY

COMPREHENSIVE ESSAY ON THE PRESENT STATE OF AFFAIRS IN AMERICA UPON THE  ASSUMPTION OF THE GREAT IMPOSTER TO THE OFFICE OF THE U.S. PRESIDENCY IN 2021

A RADICAL PLAN FOR THE POLITICAL, SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICA

PART ONE

AN UNPRECEDENTED BLAST OF UNILATERAL ACTIONS WARN OF TYRANNY AHEAD FOR THE NATION

During his first two weeks in Office, Joe Biden signed over 40 executive orders or similar executive edicts. And he isn’t done. A few days into February and we can expect to see 50 or more Presidential executive orders and other edicts.Even 40 edicts far exceed the number signed by any previous U.S. President during his first days in Office. In fact, during his first five days in Office, Biden’s total is far greater than the signed orders of three recent Presidents, combined: Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, as reported by the website, Great American Politics:“As of January 25, 2021, Biden has ‘issued 33 executive orders, actions, proclamations, memoranda and agency directives,’ according to CNN. Twenty-one of these, according to the White House website, are executive orders.President Donald Trump signed four in his first week in 2017; President Barack Obama signed five in 2009; President George W. Bush signed none in his first week in 2001; and President Bill Clinton signed one in 1993.”If Biden is remembered for little else, he likely will be remembered for the sheer number of executive orders he signed during his first few days as President.Of course, Biden didn’t draft these orders and edicts, himself. Biden’s staff did, and, likely, these documents were drafted well before Biden took the Oath of Office. All they needed was Biden’s signature, his imprimatur as President. And with great pomp and flourish before the cameras, he gave the public that.A propaganda machine of Joe Biden’s Party, the cable “news” station, CNN, lays out the gist of these official orders and edicts. Many involve the reversal of Trump’s policies and initiatives, and they all lay the groundwork for an expansive Radical Left agenda.Biden has, to date, signed several orders pertaining to immigration, the environment, the Chinese Communist coronavirus, and health; one order each for the census, ethics in government, and government regulation; and a couple pertaining to the Radical Left’s newest invention, something called ‘equity,’ apparently not to be confused with ‘equality.’  Democrats in Congress and in Biden’s Administration have mentioned the term ‘equity’ incessantly of late, albeit without bothering to explain what they mean by it, which begs a person to ask:

WHAT DOES THE WORD ‘EQUITY’ MEAN AND WHAT IS ITS IMPORT?

In a recent Press conference, Susan Rice emphasized the importance of “equity” in Biden Administration policy. Susan Rice, who served as Obama’s National Security Advisor, is now Biden’s Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council. Biden’s Press Secretary, Jen Psaki, has also used the word ‘equity’ in her Press briefings; so has Kristen Clarke, Biden’s new head of the powerful Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice.Clearly, the Biden Administration wants to sensitize the public to the mere mention of the word and wants the public to become familiar with it. But that raises a question—and one the Press seems loath to ask anyone in the Biden Administration.The word ‘equity’ seems to mean nothing more than ‘equality,’ a synonym. Okay. But if the two words are synonyms, then why not use the term, ‘equality.’ After all, the word ‘equality’ has historical weight behind it. The word ‘equity,’ by contrast, does not.Apart from extensive use of the word in politics and in the Press, ‘equality’ is a legal term of art, as is the adjectival form of the word, ‘equal,’ appearing prominently in both the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and in federal legislation and the import and purport of ‘equality,’ are discussed at length in legal treatises.So, then, what devious intention or nuance lurks behind the use of the word, ‘equity,’ in lieu of the word, ‘equality,’ by Biden’s people?  The Biden Administration can’t be alluding to the expression ‘private equity,’ which applies to and sees prominent use in business and economics.With no apparent allusion to business finance or to the law of contracts, the reference to ‘equity’ by Biden's officers and staff at the Administration's Press conferences is singularly odd and markedly discordant.Is the Biden Administration using the word ‘equity’ in a novel way? If so, then offer an explanation for it.If no novel use for the term ‘equity’ is intended, then why use it at all? The word, ‘equality,’ works just fine. But, having thrown the word out in the public domain, and with Biden’s people excruciatingly mindful of employing and emphasizing the word in their public discourse and when directing that talk especially to the Press, there must be some reason for doing so, and that is itself telling.

DEMOCRATS' USE OF NEOLOGISMS AND COMMON WORDS AND PHRASES WITH NEW TWISTS ALLUDE TO A MASSIVE PROPAGANDA EFFORT TO FORM, SHAPE, AND SWAY PUBLIC OPINION

A RADICAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE NATION IS ON THE HORIZON

The American public has seen that Democrats, generally, and the Radical Left-wing of the Party, especially, have a penchant for using common words and phrases in cryptic ways and for inventing new words and phrases, the meaning of which remains confoundingly mysterious. This must all be by design.How often in the last several months have Democrat Party politicians and their friends and compatriots in social media and in the Press thrown the expression ‘systemic racism’ around? No one bothers to define it or provide evidence for its existence; why is that? Even so, in asserting the words ‘systemic racism’ over again, the expression operates as a viral meme, a painful splinter in the public's psyche, as it was meant to do. The public blithely accepts the existence of this thing, ‘systemic racism’, as it is expected to do, and many Americans obediently comply, accepting the existence of ‘systemic racism’, unskeptically, unconditionally, and uncritically. The expression is thrown out to the masses as a self-evident truth, an assumption that no one can seriously question, or even be permitted to question, as with the issue of the integrity of America's federal elections and whether Trump actually did win the 2020 U.S. Presidential—mainstream media exposition and proclamation to the contrary. Evidently, America's seemingly Free Press takes its cue from the postulates of Reich MinisterJoseph Goebbels, from whom the Press and social media today have inserted Goebbels' profound, elucidating thoughts on the theory and practice of propaganda, into their own playbook: an educational treatise on the practice of manipulating and swaying public opinion over to your side. See Inspiringquotes; AZQuotes; and Quotes from The Goebbels' Diaries, as posted by Goodreads:“A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth.”“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”“This is the secret of propaganda: Those who are to be persuaded by it should be completely immersed in the ideas of the propaganda, without ever noticing that they are being immersed in it.”“Not every item of news should be published. Rather must those who control news policies endeavor to make every item of news serve a certain purpose.”“It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion.”“The essence of propaganda consists in winning people over to an idea so sincerely, so vitally, that in the end they succumb to it utterly and can never escape from it.”“Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident they are acting on their own free will.”“Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for every form of power politics and any dictatorship-run state has its roots in the street.“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.”“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”“. . . the rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitious.”“The war we are fighting until victory or the bitter end is in its deepest sense a war between Christ and Marx. Christ: the principle of love. Marx: the principle of hate.”“Peoples do never govern themselves. That lunacy was concocted by liberalism. Behind its people's ‘sovereignty’ the slyest cheaters are hiding, who don't want to be recognized.”“You can’t change the masses. They will always be the same: dumb, gluttonous and forgetful.”“That propaganda is good which leads to success, and that is bad which fails to achieve the desired result. It is not propaganda’s task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success.”“One should not as a rule reveal one's secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should like big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”“Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.”Is it any wonder that the Biden/Harris Administration intends to dummy down the entire public educational system. This Brave New World that they have in mind can't function where people are free thinkers! But, the success of the Press in manipulating and controlling the thought processes of adults who have progressed through traditional public school education, before it had been dummied down and had become an indoctrination mill to create a population of unthinking drones, still demonstrates the emphatic power of propaganda over even highly educated Americans who consider themselves critical thinkers.Give some thought to the ability of the Press and social media to instill into the mind of many Americans the idea the 2020 U.S. Presidential election was completely fair and aboveboard. Was it really so? Did the DOJ and FBI truly undertake a serious investigation into numerous concrete allegations of election tampering? If so, when did that investigation take place? How extensive and intensive was it? What did the DOJ and FBI investigate? Isn't there a report of the findings of the DOJ and FBI? If so, where is it? Why can't the public see it? Why should the public simply take on faith William Barr's perfunctory, dismissive assertion, as reported by PBS, for one, that the Department found no evidence of widespread fraud? And, apart from the issue of massive vote tampering, isn't it odd that the U.S. Supreme Court would dismiss out-of-hand a serious State versus State elections' case when only the U.S. Supreme Court can provide relief as the Constitution only provides the U.S. Supreme Court with jurisdiction to hear and decide cases between States, as sovereign entities, when a federal question arises. As reported by Market Watch,“Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented from the decision to not hear the case, arguing that ‘we do not have discretion’ to turn down suits filed between two or more states, which fall within the Supreme Courts ‘original jurisdiction.’ ” ’The Press and social media not only scoff at the idea of a stolen election, exclaiming, with cavalier and constant bravado that such an idea is false and baseless, but that it is a crime for one to simply utter the possibility of it, and so any discussion is forbidden, as the argument for a stolen election is deemed too outlandish for discussion, dismissed out-of-hand as fantasy, as disinformation or misinformation. But, is it so? Also strange is the fact that the Democrat Party and social media are adamant that no evidence for a stolen U.S. Presidential election can even be entertained. That in itself is food for thought. The Democrat Party, the Press, and social media don't merely dismiss the issue out-of-hand, they become apoplectic if one simply harbors suspicions about the integrity of the election. Given the seriousness of the election of a U.S. President, one would think that, at the very least, the Democrat Party, Press, and social media would at least allow those who would challenge the prevailing opinion a forum to express their belief and to present their case. But, challengers are peremptorily and unceremoniously shut out and down from expressing their doubts about the integrity of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, and, more, challengers are contemptuously and vigorously denounced. Why does their exist such raw anger directed against those Americans who would dare express a contrary opinion, and one that has substantial and significant data to support a contrary finding pertaining to the integrity and fairness of the 2020 Presidential election?Can it be that Trump actually did win the election as he and his supporters claim? But no one dare be permitted to say it, lest the charade of the Great Pretender in Chief be recognized for whom and what he really is? Can it be that the forces that seek to transform our Nation into a Collectivist State cannot, must not, allow for dissension in the public marketplace? Can it be that this free Constitutional Republic is not so free, after all? Can it be that that the Republic no longer exists or else is surely on its deathbed, where only the trappings of liberty remain? Soon, will even the trappings of liberty be dispensed with as things no longer necessary to keep dissident thought at bay because all dissension in public and social thought will at some point be stamped out?If the Country cannot return to its roots, irreparable harm and catastrophe will befall the Nation. That is an ice-cold fact.Division, divisiveness, and suspicion of ‘the other’ have become widespread, and are deliberately being fostered by an Administration that falsely and ironically accuses Trump and his supporters for division and divisiveness in our Country. The fact of the matter is that Biden and his handlers have no desire to unify the Country because the unity they seek isn't really unity at all or otherwise  has taken on a most unusual form, or surely so in a free Constitutional Republic if that is what our Nation still is? Biden's unity is no more than a function of uniformity in thought and conformity of behavior, the antithesis, then, of free, critical thought. The unity the Biden/Harris Administration has in mind is compliance: unity imposed on the polity by Government edict or, where deemed necessary, unity imposed on the polity through the use of brutal, physical force, where the military and police target political dissent. How ironic that our Nation that has hitherto chastized other Nations for not permitting open dissent would not openly embrace its own cardinal sin.This demand for unity through conformity leads inevitably, inexorably into violent conflict and confrontation in society; assaults on innocent people, and the wanton destruction of public and private property. But, this, too, must be by design.  And this, too, is all by design. The malicious, malevolent forces that crush have unleashed their fury against our Nation. A violent clash is apparently welcomed. It is certainly ordained. That is the cost of success for a counterrevolution to overturn the American Revolution. And that is a price the forces that crush are willing to pay, must pay, to overturn 200 plus years of freedom that itself was the price many Americans were willing to pay and did pay to create and then preserve a free Constitutional Republic.Thus the forces that crush deliberately, calculatedly foment chaos throughout the Country. They foster ill-will among America's myriad ethnic groups. They create the very conflict and dissension they disingenuously say they wish to avoid, as they know that only through both psychological persuasion, i.e., propaganda, and through the threat of and through the use of physical force can they contain the righteous indignation of those Americans who are averse to relinquishing their sacred, fundamental, natural, unalienable, immutable, illimitable rights. The forces that crush must destroy all opposition.These forces that crush must undermine social cohesion to make their wishes for a one-world political, social, economic, cultural, and juridical system a reality. Thus, they denigrate America's f0unding founders. They defile our cherished history, heritage, traditions, mores, and core values with their lies. They disdain national pride and patriotism, perceiving these as feelings as archaic, atavistic, parochial; such feelings have no place in the new world order they intend to erect.Anything deemed archaic, atavistic, and parochial, these forces that crush intend to eradicate. Even the sacred institution of the family isn't beyond ridicule condemnation.Privacy is also considered quaint and anachronistic. Our Nation has become a surveillance society. Each individual is encouraged to become a shoofly; a spy against one's neighbor and even against a family member.very American is encouraged to report dissenting conduct and speech to the police or whomever the new authority, as established by an oppressive and repressive Government, happens to be.The forces that crush intend to replace our unique national identity with a multicultural perspective that transcends individual nation-states; that transcends OUR Nation-State. The forces that crush intend to replace our Nation's Judeo-Christian ethic with a new ethical standard grounded in the will of the State, where the State itself purports to be a god, and the sole god.Messaging is delivered through old vehicles and new, radio, television, and social media: through the airwaves, digital media, hard copy news media, and even word-of-mouth. The public is systematically subjected to highly efficacious, effective, and efficient modern propagandistic techniques. Yet, the full range, potential, and destructive power of propaganda are visible to those people perceptive enough to peer directly at it, and in so doing be immune from the effects of it. Unfortunately, many people aren't cognizant of the onslaught of propaganda on their psyche, and the impact it has had and continues to have on shaping their belief structures.And, now with the word ‘equity’ bandied about regularly in the Biden/Harris Administration's Press conferences, the propagandists have injected a new viral meme into the public psyche. The full impact and purpose of it have yet to play out, but something is definitely afoot: intimations of something far-reaching that will impact each American. And none of it is good.Consider Democrats’ policy positions on guns and on civilian gun ownership and possession, particularly. None of that is good either. Words DO have meaning. And those words that Democrats and the Press use when talking about guns are meant to amplify their abhorrence of them and to enact laws and to inject social policy directives that serve to undermine the very framework of a stable, cohesive society. The American public had learned the disturbing truth pertaining to Federal and State antigun policy and rhetoric. And that painful truth will shortly be revisited upon them and with a vengeance. This is a major concern for the forces that dare to crush a free Constitutional Republic and a free people, and it is all part of their plan for complete domination over the individual American citizen.________________________________

ANTIGUN LAWS AND ANTIGUN POLICIES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE FOUNDATIONS OF A FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC

PART TWO

Antigun laws and policies aren’t meant—were never meant—to create a cohesive, stable society, to protect public safety and order. They were meant—are meant and were always meant—to hobble the American people, to subordinate the citizenry to Government. This is contrary to the import and purport of the U.S. Constitution. The framers of the Constitution intended for the American people to be sovereign, not for Government to assume that role, else tyranny looms.Through the incorporation of the Nation's Bill of Rights into the Constitution, and especially through the exercise of the natural, fundamental right of free speech and the right of the people to keep and bear arms, the citizenry would have and was meant to have the ability to keep a powerful, deceitful, jealous Government and a riotous majoritarian mob, operating at the behest of a tyrannical Government, both in check, and thereby maintain its sovereignty over those forces that would dare to usurp the natural sovereignty of the people.Obviously, the enactment of unlawful, restrictive gun laws and unlawful policies, together with—as we are seeing today—unprecedented restrictions on free speech are designed not to benefit the American citizenry but to harm it, and to do so irreparably, by removing from Americans the only effective means by which and through which Americans can maintain their sovereignty over Government: through exercise of the natural, fundamental right of each individual to speak his or her own mind and through the right of each to own and to possess firearms in defense of self and family and to prevent the unlawful encroaching usurpation of power by and the onset of tyranny by the State.Restrictions on sacred rights are meant to tear down society. And the subordination of the Self to the group Collective is antithetical to the tenets of Individualism upon which our Nation was constructed and upon which it grew and flourished. The forces that crush intend to create something wholly alien to our Nation’s history and traditions and culture.The public meets with waves upon waves of new laws, policies, and initiatives, all meant to defeat this thing ‘systemic racism’ that doesn’t even exist except in the feverish minds of politicians and fanatics, who create a dangerous reality out of nightmarish fantasy harking back to a long ago, dead past. The forces that crush conjured up this fiction of systemic racism as a ploy to tear down the sanctity and inviolability of the individual. The inculcation of the bizarre and ludicrous doctrine of critical race theory now hawked as legitimate science, to be added to the curriculum of public school and higher education, has at its apparent objective the goal of raising up one ethnic group at the expense of the other, which, in itself is dubious and disheartening. In truth indoctrinating young Americans and old in this new doctrine of critical race theory is psychologically debilitating to everyone. It isn't meant to mend feelings among ethnic groups. The opposite is true. It is meant to sow divisiveness and division, discord and discontent, suspicion and hatred among the masses, thereby creating a means by which a small, ruthless elite ruling class can easily subjugate and control the rest of us.The actions of the obstructers and destructors of our Nation do long-lasting if not irreparable harm to the health, safety, and well-being of the populace. It is not something they worry about. It is not something they care about. They see this as necessary to their agenda for absolute control over the population. It is their intention to fracture, destabilize, and tear down society. Once that is accomplished they will then engineer a different social, political, economic, and cultural order from the rubble of the old.A substantial segment of the population sees the intentions of the destroyers of our Country clearly. But, another substantial segment of the population does not. Those that do not have been conditioned to believe that President Trump was an autocrat, a danger to Democracy. it is all false. It is all a ruse.The Democrats had no one to offer as a palatable replacement, other than a feeble, shell of a man, Joe Biden.The Press erroneously and deceptively convinced the public that Joe Biden is a political moderate. They did this to allay the public’s suspicion of Radical Left intentions. Many Americans felt that voting for Biden would be a safe bet for the welfare of the Nation. Sadly, they were wrong. But, what is Joe Biden really?To pin Biden down is a fruitless and pointless venture. He isn’t running the Executive Branch of Government. He isn't running anything, not really. Biden isn’t a leader. He's a follower. and he is being led, and those who voted for him and those who voted against him in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election both know it. Biden is being dictated to by his advisors and he is obediently doing what he is told. Everything he says and does is deliberately and carefully scripted for effect.The goal to be achieved is a radical transformation of society, consistent with the tenets of Collectivism. The EU and Communist China under Xi Jinping, as Collectivist political, social, economic, and cultural constructs, provide, each in its own way, a blueprint for a radical transformation of America that the obstructers and destructors of the Nation envision.And the Biden/Harris Administration is just getting started with the massive transformation of our Nation into a Dystopian Collectivist nightmare.The public is beginning to see the Collectivist vision for America taking shape with increasing top-down Federal Government control of all aspects of American life. And this mammoth undertaking to rupture and destroy a free Constitutional Republic is moving ahead rapidly. Severe restrictions on fundamental rights and liberties are taking shape rapidly.Dissent as protected speech is not only strongly discouraged; it is systematically attacked, debased, degraded. A coordinated attack against the First Amendment is well underway, and a reciprocal attack on the Second is about to be launched.The radical transformation of America has begun and will soon be in full swing. Americans must be proactive to prevent this, using all lawful means to do so.If we fail, we will all soon see our Nation taking a 180-degree turn from a free Constitutional Republic, securely grounded on the tenets and principles of Individualism, to a Marxist, Paternalistic State, grounded on the tenets of Collectivism. This is a thing alien to our Nation's rich and glorious history, heritage, culture, and ethical values; and a thing absolutely antithetical to our founders' beliefs; abhorrent to their sensibilities; and disparaging to their memory.__________________________________

PROPAGANDA IN AMERICA IN FULL-SWING TO UNDERMINE A FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC

RENEWED USE OF THE EXPRESSION ‘ASSAULT WEAPON’ TO UNDERMINE THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS ON THE WAY; EXPECT IT!

PART THREE

As with the odd use of the word, ‘equity,’  in lieu of equality,’ which has been voiced by Biden Administration officials of late, and which is apparently one more vehicle through which the Biden/Harris Administration intends to introduce a mammoth new wave of repressive policy initiatives—yet to be formally announced but surely soon to be activated—the sinister forces that are working feverishly to undermine a free Constitutional Republic have, in the not so distant past, utilized another expression which operated as the springboard for launching a devastating concerted attack on the Nation’s cherished institutions and fundamental rights. And Americans will soon see it utilized actively once again.Recall that Democrat political strategists decades ago coined the phrase ‘assault weapon.’ Politicians and lawmakers utilized the expression as a propaganda tool to constrain, not preserve and strengthen, the exercise of the fundamental, natural right codified in the Second Amendment.The expression ‘assault weapon,’ a fictional phrase that is not used or referenced by the military or by the gun industry, is a vague expression— deliberately vague in meaning—and for good reason. If the expression were well defined, the public would know exactly what firearms fall within the meaning of ‘assault weapon,’ namely the many they own, and they would be perturbed to see those firearms targeted for confiscation.By keeping the expression vague, State and federal governments can place into the category of banned firearms, i.e., ‘assault weapons,’ any firearm they wish to prohibit the public from owning and possessing. And the result is that the domain of ‘assault weapon’ constantly expands under Federal and State law and with alacrity.Each State has its own legal definition for ‘assault weapon.’ In some States those definitions are more expansive than in the gun statutes of other States. And, so the expression, ‘assault weapon,’ remains deliberately amorphous.Had the propagandists began their attack on the Second Amendment by using the expression, ‘semiautomatic firearm,’—an expression that has unambiguous meaning in the gun industry and in the military—that would immediately raise alarm bells among American gun owners and justifiably so.Most firearms owned by the American public today are semiautomatic weapons. By deliberately refraining from the use of the expression, ‘semiautomatic weapon,’ or ‘semiautomatic firearm,’ the political strategists and the propagandists had hoped to disguise the full depth and breadth of their aims, and they have met with a measure of success by opting to target civilian ownership and possession of ‘assault weapons’, rather than by specifically targeting ‘semiautomatic weapon.’ Not that the average gun owner didn't know what was going on—even if many Americans truly did not—but, through the use of a neologism, a coined word, a legal fiction, even more astute members of the public could be under placed under a hypnotic trance, not quite getting the full measure of what was taking place. Such is the power of propaganda. And many Americans did go along, unaware of the deception, oblivious to the ruse. They would see and did see “ASSAULT WEAPONS” as a danger to public safety and public order when they didn't see “SEMIAUTOMATIC WEAPONS” as a danger to public safety and order. In other words they weren't led to believe that THEIR firearms were a danger to public safety and order and, so, they didn't see THEIR firearms as being targeted. Thus, they didn't have necessarily have a problem with laws that restrict access to such things, “ASSAULT WEAPONS” where they definitely would have had a problem if “SEMIAUTOMATIC WEAPONS” were targeted.Reference to the amorphous “assault weapons” rather than to well-defined  “semiautomatic weapons” offered another boon to antigun zealots and antigun proponents, for it left Federal and State legislators free to fashion gun bans in whatever manner they wish. They were free to give specific legal meaning to the expression, ‘assault weapon,’ in whatever way they want, targeting the very firearms and the component parts of those weapons that Americans own and possess and would wish to keep. Those Americans, who might have deemed the assault weapon as a type of firearm that no civilian needs and that no civilian should be permitted to own and possess, would learn too late that they had been hoodwinked and that what they had taken to be a fundamental right to keep and bear arms had, indeed, been unlawfully, unconstitutionally infringed, after all, with an end-run around the problem of semiautomatic weapons in the hands of tens of millions of Americans, through a ruse concocted by the propagandists.When State governments ban “assault weapons,” they must obviously name the weapons they intend to ban; and now the public knows that the firearms they own and possess that were once legal, now aren’t. And that justifiably angers them, but it is much too late in the day to do anything about it. And, as restrictive gun laws are amended and refined, the public sees that more and more semiautomatic weapons are included under the rubric of highly regulated or outright illegal “assault weapons.”The federal assault weapons ban of 1994 (AWB) listed a substantial number of semiautomatic firearms, handguns, rifles, and shotguns. Democrats demonstrate a remarkable proclivity for making illegal a substantial number of semiautomatic weapons, and they relish the chance to do so.The AWB expired in 2004 and Congress didn’t renew it. Democrats attempted repeatedly through the years to reinstitute a federal “assault weapons” ban, but without success. Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein figured prominently in that effort, but, to date, had not met with success. This will soon change now that Democrats have control of the Executive Branch of Government and now that they also control both Houses of Congress.Yet, through the intervening years, between 2004 and 2021, when Democrats in Congress ran into problems convincing Republicans and the public at large to fashion a 1994 national assault weapons ban, did not affect the States. The seeming intransigence of Congress that galled the antigun zealots never impacted States that antigun zealots controlled. These Radical Left States created their own oppressive gun laws, severely restricting possession or banning altogether many semiautomatic firearms under the category “assault weapons.” Broadly construing ‘assault weapon,’ to mean whatever they chose it to mean, these States were free to ban many different firearms with a broad stroke, and they did so with abandon.If the expression ‘assault weapon’ were an industry term of art, as, for example, the expression ‘assault rifle’ is, legislatures would have struggled to lawfully ban large categories of firearms under the rubric of ‘assault weapon.’ But the phrase ‘assault weapon’ is not an industry or military term of art. So the drafters of legislation can include single-action or double-action revolvers, or any other kind of firearm under the rubric of ‘assault weapon’  if they wish. And, at some point, they may very well do so. There is nothing to constrain them.Look at the New York Safe Act of 2013. Under the list of banned “assault weapons” is included revolving shotguns. Revolving shotguns aren't semiautomatic weapons. The expression, ‘assault weapon,’ need not be confined to semiautomatic weapons or to any particular category of firearm.Now that Democrats control both Houses of Congress along with the Executive Branch of Government, we will soon see Presidential executive orders and legislative bills flying willy-nilly off the desks of antigun proponents and zealots. There is nothing to stop them._____________________________________

THE WAR ON AMERICA'S BASIC FREEDOMS, THE RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH AND THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, IS UNDER GREATER ASSAULT TODAY THAN AT ANY OTHER TIME IN OUR NATION'S PAST

PART FOUR

Democrats have complained long and hard that, as they see it, too many people have access to “military weapons of war,” a.k.a. ‘assault weapons.’ A flurry of State and local laws and, for a time, federal law, too, strictly regulated the ownership and possession of them. Congressional Democrats now have carte blanc to do what they want. And on the matter of guns, Joe Biden has never equivocated.Back in August 2019, when Biden was just another Democrat Party hopeful to be U.S. President, CNN reported him exclaiming that “he will push to ban assault weapons if elected President in 2020.” And, in March 2020, MSN news, citing a Columbus Dispatch story, reported Biden asserting, “‘Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines are designed for no purpose other than to kill quickly and as brutally as possible. No one needs them.’” Unlike with the issues of “court-packing,” coal mining, and fracking, where, during the campaign, Biden made vague pronouncements or outright inconsistent statements he has been unequivocal when it comes to guns.Biden has a deep-seated loathing of guns, especially those he refers to as ‘assault weapons,’—a fiction and pejorative.Yet, noticeably absent from the first few dozens of executive orders Biden signed, there is, momentarily, as of the posting of this article, no Biden order pertaining to guns and gun ownership. Has he forgotten about that? Not likely!Rest assured, those orders are coming, and coming soon. And we will soon see a gale of antigun bills flying of the desks of Congressional Democrats.The twin issues of “guns” and “gun violence” will be much discussed in the weeks and months ahead. That much is certain.Will Biden sign an executive order banning “assault weapons” and will he sign a flurry of other antigun laws as well, not bothering to wait for Congressional enactments?Don’t think this is improbable. In fact, with all the banter of gun-toting “white supremacists” and right-wing “domestic terrorists” and with thousands of National Guard troops camped out in the U.S. Capital, and with the constant denigration of and growing suppression of conservative dissent, something is definitely afoot. In fact, the Democrat Party propaganda machine is in overdrive. The propagandist newspaper, NY Times, for one, has laid the groundwork for an assault on “guns.”Proclaiming with majestic fanfare a massive threat to “democracy” posed by purported well-armed right-wing extremist groups, or so the public is told—and never mind the threat posed by truly dangerous Radical Left Anarchist and Marxist extremist groups that routinely get a pass despite having engaged in an unmistakable reign of terror against the public over the summer, and continue to do so even now—the vast propaganda machine of the “free” Press is setting the stage for a nation-wide gun confiscation program targeting average citizens, similar to the one instituted in Australia some time back, that Hillary Clinton championed.The propagandists have conjured up a new pretext for further undermining the Second Amendment: the threat of “domestic terrorism.”  Old expressions bandied about such as ‘white supremacist,’ and ‘white extremist,’ and new expressions such as ‘domestic terrorist’ and ‘equity’ aren’t defined—are deliberately kept vague—but the public is getting a ferocious blast of “news” reports meant to keep these words and phrases constantly in the public psyche. This isn’t an accident. The reason for this is plain.The Radical Left propaganda machine is softening up the public, turning the mind to mush, conditioning the public, most of them reluctantly, but some of them gleefully, to accept the need for curtailing the citizenry's fundamental rights. the Radical Left is constantly contorting and distorting the import of the U.S. Constitution out of all semblance to its original meaning and intent.The forces that dare crush the Nation and its people into submission—and they are legion—including mega-billionaire neoliberal globalists both here at home and abroad, Communist China, and avowed Marxists, Socialists, Communists, and Anarchists, found in all sectors of Government and in the economy, are succeeding. They have weakened much of the public’s resolve. The dangerous forces that crush entire nations into submission cavalierly usurp authority, denying the American people their rightful sovereignty, slowly suffocating and strangling the public’s will and spirit to oppose them, leaving Americans feeling remorseful, fearful, dejected, without hope, and thereby dependent on the Nanny State. Such is the power of propaganda to bend, shape, and warp the public psyche. The use of words and phrases can have and do have a tangible, debilitating effect.By deliberately keeping expressions vague and ambiguous, propagandists can define words and phrases in whatever way they want, changing the meaning of words and phrases at random, or dispensing with them and replacing them with others, or coining new words and phrases; lumping whatever they want into them. The propagandists have laid the groundwork for a new bogeyman, and they are using that bogeyman to undermine the U.S. Constitution, the foundation of our Government and they are blithely attacking our Nation’s fundamental rights.The forces that dare crush our Nation into submission have taken over the reins of Government. With the ouster of Trump and with control over two of three Branches of Government, and with that of the Judiciary, the third, on the radar, the forces that intend to destroy a free Constitutional Republic have attained much of their first goal. The second goal is now to rein in the sovereign American people themselves.How do you destroy the sovereignty of the American people? Get them to accept the false and dangerous notion that their fundamental, natural, unalienable, immutable, illimitable rights are no longer necessary; that the Democrat Party agenda, when effectuated, can better “serve” the American people and that all will be well with the world once the Nation's old, archaic, atavistic, anachronistic Bill of Rights is erased, and once the plain meaning of the Articles of the U.S. Constitution is modified, upended, reinterpreted, formally dispensed with, or, simply, ignored.____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

TYRANNY ON THE HORIZON: THE BILL OF RIGHTS ENDANGERED; A FREE REPUBLIC WELL LOST

AMERICANS FACING COUNTERREVOLUTION TO DESTROY A FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC: DIRE OMENS

PART ONE

There is a story in ancient Greek Mythology that resonates today. It is a story that every American should know well for in it is a lesson to be learned. It is the story of Cassandra.Cassandra, the daughter of King Priam and queen Hecuba of Troy, was favored by the god Apollo who bestowed the gift of prophecy on her. But she angered Apollo.Apollo’s punishment was a keen example of poetic justice. He didn’t rescind his gift to her. She would retain it, but she would ever suffer anguish from her exercise of it.Cassandra warned Troy of its destruction, if Paris, her brother, one of the Royalty of Troy, ventured to Sparta, a powerful, military Greek City-State. But no one believed her. She was ridiculed by both High and Low of Troy: both Royalty and commoner because Troy was, after all, a powerful City-State of the western world; its military might extraordinary, the walls of its City impregnable.King Priam ignored Cassandra’s prescient warning and permitted Paris to sail with his older brother, Hector, a great warrior, to visit Sparta. Paris absconded with Helen the most beautiful woman in the world, and the wife of King Menelaus.That act of treachery sparked the Trojan war. The Greeks ultimately decimated Troy. Troy ceased to exist.Jump forward to the present time. In America there have been warnings aplenty of the danger posed by malevolent, malignant, secretive, powerful forces, both at home and abroad, intent on softening up and destroying a free Constitutional Republic to pave the way for its incorporation into a massive, diabolical transnational political, social, economic, juridical, cultural governmental scheme. Yes, many Americans understand this; but many more do not and, of those who do not, many of them scoff at the idea, even as they see the truth of the matter all around them. This is unfortunate but more troubling is the fact that many Americans simply don’t care that a free Constitutional Republic is on its deathbed and even more distressing and deeply disturbing is the fact that a substantial number of Americans want the Republic to fall, the Bill of Rights erased, the Constitution wholly ignored. Months of riots and mob violence in major Cities and small alike operated freely with abandon; public and private property vandalized, burned, and destroyed; innocent people assaulted, threatened, even murdered; monuments defaced, toppled.Few of these “protestors” faced arrest, even fewer faced prosecution, and fewer, still, if any, faced conviction and incarceration, for their intentional acts of mayhem, arson, assault and battery, and wanton destruction. When a reporter, at a news conference asked the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, what she thought of the mob violence taking place in Baltimore, Maryland, this past summer, she casually, flippantly, with a smile, no less, retorted, “people will do what they do.”  See, e.g., fox news, and articles posted in the Federalist, and the Washington Examiner.Was Pelosi’s remark taken out of context? No! The remark is a demonstrative, emphatic coda, a fitting finale to Pelosi’s condoning of and even encouragement of violent criminal behavior.Pelosi obviously approves of violence when perceived useful and conducive to the  stated objective: realization of a peculiar vision for the Country, a vision contrary to that of America’s founding fathers, who sought, through the careful construction of the U.S. Constitution—a desire to create and preserve a free Constitutional Republic See article in Real Clear Politics.Most Americans are proud of our Constitution, the longest existing and meaningful Constitution of any government of any nation on Earth. Pelosi obviously is not.Most Americans wish to preserve a free Constitutional Republic where the people are the ultimate sovereign. Pelosi does not.Pelosi and those around her, puppets like her, seek nothing less than the eradication of the Constitution, uniformity of thought and conduct among the citizenry and through that, the subjugation of it; the erosion and eventual erasure of our history, our heritage, our Judeo-Christian ethic, an end to all of it, and therein manifests tyranny—the very antithesis of the wishes and goal of the founding fathers of the Nation.Nancy Pelosi and those who share her political sympathies and who, like her, seek to profit from the demise of our Country demand no less than a metamorphosis of our Country—an extreme and horrifying mutation of it. And, they now have their chance.Since its inception, our weblog, the Arbalest Quarrel, has written extensively of the forces that would dare crush our Republic and its citizenry into submission. We have pointed to their aims, their ambitions, the tenacity of their efforts, and the inherent danger they pose to a free Constitutional Republic and to the fundamental, natural rights upon which our Constitution and the sovereignty of the American people over Government rests.Like Cassandra who warned Troy of its imminent and catastrophic demise if her warnings were not heeded, the Arbalest Quarrel has presented its readers with warning signs of the encroachment of the armies of darkness that Americans blithely dismiss. They cavalierly dismiss the signs of our impending doom. They fail to heed the warning signs of imminent destruction of a free Constitutional Republic.We all have a front row seat of the carnage to follow; the manifestation of our worst nightmare yet to come.With the inauguration of the puppet of the shadowy Obstructers and Destructors of our Nation, the Grand Pretender and Great Imposter, Joe Biden, will be sworn in as the 46^th President of the United States and Americans will soon see the calamity wrought as they lose their most cherished rights, a process already commencing with a multitude of attacks on free expression. It is all appropriately, fittingly in vein that Chief Justice Roberts, who, himself, is a Grand Pretender and Great Imposter, will have done the swearing in. The American citizenry will come face-to-face with their destiny, and it will be a stark, unpleasant future, indeed._____________________________________________________________

AMERICA’S DEMISE AS A FREE REPUBLIC COMING TO FRUITION

PART TWO

Since at least the last decade of the Twentieth Century and into the first decade and half of the Twenty-first Century, most of the American electorate became gradually cognizant of the dire threat to our Nation, to its people, to its core values, traditions, history, and heritage. They voted into Office an outsider, Donald Trump to set things right—to return the Nation to its roots. But the Obstructers and Destructors of our Nation—these ruthless, jealous, malevolent billionaire neoliberal globalist forces that crush—would have none of that. They were contemptuous of Trump and disdainful of the tens of millions of American citizens who supported him.Apoplectic with rage at seeing their secretive, agenda to dismantle a free Republic and to dissolve the Nation’s Constitution going awry, with the shocking defeat of their toady, Hillary Clinton, in 2016, they immediately set to work, formulating their plans to frustrate and bedevil the Trump Administration.These evil, malignant forces inserted spies deep into the recesses of Trump’s Cabinet, and existed en mass in the Federal Bureaucracy, and they were of one mind, with a specific, concerted, uniform aim: sabotage the President’s policy initiatives and objectives. Do whatever it takes to undermine the Trump Administration. And the Democrat Party puppets in Congress spent the bulk of their time and tens of millions of taxpayer dollars in a single-minded effort to remove Trump from Office.The remarkable thing is that, notwithstanding these incessant, relentless multivarious, multi-pronged seditious assaults on Trump, and on his supporters, to waylay his efforts and to destroy his Presidency, Trump was able to achieve many of his goals. The President made good on his campaign promises, consistent with his salient campaign slogans: “America First” and “Make America Great Again.” He worked tirelessly on behalf of the American people, to fulfill his duties in strict accordance with his Oath of Office, under Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution. But the forces that crush perceived Trump’s to treat America First and to Make America Great Again as a slap in the face to their Agenda. They abhorred the slogans, and the intent behind them. Their ultimate goal has always been to destroy the very concept of the Nation-State; to merge the remains of these Nation-States into a one-world governmental scheme, ransacking the Nation-State of everything of value to these overlords of a one-world governmental scheme—including the technology, the military, the police and the intelligence mechanisms and apparatuses—harnessing them all to their own needs and ends. These powerful, ruthless forces that crush were therefore dismissive of the Trumpian slogans, going so far as to treat them as veritable obscenities, refusing to countenance them; encouraging the Press and the politicians whom they control or whom they had compromised, or who otherwise were ideologically aligned with them, to utilize their voices and their print or digital medium to attack anyone who, from their standpoint, would have the audacity to invoke such slogans or emblazon them on hats, shirts, flags or banners. And the ever compliant, sympathetic, obsequious Press and the compromised, bought and paid for politicians obeyed. They went to work. They vehemently attacked what they disdainfully objected to as Trump's unruly, rude, ignorant, obnoxious, unrefined, lewd, provincial base of supporters.With their control of the massive, police, intelligence, and military apparatus, along with a compliant, sympathetic Press, court system, and academia, these powerful, malevolent forces hounded and attacked the man and his followers relentlessly. Their intentions were clear: to destroy not only the Trump Administration, but to destroy the man himself, and those closest to him. And, even as he now gets set to leave Office, still they hound him, intending to carry out an illegal impeachment trial against him, contrary to the Constitution, an act of pure vindictiveness, which led Senator Lindsey Graham to remark to Biden, on Fox News Sunday Morning Futures, hosted by Maria Bartiromo this past Sunday, January 17, 2021: “If you continue to do this, you hate Trump more than you love the country.”The hatred of Trump knows no bounds. The forces that crush worked on Americans, through the Press, to fan the flames of raw, visceral, hatred toward President Trump, to defeat him.And these ruthless, powerful, sinister, and secretive forces that crush have clearly succeeded,  although at no small cost: reluctantly, they had to come out of the shadows. They had to make their existence known. They had to make known the full depth and breadth of their monstrous agenda. And, they had to make known the extent to which they had insinuated themselves into every core business sector and institution of our Country.And, this was no easy effort; more was required to manage and accomplish a mammoth turnaround. They had to bring a substantial mass of average Americans over to their side. They did this through a well-designed, well-engineered, comprehensive campaign of propaganda.For the last four years Americans have been subject to an elaborate scheme of deception, a massive psychological indoctrination program that has no parallel in our lengthy history.But, to take control and sway a Nation of almost three hundred and thirty million Americans of diverse education, cultural, ethnic backgrounds was no easy task.The obstructive and destructive forces, both here and abroad orchestrated and implemented an impressive, multifaceted, multi-pronged strategy, to turn one American against the other and one group against another, emphasizing and magnifying differences between and among Americans, and all but ignoring those qualities and characteristics that bring Americans together. They utilized Anarchist and Marxist groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter, to create mayhem and to further sow discord. Insidiously and vociferously they blamed President Trump for societal divisiveness and division that followed, even as it was they who orchestrated and nourished the violence and discord, not Trump.To this day, many Americans who say they not only dislike Trump, but loathe the man, cannot adequately explain or articulate why, other than pointing to superficial matters, such as  his personality and bearing, all but skirting over his singular accomplishments in both the foreign and domestic policy arenas.Trump spared the Nation from expending vast sums of money on unnecessary foreign wars and intrigues, substantially reducing the number of American lives ruined and lost because of them. And he established a foundation for lasting peace in the Middle East.Trump obtained further Arab recognition for the State of Israel and he reined in Iran. Trump stood strong against the growing military, economic, and geopolitical threat posed by China, and he reined in the dangers posed by North Korea.Trump’s economic policies also worked out exceptionally well. He created millions of jobs for average Americans of all ethnic backgrounds and spurred the growth of small business. Wages increased not through Government regulation, but by Government allowing America’s small businesses to function, placing fewer constraints on them,  not more. thereby creating a boon for both business and worker, permitting America’s businesses and America’s workers not only to survive, but to thrive and to compete effectively against China. In the foreign arena, Trump destroyed the Islamic State and contained Iran. The U.S. military footprint was reduced, and the world was safer for it.Everything was going well for the Nation and its people, and that wasn't what Communist China nor the western billionaire globalist elites, nor the Radical Left Marxists, Communists, Socialists, and Anarchists wanted to see. For, it is not easy to destroy a U.S. President whose policies actually strengthen the Nation, and work to the benefit of the citizenry. That would not do at all. Something was needed beyond the use of propaganda to slowly turn Americans against Trump. Something drastic was needed. And something drastic mysteriously arrive out of the blue, just when it was needed by the forces that crush: a severe biological plague; a global pandemic.It was only through Xi Jinping’s unleashing of the Chinese Communist Coronavirus on America and the world, that the economy and the life and well-being of individual Americans have suffered. This was not good for the American citizenry. It certainly was not good for small business. But, it was just the ticket for ridding the Nation of a successful U.S. President, when all else failed: sabotage; the Mueller investigation; impeachment; and trial. Of course, the Chinese Communist plague was not Trump's fault. No matter. Blame Trump, not China. That was the foundation of the game plan; and the new tack to employ to destroy Trump.Not, surprisingly, the forces that crush, these neoliberal globalist elites, through their puppets—the Press and Democrat Party leaders—were quick to blame Trump, not China for the devastation wrought by the plague that China, notwithstanding that it was and is Xi Jinping's regime, not Trump, that bears sole responsibility for the Coronavirus plague, and the forces that crush utilized and played the horror of the plague to their advantage.Given how the plague has taken over the lives and thoughts of Americans completely, it is easy to forget that before the unleashing of the Chinese COVID plague on the Nation, the American economy had grown significantly and without concomitant runaway inflation. Even The New York Times acknowledged Trump’s singular accomplishments in the economic arena, but did so, grudgingly, and did so with but a few days remaining in the Trump Presidency. When was the last time that the Press ever said anything positive about Trump? Apparently to do so now, when it doesn't matter, as Trump's tenure in the White House is over, the Press doesn't mind reporting news.In fact, on January 19, 2021, the Times reiterated the strength of the economy under Trump’s tenure in Office but was careful not to give him credit for it. They didn’t even mention his name. The Times writes, “The humming labor backdrop that existed 11 months ago—with 3.5 percent unemployment, stable or rising work force participation, and steadily climbing wages turned out to be a recipe for lifting all boats, creating economic opportunities for long-disenfranchised groups and lowering poverty rates. And price gains remained manageable and even a touch on the low side. That contrasts with efforts to push the labor market’s limits in the 1960s, which are widely blamed for laying the groundwork for runaway inflation.”Why didn’t the NY Times credit Trump for this economic marvel? Could it be that they didn’t want to allude to the fact that Trump, as portraying him as evil, could not be perceived as having accomplished anything good for the Country. Over and over again, the Press refers to Trump as a Racist. But he was nothing of the kind. But to admit that would go against the mainstream media's own narrative—a narrative that required the Press to constantly and vociferously to denigrate. And being so wrapped up in their own fairy tales they failed to notice that Trump truly was making America great again.  Trump, far from being a Racist actively, avidly attempted, and succeeded to assist those “disenfranchised groups” that the Times’ reporters mentioned in the afore-referenced news article.The NY Times conveniently fails to mention that, back in August 2019, Martin Luther’s niece had this to say about the President, as reported by The Hill:“Martin Luther King Jr.'s niece Alveda King said Thursday that President Trump is not a racist, adding that she has gone up against "genuine racists."In an interview with ‘Fox & Friends,’ the niece of the late civil rights leader said she believed Trump when he said he aims to improve life for all Americans, regardless of race.‘President Trump has said ‘we all bleed the same.’ He's very clear on that, and he has done so much for all Americans, including African Americans,’ she said.‘Trump is not a racist’ she added. ‘I've had the experience of going head to head with genuine racists.’Her comments come after the latest round of criticism aimed at Trump from Democrats, including 2020 presidential candidates like former Rep. Beto O'Rourke (D-Texas), who said this week that Trump ‘is a racist, and he stokes racism in this country.’O'Rourke earlier in the week said that he believed Trump bears at least part of the blame for the recent mass shooting in El Paso, Texas, and he cited the suspected shooter's alleged anti-immigrant manifesto that was posted online before the attack.King weighed in on Trump's Wednesday visit to El Paso, where he and first lady Melania Trump met with hospital staff and other local officials.‘What President Trump and first lady Melania did was to go down and look for solutions. We have to overcome evil with good. When people call each other racist — we are one blood. One human race, different ethnicities — we're not color blind, we can see, but that is for the purpose of appreciating each other and we have to do that,’ King said.” See also article in the Atlantic Black Star.Wouldn't it have been nice had The New York Times and other mainstream outlets sought to reduce tension in the Nation and acknowledge the fact that Trump is no racist insisting instead that he is a racist. One need only look to the man’s actions to realize that he isn’t a racist. He has assisted Blacks in the economic, political, social, and cultural spheres. He has done so, admirably, decidedly, and decisively, but the Press gives him no credit for that.An apt reminder of Trump’s desire to assist Blacks especially on Martin Luther King Jr’s Birthday would have done much to help unite Americans, rather than to tear them apart. But, again, that would go against the grain, against the narrative. Yet, the seditious Press desires only to stoke tension among Americans, not allay it. And in that lie, the Press has succeeded well; even using the Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. to assert and reinforce the bald-faced lie that Trump is a racist and that, means, by extension, that anyone who supports Trump, must be a racist too. It is all a pernicious lie, but one the Press has continually and vigorously propagated despite all the evidence to the contrary. And the Nation has suffered and continues to suffer because of it. The Press and the Democrat Party leadership bear primary responsibility for this and should be roundly condemned for it.__________________________________________________________

THE GRAND CONSPIRACY TO DISUNITE AMERICANS HAS WORKED LIKE A CHARM

PART THREE

The Press along with the Democrat Party leadership has actively and avidly conspired to divide Americans, not to unite Americans. They are intent on fanning the flames of hatred, suspicion, and fear among Whites and Blacks where none exists.The lies the Press and Democrat Party leadership deliberately propagate and perpetrate have permeated throughout society, with many Americans believing it, damning both Trump and the tens of millions of Americans who have supported him. Many highly educated, articulate Blacks realize the harm the Big Lie and false narratives do, as they nurture of enmity as, of course, they are designed to do. Treating Blacks as inherent victims serves only to demean the race, evoking a reality that is false and pernicious and reprehensible; and treating Whites as inherent oppressors serves to castigate the race, evoking a reality that, too, is false and pernicious and reprehensible.The orchestrators of this great Myth do so with the intent to create perpetual enmity between the races. They have used it, to date, to great effect to justify the subjugation of all Americans: inducing in the White Race fear a sense of guilt, remorse, despair, along with the desire for redemption; and inducing in the Black Race anguish, rage, a lack of esteem, along with the desire for revenge and retribution. Thus, the proletariat of both races must look to Government alone for succor and security from all harm; not to one’s family, and not to one’s own indomitability of spirt, and not to the Divine Creator.This injurious stratagem is no accident. It has been carefully crafted, calibrated, and implemented to compel mass conflict and to draw attention way from the goals of the real defilers and spoilers of the world who have engineered this stratagem to reduce the citizenry of this Nation to penury and servitude. Black intellectual visionaries and articulate speakers such as Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Peter Kirsanow, Jason Whitlock, Horace Cooper, and Candace Owens, certainly see the incipient, imminent danger this stratagem of the neoliberal globalist elites and the Radical Left poses for all Americans. To their credit these sensitive, perceptive, educated African-Americans have called out the purveyors of lies. Apparently the Press and many cable news  broadcast news channels have been too caught up in their own false narratives too notice, as they ARE the purveyors of lies.The forces that crush intend to take us back to a dark time in our history: to recreate it, magnify it, distort it, allow it to gestate and infuse in the masses and to permeate all of society; and to use it as a pretext to undermine the sacred rights and liberties of Americans, and with that—control us all.Trump disagreed with the plan of the forces that seek to crush America into submission. His America First plan emphasized the importance of American initiative; reliance on the individual and of the sanctity of the Self. He applauds American inventiveness and achievement, and he provided the impetus for it. Trump recognizes and has supported the Nation’s Bill of Rights, upon which the sovereignty and well-being of the citizenry depends—has always depended. All this is fact, and Trump has been maligned for it. The Nation’s Bill of Rights mean little if anything to Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and those who pull their strings. They and those who pull their strings are adherents of the tenets of Collectivism. Amorphous Groups, not individuals, are of importance to them, for groups can be easily manipulated. Individuals not so easily.Trump’s extraordinary accomplishments on behalf of the Nation and its people are a testament to his desire and fortitude to serve the Country; its people; and to serve the U.S. Constitution, the bedrock of a free Constitutional Republic. But the well-being of the Country, its people, and the plain meaning of the Constitution mean little to those forces intent on ridding the Nation of Trump. For in ridding the Nation of Trump, as they see it, they also rid the Nation of the need to operate within the constraints of the Constitution they duplicitously and disingenuously say they ascribe to serving.Despite Trump’s singular accomplishments—perhaps precisely because of them—the forces that crush have worked tirelessly, feverishly to bring Trump down. It is because he had proved that America can truly be the World’s leader that he is maligned. He has demonstrated the importance of Nation’s spirit that each Nation should cultivate for itself, on behalf of its own people. He has been brought down not because of any perceived failure, but, rather, because of his admirable successes in both the domestic and foreign policy fronts.With Biden in Office all that Trump accomplished will be reversed. It will be back to foreign wars and intrigues and wasteful loss of American life, wasteful spending of taxpayer monies; obeisance to China; sycophantic behavior to the neoliberal Globalist elites of the EU; an open Southern Border, resulting in waves upon waves of poorly educated illegal alien migrants coming to our Country, drawn to America by the thought of free American largess; thousands more murderous transnational gang members, drug cartels, and sex traffickers following along with caravans of  thousands of freeloaders; top down control of public education; top down control of the police; abortion on demand; the eradication of our civil liberties and the evaporation of our fundamental rights; the annihilation of our history, heritage, traditions, and values; the release of tens of thousands of career criminals and severely mentally ill people onto the streets to prey on innocent Americans; strict control of language, thought, and conduct—and all this just for starters.The new world order that powerful, malevolent, malignant, and secretive mega-billionaire neoliberal globalist Obstructers and Destructors seek to impose on the citizenry, through their puppets in Congress and in the White House, and in the Federal Bureaucracy, requires not the preservation and well-being of this Nation, this Nation’s Constitution, and requires not the inherent sovereignty of the people, but, instead, an end to all of it. And with firm control of the police, military, and the intelligence apparatus, along with the willing cooperation of the Press, academia, and the Courts, and with Big Tech, and Wall Street given free rein to continue to reap billions of dollars at the expense of the average citizen, a free Constitutional Republic, envisioned by the founders of the Republic, is about to become nothing more than a footnote in a massive revisionary historical textbook.We are now truly facing our critical Eleventh Hour._______________________________________________

SHH! DO NOT WHISPER THE TRUTH: “TRUMP WON THE ELECTION”

PART FOUR

At no other point in time, since the opening salvo of muskets marking the commencement of the American Revolutionary War in 1775, a war against the tyranny of King George III, a war that gave birth to the most powerful, most prosperous, and most beneficent Nation on Earth, have we Americans—the beneficiaries of the sacrifices made by those founders of our Nation, the first Patriots, and of the millions of soldiers who have fought and of the many who died to protect and preserve our Nation since—faced our truest test of faith. The election of a U.S. President is as much an historical tradition as it is a Constitutional requirement under the Twelfth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.The 2020 U.S. Presidential election was no ordinary election. Most Americans knew full well, as did sinister, powerful, wealthy, jealous, and ruthless forces behind the scenes, that this election, as the previous one in 2016, would determine the future direction of our Country—for the foreseeable future and conceivably for all time.But President Trump lost the U.S. Presidential election. Or did he?There exists substantial evidence of massive elections fraud and illegal manipulation of the electoral process of several key States. Yet, the Press and the Democrat Party leadership vehemently denies this, calls Trump and those who protest the outcome of the election liars, and persecute Americans relentlessly for merely asserting the fact of it. But where is the investigation to prove the assertion, false?The Federal and State Courts have routinely dismissed Trump’s lawsuits out-of-hand.The U.S. Supreme Court, apart from Justices Alito and Thomas, would not allow the critically important Texas case to be heard, patently and ignobly ignoring their Article 3, Section 2 original jurisdiction mandate, that requires the high Court to review cases involving suits between States as no other lower State or federal Court has authority to do so.Texas did have standing to present its pertinent, critical case to the High Court—a case in which seventeen other States joined—challenging the electoral processes of a few other States that intentionally, invidiously violated Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution.Chief Justice John Roberts wouldn’t even deign to allow Texas a hearing to present its case, apparently thinking that, to do so, would give credence to the merits of the case, even if the Court were thereafter to decide against Texas, concluding that the mere fact of allowing a hearing before the High Court would only serve to diminish the false narrative the Press had been relaying and playing to the public, denying out-of-hand the very idea that massive elections fraud had in fact occurred, handing the election to the imposter Joe Biden when the election was handily won by Trump. John Roberts, and the other members of the liberal wing of the Court would not allow, must not provide a forum for Texas and 17 other States to make their case that a few critical rust belt States, along with Georgia, had in fact unconstitutionally made changes to their elections laws to assist in the mammoth 2020 U.S. Presidential elections fraud scheme.The question is: why did Associate Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, play along with this? Did Justice Roberts browbeat his colleagues? Consider the report by Vision Times. See also report in Real NSE.And, then there is the odd, out-of-character, perfunctory, oblique, nebulous remark of then Attorney General, William Barr. The National Review, referencing the AP, reports Barr as saying, on December 1, 2020,“There’s been one assertion that would be systemic fraud and that would be the claim that machines were programmed essentially to skew the election results. And the [Department of Homeland Security] and DOJ have looked into that, and so far, we haven’t seen anything to substantiate that.”One assertion of systemic fraud? DOJ looked into that and so far, has found nothing? Really?But when did this investigation commence? Who, exactly, did the investigating? What, precisely, did those “investigators” investigate? Is the investigation ongoing? How much time has been spent on this investigation? Where is the report? Is there a report? Will the public ever see the report, if, in fact there is one forthcoming? Unfortunately we cannot ask Mr. Barr these questions. He abruptly and quietly resigned from Office. CNBC reports that Barr submitted his letter of resignation to President Trump on December 14, 2020,  two weeks after making his comment to the AP. The resignation took effect on December 23, 2020, just before Christmas. And, we haven’t heard a word since from the DOJ.Deputy Attorney General, Jeffrey Rosen, replaced Barr. But, Rosen hasn’t said anything further about the DOJ investigation into elections fraud. We know next to nothing about Rosen. The ABA Journal points out that Rosen has no prosecution. In fact we haven’t heard a damn thing from Rosen about anything—not least of all, about the status of the Durham investigation.As this article goes to publication, soon, very soon, the senile, corrupt Joe Biden will take the Oath of Office, becoming the 46th President of the United States. One should ponder that. Of course, Biden will be served with legions of advisors from the Obama Administration, including those from the banking sector, and those from the technology sector. They likely will make all decisions, with Biden rubber-stamping those decisions. The forces that crush, through their puppet, Joe Biden, will go to work to reverse Trump’s many achievements, returning the Nation back to the Agenda set for it by the shadowy forces that pulled the strings of Bill Clinton, two Bushes, and Barack Obama. As MSN news reports, quoting The New York Times,“President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr., inheriting a collection of crises unlike any in generations, plans to open his administration with dozens of executive directives on top of expansive legislative proposals in a 10-day blitz meant to signal a turning point for a nation reeling from disease, economic turmoil, racial strife and now the aftermath of the assault on the Capitol.” The critical question is this: will the Nation be able to withstand the coming storm, retaining a free Constitutional Republic as the framers of our Constitution constructed and intended for it, a free Constitutional Republic where the people themselves are and remain sovereign over Government—where Government exists to serve the people and not the other way around—OR will a free Constitutional Republic and a sovereign people cease to exist; the American people losing their sacred rights and liberties: the right of free expression, association, constrained, attenuated; the ownership and possession of firearms, curtailed; the people under constant surveillance, impoverished physically and spiritually; harassed; subjugated?This question isn’t hyperbole notwithstanding that many Americans, the seemingly sensible middle and upper-middle class Americans who define themselves as socially and politically liberal—and who may, or may not, object to the antics of the Radical Marxists and Anarchists rioting and causing general mayhem in our Cities for months on end—think that a Biden/Harris White House and a Democrat controlled Senate, along with a Democrat Controlled House of Representatives, doesn’t portend the end of our Republic, but simply a return to normalcy. But, in that belief, these ostensibly sensible, pragmatic middle and upper-middle class Americans are dead wrong.Happy these Americans claim to be to see Trump go, and they are oblivious to the fact that their own lives are about to take a radical turn for the worse. But they have themselves to blame for that.___________________________________________________________

A WAR UNDERWAY FOR THE SOUL OF THE NATION

PART FIVE

A war is being waged against the United States. This war commenced at the very point Americans achieved their independence from the oppressive monarchy of George III of Britain, and it’s a war against Americans that has gathered steam in the last couple of decades before President Trump brought the Destructors’ Agenda to a screeching halt.This war is being fought between two factions: very much a war of light against the dark.One faction consists of those Americans who seek to preserve our Nation as handed down to us by the founders of it: an independent sovereign Nation-State and free Constitutional Republic grounded in a formal Constitution, governed by the American people themselves—through their elected representatives.The other faction consists of Counterrevolutionaries: those who are dead-set intent on tearing our free Constitutional Republic down and constructing a new Order—a true Marxist State—not to be construed as a genuine sovereign, independent nation, one defined by geographical borders, and these Counterrevolutionaries have brought into the fold, millions of ordinary Americans—Americans who have been effectively brainwashed to think that the danger to the Nation existed in the person of Trump and that a Biden/Harris Presidency will thwart “the Trump danger” when nothing could be further from the truth.The Counterrevolutionaries and the sinister, secretive neoliberal Globalist elites who control them, have in mind an ambitious project. They seek to create an amalgam, comprising the remains of western nation-states, where the governments of these nation-states exist only as paper relics because the real rulers of these “nations”—nations that are now merely vestiges of their former selves, mere geographical regions each containing millions of multivarious impoverished people—emanate from Brussels. This is apparent from an analysis of the governing authority of the purported nation-states presently comprising the European Union. Biden intends to make amends to Brussels, to atone for trump’s apparent sins. but are these overseers of the EU truly our allies? How can they be?The Western titans of industry and finance and technology are the true rulers of this new Order, governing the world through their proxies in the Biden Administration, in the EU, and in other major Western Countries. Above them, we see the Rothschild clan, whose progenitor created the institution of the private Central Bank cartel that has enslaved and bankrupted Nations. And there is the Royalty of Europe. But is there anyone or anything else above these sordid people? Indeed, who can say what manner of man or creature controls the controllers at the apex of the pyramid that IS the “Eye” of the pyramid? And we see the dire effects of their agenda: enslavement of mankind.The European Union constitutes the germ of the grand design of this new transnational world order: the vehicle for enslaving mankind. With the United Kingdom finally out of the EU—after years of attempts to compel the UK to remain—it remains to be seen whether or how long the UK will remain free of the shackles of the EU if in fact it is free of the constraints of Brussels. An eleven month “transition” takes place now. But will the UK really be free of Brussels? We would bet against it. With the neoliberal Globalist elites’ attention and efforts directed first and foremost to undermining the 2020 U.S Presidential election, to ensure that their puppets Biden and Harris take over the reins of the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government, and with Trump about to take his leave from Government, the ruling elite of Europe will draw their attention once again to the problematic UK.Other western nations will eventually be brought directly into the EU’s orbit, namely and especially the Commonwealth Nations. But the real prize, the one the elites and their counterrevolutionary proxies had coveted most of all, is the United States.With its technological expertise and vast natural resources, along with its extensive and unparalleled array of military, police, and intelligence apparatuses, the forces that crush have now orbit, utilizing these apparatuses for their own selfish and nefarious purposes.And the Chinese Communist empire has its own designs, ambitions, and objectives for the Nation, and Joe Biden is their “Manchurian” Candidate in a real sense, as well as being a puppet of the Western neoliberal globalist elites.China has bought and paid for Biden and they intend to profit handsomely from him.Communist China’s aims are primarily geopolitical and military. The aims of the Western titans of industry and finance and technology are, as they essentially have always been—monetary—but they cannot ignore the import of geopolitical and military dominance lest they be run over by China. The formation of an uneasy world Dyarchy appears to be on the horizon for the world.Of the mass of the commonalty in Europe, the Commonwealth Nations and of the commonalty of China, and of Russia, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, these peoples are already doomed. It is no accident the poor, impoverished, or outright lazy, would make a mad dash for the United States, seeking handouts at the expense of Americans, who, like they, will be reduced to abject poverty and misery, as few dollars will exist to benefit anyone at the bottom of society.Can Americans prevent or lessen the severity of what is about to befall them? All that stands between Americans and annihilation, is their fundamental, natural, unalienable, illimitable, and immutable right of free speech and their right to keep and bear arms—rights bestowed on man by the Divine Creator himself, as etched in stone in the Nation’s Bill of Rights. Both these crucial God-given rights are being whittled away to nothing.When the corrupt Joe Biden and the sordid, horrid Kamala Harris get into Office and with the contemptible, deceitful Chuck Schumer as Senate Majority leader, along with the priggish Nancy Pelosi, once again firmly entrenched as Speaker of the House of Representatives, we Americans—who have, to date, been given but a foretaste of erosion of our fundamental, illimitable, immutable, unalienable right of free speech and right to keep and bear arms—will see these rights not only sharply curtailed, but obliterated, extinguished.An armed citizenry and a citizenry that speaks its own mind cannot be tolerated and cannot long remain in a totalitarian environment. Such rights contradict the objectives of the tenets of Collectivism. And the very existence of an armed citizenry is wholly incompatible with and poses an imminent threat to dictatorial rule and to the coming New World Order. An autocracy demands exacting uniformity in thought and conduct among the mass of commonalty and, through their puppets in Congress and in the vast Government Bureaucracy, the secretive, ruthless Globalist elites intend to crack down hard on all dissent and they intend to crack down hard on the means through which the people can assert their sovereignty over Government, i.e., through force of arms, as the founders had intended. The New World Order would otherwise all come crashing down.For the first time in American history, we will see a person take the Oath of Office with few people in attendance. Military and police presence will be massive. This evident show of force is, of course, overkill. But it does have a subtle, sinister purpose. It has less to do with ensuring protection of the inauguration farce that it may proceed unhindered, and it has more to do with demonstrating to the American people that the era of a free Constitutional Republic and of their sovereignty over the Government is about to come to an end. Not surprisingly, the Washington Post, the mouthpiece of the centi-billionaire Jeff Bezos, is letting everyone know that Washington, D.C. is now tied down tight as a corset around a woman's waist. Reading about the lockdown, one gets the distinct impression that the globalist elites are positively giddy that they now have control over our Country. Recall, it wasn’t that long ago the same Washington Post mocked Trump for wishing to stage a massive military parade for Independence Day 2019. Obviously, it isn’t a show of military force that the Press finds unbefitting the United States, but, rather, whom it is that has authorized such a military show of force and for what purpose it has been arranged. A show of force is peculiarly, ironically befitting for the Nation, where, as here, Americans witness one Grand Imposter undertaking to swear in another Grand Imposter to the Highest Office in the Land. Where a show of force demonstrates the idea of a powerful America, demonstrative of Trump’s “America First” principle as an expression of pride of Country, that notion, the Press tells us, is, to be taken as wholly unacceptable. But, where a show of force at the Nation’s Capitol is exalted, as a gesture of defiance directed against the citizenry itself, that, apparently, is quite all right. It is rather odd to say the least, but strangely appropriate if at once unsettling, when one stops to think about it. Such a happenstance is typical of the pomp one sees in totalitarian regimes where the Dictator demonstrates, through an overwhelming show of military force and police presence, both the pretentious, seemingly omnipotent power the Dictator wields over the populace and, paradoxically, the Dictator's real fear of that very populace. But, as for us, it certainly doesn’t smack of a friendly atmosphere for a solemn American event. One might have hoped that the police and military presence would be a wee bit more discreet. But in a topsy-turvy America, to expect some measure of discretion at a U.S. Presidential inauguration would be too much to ask. Civilian presence as virtually nonexistent and military and police presence omnipresent is an apt scene for an Alice-in-Wonderland nightmare such as we Americans now find ourselves in. But, then, Biden never really did draw much of a crowd at an event, did he? With the dawn of a new world order upon us, expect to see mindless circumambulations, bizarre edicts, and implausible, incomprehensible explanations to justify or rationalize the most awful actions Biden/Harris Administration will soon thrust upon our sad Country.Where words of the Radical Left regularly come to signify the opposite of what one might reasonably expect from the usual meaning of them and where untold suffering of Americans is unassuaged by Press assertion of the purported good intentions behind Government action that gave rise to that suffering, and if this is what Americans can expect, is it any wonder that tens of millions of Americans should respond with foreboding of a Biden Presidency?His handlers might wish to present Joe Biden as the Great Healer and Unifier of America—and perhaps Biden really sees himself as such—but from what we can gather to date from Biden’s words and actions, this is all deliberate deception and grand illusion.Biden’s Presidency will sicken the citizenry, not heal it, and his Presidency will divide and is ultimately meant to destroy the Nation rather than unify and preserve it. But then that is the endgame. Suffused with soothing words of calls for unity are concerns expressed aplenty about what to do about 75 million to 80 million people who voted for and who supported President Trump and who supported Trump's policies and initiatives. How can Biden and Congressional Democrats expect to unify the Nation, if in fact, they truly mean what they say, if, in the same breath they claim that Trump supporters are beyond the pale? There is a huge disconnect here. And, the fact of the matter is that Democrats must come to grips with those 75 to 80 million people. If the Biden/Harris Administration and Congressional Democrats continue to act with disdain toward and remain suspicious of Trump supporters, then any attempt at unifying the Nation is doomed at the get-go. But 75 million to 80 million people in a Land of 33o million is not an insignificant number. If the lockdown at the State Capital is any indication, a massive military and police presence in this Nation may become as ubiquitous as the wearing of masks in this era of the Chinese Communist plague. It is very difficult to claim that the United States is now to become a Democratic society, when the Nation did not exist as such under Trump, so the Press tells us, if the entire Nation lives under constant military and police surveillance. Perhaps Biden will tell us that this is necessary in order to preserve public order and safety, even as the prisons and mental institutions are emptied of their many wards, but the proof, as they say, is in the pudding. If actions belie words, it is the actions that will dictate how the public perceives a Nation existing under the dictates of a Biden/Harris Presidency. But, we know what the neoliberal globalists and Radical left globalist Marxists want to erect, and that bears watching, because it is they who are in control of the U.S. Government, and they are very much concerned about the existence of too much free public discourse and of the freedom of association, and above all else, they are concerned about the presence of a citizen army, the foundation of a truly free Constitutional Republic and of a sovereign, independent Nation-State, which they detest.Both billionaire neoliberal globalists and Radical Left globalist Marxists seek to destroy the Nation-State, rewrite history, shred the Constitution, disarm the citizenry, and clamp down hard on all dissent. In the last several months, up to the last couple of weeks, and to the run-up of the inauguration, Americans have obtained a very, very good foretaste of what to expect from a Biden/Harris Presidency. The coming clampdown of dissent will be couched in such terms as 'insurrection,' 'domestic terrorism,' 'white supremacy,' and 'racism,' the first two of which, 'insurrection' and 'terrorism,' are legal terms of art. The word, 'terrorism,' as defined in Title 18 of the United States Code, is understood to mean 'international terrorism.' And, to our knowledge the expression, 'white supremacism'  and 'racism' are not legal terms of art, only  political and social ones. There is no reference, as yet at any rate,  as far as we are aware, to the application of terrorism in the domestic sphere to the notions of 'white supremacism' and 'racism,' equated with or implied in the notion of 'terrorism.' In fact, 'white supremacism' and 'racism' pervasive or not, prevalent or not (and there is little if any evidence to suggest that even a significant minority of Americans espouse such ideas, apart from incessant railing by the Press and by the Radical Left members of Congress) do not of themselves implicate terrorism in the legal sense. That is likely to change in the Biden Administration, given the abundance of news reporting of late that refer continuously to the notion of 'domestic terrorism.' There likely will be a flurry of activity to enact laws specifically designed to target right-wing political groups, leading inevitably to the disbanding and banning of any such organizations. But, one must ask, will the application of 'terrorism' to those groups espousing right-wing, ostensibly, extreme political thought, but not directed to the use of violent attacks on and upheaval of the U.S. Government, still be treated as illegal domestic terrorist organizations, nonetheless? Probably. But, then, will the same label, name, or appellation not also apply to extremist left-wing political groups, such as Antifa, and Black Lives Matter, that admittedly espouse radical Marxist and Anarchist ideologies and that have espoused and have used violence against both Governmental institutions and Government officials and have utilized violence against private individuals and against private businesses as an obvious terror tactic to tear down society? Ought not those groups also be designated as outlaw domestic terrorist organizations and associations that should themselves be shut down? Not likely. And, that takes us to the expressions, 'white supremacism,' and 'racism.  These are constantly invoked as favorite talking points of the mainstream media. The public is told of the prevalence of white supremacism and racism in our society. But are they really? If so, where are they to be found? All around us, the public is told. A person waves a battle flag of the confederacy. Is the act of doing so an example of illegal conduct, namely insurrection and domestic terrorism that must be stamped out, or is it protected speech, if framed as an defiance? Under our law the waving of a Confederate battle flag IS protected speech, a fundamental, natural right, but doing so may not be treated as such, for much longer. But, suppose someone wishes to wave the Red and Gold Hammer and Sickle flag of the old Soviet Union as an act of defiance, expressing the desire for the creation of a Communist State in the United States. Is the act of waving that flag an example of allowable protected speech and the act of waving a flag of the Confederacy or waving the flag, say, of the Third Reich, untenable, illegal? If so, why allow the one but not the others? Is that not straightforward hypocrisy and duplicity? One need only look to the extent to which the Biden/Harris Administration and the Democrat Party controlled Congress strive to preserve our Nation's fundamental rights and liberties as codified in the Bill of Rights or attempt to constrict them or curtail them outright to be able to infer whether this Nation continues in some capacity, at least, as a free Republic, or whether it truly degenerates into an autocracy, the very thing that the Press has proclaimed that Trump espoused and where the Press and many Congressional Democrats said we were headed under a Trump Administration, but was, for all that, curiously, absent.In the Trump Administration, apart from the misuse of the DOJ and BATF to unlawfully rewrite Federal Statute to ban "bump stocks," and apart from the silent but pervasive invasion of the our privacy through rampant violation of the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, creating a true surveillance society that we can thank both the Bush Administration and Congress for, and which Trump never curbed, still, President Trump's Administration never banned political expression or sought to do so, or strove to curtail the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Quite the Contrary. President Trump strove to preserve our Nation's First and Second Amendment fundamental, natural, unalienable rights, recognizing that the constraining of them or outright curtailing of these rights is incompatible with the tenets of Individualism and incompatible with the sovereignty of the American people, and incompatible with the existence of a free Constitutional Republic. If Trump were truly the Autocrat or Tyrant that Congressional Democrats and the Press say he was, there was no evidence of that. One of the first things a true Autocrat and Tyrant would do is clamp down on speech and curtail civilian ownership and possession of firearms. From what we can see, it is only Democrats and the technology monopolies that wish to clamp down hard on dissenting voices, and we have been getting a good taste where we are headed on that front.Under a Biden/Harris Administration, the public may very well see the unlawful censoring of political expression, couched as it is in moralistic terminology, among other things. The first 100 days of the Biden/Harris Administration will tell the public much about what we may expect. Our guess is that public policy directed to the constraining and eventual curtailing of expansive free speech and stringent constraining of possession and ownership of firearms is, unfortunately, just around the corner, up around the bend (to use a phrase from the lyrics of a catchy Credence Clearwater Revival song).If the destruction of the American spirit and the oppression of the American people are in fact at hand, what will Americans do about it?Is there anything that can be done now to preserve the Republic and the fundamental, natural, unalienable rights and liberties of the American people as the final hours of the Trump Presidency draw to a close, and a horrifying new world dawns? At this point all we can do is hold our breath and wait.

POSTSCRIPT

It is now day’s end January 20, 2021. President Trump has departed the White House, and Joe Biden, now U.S. President Joe Biden, has been sworn into Office by Chief Justice John Roberts. And Kamala Harris, now Vice President Kamala Harris, has been sworn in by Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor. It is all hard to believe and harder yet to take all this in.Some Americans hold out hope on the 2022 Midterm elections when the Republicans have an opportunity to regain control of the U.S. Senate and gain yet more seats in the House, or so some Congressional Republicans tell us. But this is problematic. If, in fact, as substantial evidence of elections fraud points to, the Big Steal occurred, then why should anyone profess faith that elections fraud won’t occur in the 2022 Midterm elections as well. Indeed, did not elections fraud permeate the Georgia runoff elections that had predicted a clear Republican victory? Instead, the Senate obtains two sorry cases: one a wife beater and the other with ties to Xi Jinping’s China, and both likely Communists.Press pronouncements proclaiming the integrity of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election electoral are hardly reassuring when they amount to nothing more than blanket denial. Yet the Press would have the electorate accept Press denials as self-evident truth when they clearly are not. The Press also routinely asserts that claims of elections fraud are unsubstantiated, when, in fact, many have been substantiated and those that haven’t are still predicated on sound and reasonable allegations which courts of competent jurisdiction should have permitted to proceed to discovery, but perfunctorily dismissed the cases, to suggest that the courts did not want the truth to come out. The Press also says that claims of elections fraud have been debunked. But, curiously, the Press never  troubles itself to explain who it was that debunked claims of elections fraud, or when it was that claims of elections fraud were debunked, or how claims of elections fraud were debunked. It is also rather curious that the Press and Big Tech become defensive, agitated, and angry over the entire matter of claims of elections fraud. If those who profess to be certain as to the integrity of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, are in fact so certain of it it seems odd they absolutely insist that no investigation should ensue. After all, the election of a U.S. President is no trivial matter. Given the sheer number of accounts of elections fraud that beset the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, and the fact that such accounts are compelling, it is highly suspect that those who profess certainty that no fraud occurred should wish to preclude comprehensive investigation of the matter. Investigation would go a long way to allay suspicion of massive elections fraud.To dismiss investigation of elections fraud out-of-hand serves only to invite suspicion and helps explain the consternation and puzzlement of Trump supporters, tens of millions of us. It is deeply puzzling, too, that there would be angry calls for expulsion of Senators Hawley and Cruz from the Senate merely for making their case for an investigation into elections fraud. There seems to be a deep desire on the part of many in Congress and in the media to bury this matter quickly and completely. And the U.S. Supreme Court, as well, apart from Justices Alito and Thomas, express an all too cavalier attitude toward allegations of State violations of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. Hope for Republican capture of the House and Senate in 2022 is little merited when Americans must depend on the very integrity of an electoral process that is much in doubt. And, if that is all that we have, after our worst nightmare realized, a Biden/Harris Presidency, and loss of the Senate as well, and two years to wait while the Biden/Harris Administration reverses a good many of Trump's major accomplishments, this Hope is not much of a consolation prize. When Pandora opened the box that Zeus had given her as a "gift," she would have done well to let Zeus keep her gift. Curious to see what that gift contained, she took a peek, and let out all manner of troubles into the world. One item remained: Hope. That was all that was left in the box; nothing more.Better it would have been had Pandora kept the lid of the box shut. The world would not have Hope, true; but, then, the world would have had little or no need of it, anyway, in the absence of Troubles and Worries and Pain, all those things to vex the world that would have been much better left in the box, together with Hope.____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

THE UNITED STATES: ON THE ROAD TO PERDITION

The United States of America is going to hell in a handbasket. You know it. I know it. But whose fault is it? No, it isn’t your fault, nor is it mine, nor is it the fault of tens of millions of other Americans who voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and once again in 2020.And why did we vote for Trump? Did we vote for him because of a winning personality or because of having a down-to-earth communication style? Some citizens did so, perhaps. But many of us don’t care about any of that; nor should we.We voted for Trump because we knew he’s our best chance—our only chance—to get our Nation back on track and to keep the Nation on track after the singular mess Bill Jefferson Clinton, George “Dubya” Bush, and Barack Hussein Obama made of our Country.Clinton presented us with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), a monstrous, unfair trade deal, devastating to our manufacturing base.Bush embroiled us in a war with Iraq, since metastasizing, across the Middle East into a trillion plus dollar cluster-f**k that has caused death or injury to well over 20,000 Americans and over 1.6 million disability claims, and untold death and misery to millions of inhabitants of the region. And the mess is ongoing. See barbaramcnally.comAnd, as the Great “Apologist-in-Chief,” Obama humbled and humiliated our Nation. See thehill.com and heritage.org.This denigration of our Nation in the eyes of the world was not mere happenstance, it a carefully crafted implemented plan meant to target the psyche of and to work on the psyche of Americans to weaken Americans' resolve, so that they would turn away from their Nation. Once this were accomplished, it would be relatively easy to nudge the public's acceptance of a new world order, one in which America no longer exists as an independent sovereign Nation-state. In concert with this scheme to demoralize and undermine the will of the American people, Obama machinated behind the scenes with powerful neoliberal Globalist Corporatists to develop two massive trade pacts: the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP). If implemented, these two mammoth trade deals would have destroyed what remains of our manufacturing base, and in the process, would have undermined our Nation’s Constitution and system of laws, subordinating them to the dictates of international law and foreign tribunals. See eff.org.Hillary Clinton would have signed these massive global trade agreements into law had Trump not defeated her, scotching the entire scheme, that took place in secret, over several years. Trump's action, signing an executive order, making clear to Congress that he would veto any effort to effectuate TPP and T-TIP, effectively killed these two massive trade deals. This, no doubt, enraged the Globalist elites who had spent inordinate money, time, and effort to accomplish their objective, only to see the realization of their efforts come crashing down.TPP/T-TIP was a sticky issue for Clinton during the 2016 election cycle, as Bernie Sanders, the darling of the Radical Left of the Party, whose own run for the Democrat Party nomination for U.S. President had gained increasing, and embarrassing momentum, had, as with Trump, adamantly opposed these trade deals, knowing full well that they would devastate what remained of our manufacturing base.  See npr article. And the the liberal LA Times, had this to say about the matter, back in 2016:“Donald Trump has made opposition to multilateral trade deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement and the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership a staple of his case against Hillary Clinton. And he quickly took the conversation there Monday.He says she supported the former, which the U.S. entered into during her husband’s administration, and the latter, which she helped negotiate as secretary of State.In fact, Trump argued, Clinton decided to oppose TPP only after she saw the popular response Trump was getting for his position.But Clinton has maintained she opposes TPP, a position she has been forced to reiterate with greater clarity.“I will stop any trade deal that kills jobs or holds down wages — including the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” she said at a campaign stop in Ohio in August. “I oppose it now, I’ll oppose it after the election, and I’ll oppose it as president.”So did Clinton flip on TPP? Context is key.The deal would be the largest multilateral trade agreement ever negotiated, involving the U.S., emerging economies such as Vietnam and traditional trading partners including Japan, Canada and Mexico. It’s a major priority for the Obama administration, which sees the deal as key to cementing the president’s so-called pivot to the Asia-Pacific region. Obama hopes to persuade lawmakers to ratify it before year’s end, but Clinton’s opposition now exemplifies the political difficulty.As a member of the Obama Cabinet in his first term, Clinton carried out the president’s priorities. Speaking on a trip to Australia in 2012 as negotiators from the partner nations were still deep in negotiations, she outlined the goals for it.“This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field,” she said then. “And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40% of the world’s total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment. That’s key because we know from experience, and of course research proves it, that respecting workers’ rights leads to positive long-term economic outcomes, better jobs with higher wages and safer working conditions.” Had the Globalist elites and their Governmental puppets succeeded with their insidious, sinister, secretive, and heinous behind the scenes plotting to bring TPP and T-TIP to fruition, Americans would have ambitious trade pacts would have ushered in a new transnational, supranational, world-wide, economic, political, social, cultural, and juridical construct they would be well on their way to realizing their goal of a transnational, supranational corporatist construct. Biden has made plain his intent to return to the Globalist agenda, but that may not sit well with the Radical Left. Biden, not surprisingly equivocates, but when push comes to shove, he will side with the Globalist elites on this.Forbes spins this, as does Bloomberg news, to suggest TPP isn’t such a bad thing.There’s a definite pattern to be observed here. We see, in the actions of these three past President charlatans—and in both the defeated Hillary Clinton and in Joe Biden, the latter of whom may very well be inaugurated on January 20, 2021, as the 46th U.S. President—a vast, global conspiracy; a complex, multifaceted scheme; an act of treachery against our Nation, so monstrous in the conception and expansive in its scope, and elaborate in its e execution, that most Americans cannot begin to fathom the enormity of it or the vileness inherent in it. Yet, no one can reasonably deny it. What has taken place slowly and, therefore, imperceptibly, albeit methodically and inexorably, over the space of thirty years, has accelerated remarkably and in earnest in the past six months with the death of a small time crook and drug addict, George Floyd. His death, ostensibly at the hands of a renegade police officer, served as the pretext for ensuing waves of violence across the Country.The Globalist elites and the Marxist and Anarchist hordes had sought for decades to tear down the entirety of our society. And, in the last six months following Floyd’s death, Americans have seen blatant, obstreperous, transparent attacks on our Nation’s cherished history, on our culture, on our core values, on our institutions, and on our Judeo-Christian ethic.We have seen the reprehensible destruction of our Nation’s monuments and artwork, and the incomprehensible, reprehensible, denigration of the founders of our Nation. The spoilers and destructors of our Nation have pushed to dismantle a free Constitutional Republic. They have subverted the independence and sovereignty our Nation. They seek to reduce the American people to a life of servitude, penury, subjugation, and unending misery, and abject hopelessness, no less than the populations of Third World countries.Americans did fight back.In 2016, Americans rejected the Globalist goals, and in Trump, they voted for a man who said he would return the Nation back to its rightful owners, the American people. And he has been true to his words and to his salient aim, as expressed, in his 2016 motto, “Make America Great Again.” Among Trump’s major accomplishments:He revoked Globalist pacts and treaties, that were designed to sell-out our Nation to Billionaire neoliberal Globalist corporatists.He reversed the disastrous economic policies of his predecessors, improving the life and well-being of average Americans as well as American businesses.He destroyed the Islamic State.He cemented relationships between Arab Nations and Israel, thereby stabilizing the Mideast. He has attempted, despite those who have sabotaged his efforts, to end the insane incessant American commitment to endless warring.He nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court, highly capable individuals who have demonstrated a desire to preserve the sanctity of our Constitution, consistent with the intention and wishes of its framers.He has protected our Nation from the dangers posed to American citizens by the incursion of millions of illegal aliens into our Nation. He has strengthened our Nation’s bond to its history and core values and has made clear his continued commitment to the strengthening of our Nation’s fundamental, natural rights and liberties.And he has emphasized his support for the sanctity of our Bill of Rights, especially our right of free speech, free association, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms.All these things were no easy tasks that Trump set for himself on behalf of the Nation, its Constitution, and the American people. But they were necessary as they served to undo the harm that fifteen years of Clinton, Bush, and Obama had caused. See recent Arbalest Quarrel article, titled, “Trump Makes Good On 2016 Campaign Promises and Has Earned A Second Term,” posted on November 1, 2020. Tens of millions of Americans supported Trump in his worthy efforts and they continue to support him, that he may complete his campaign promises, strengthen our Nation and its Constitution, safeguard its sacred history, heritage, and core values, and continue to create economic opportunity for all Americans in a Land that ensures the life, health, physical safety, prosperity and well-being of all Americans.What could be wrong with this? Anything? Apparently, everything, to some.There exist in the world today powerful and influential forces whose desires and goals are not America’s desires and goals. These forces seek to upend the very concepts of ‘citizen and ‘nation-state.’They talk of a “Great Reset” that purportedly will benefit everyone once Trump leaves Office and is replaced by the Biden/Harris team.But just what is this “Great Reset” that will bring the U.S. back into the fold of the agenda set by the Globalists, that their lackeys, Clinton, Bush, and Obama had worked obediently toward? The Hill explains:“For decades, progressives have attempted to use climate change to justify liberal policy changes. But their latest attempt – a new proposal called the ‘Great Reset’ – is the most ambitious and radical plan the world has seen in more than a generation.At a virtual meeting earlier in June hosted by the World Economic Forum, some of the planet’s most powerful business leaders, government officials and activists announced a proposal to ‘reset’ the global economy. Instead of traditional capitalism, the high-profile group said the world should adopt more socialistic policies, such as wealth taxes, additional regulations and massive Green New Deal-like government programs. “Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed,” wrote Klaus Schwab, the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, in an article published on WEF’s website. ‘In short, we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism.’ Schwab also said that ‘all aspects of our societies and economies’ must be revamped,’ ‘from education to social contracts and working conditions.’ Joining Schwab at the WEF event was Prince Charles, one of the primary proponents of the Great Reset; Gina Gopinath, the chief economist at the International Monetary Fund; António Guterres, the secretary-general of the United Nations; and CEOs and presidents of major international corporations, such as Microsoft and BP. Activists from groups such as Greenpeace International and a variety of academics also attended the event or have expressed their support for the Great Reset. Although many details about the Great Reset won’t be rolled out until the World Economic Forum meets in Davos in January 2021, the general principles of the plan are clear: The world needs massive new government programs and far-reaching policies comparable to those offered by American socialists such as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) in their Green New Deal plan.” Since the day of Trump’s inauguration, the propagandists, that include the Press and Big Tech, went to work. They played on—preyed upon—Americans’ emotions and sense of decency. They conveyed to Americans an America that is out-of-touch with the rest of the world. They conveyed an America that owes its very existence to a lie: the lie of a fair, and just America.They created and perpetrated a myth about America. They sought to instill in Americans ideas that the Nation is inherently evil, racist, inhumane, unjust. These propagandists called America’s core values into question. They even called into question the very foundation upon which our Nation was built and upon which it requires to exist, Christianity, and the idea of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, infinitely just, and infinitely loving and benevolent Divine Creator.The propagandists sought to instill awful, hateful, psychically damaging memes into the core being of each American. These memes caused many Americans to doubt their own morality and their own love of Country, as, of course they were designed to do.New concepts were invented, engineered and then inserted into the psyche of Americans by social media and the Press: ‘white privilege;’ masculine toxicity;’  ‘Cancel Culture;’ ‘Critical Race Theory;’ ‘Christian Nationalism,’ and several others.Many Americans obsessed over these viruses, developed mental anguish over them, became the willing tools of those who sought to tear down our Country. If successful, this would permit the Globalist elites to return to their agenda, which they now refer to as the “Great Reset.” Big Tech was on board. The Tech monopolies prevented other voices from being heard; knowing full well that if these other voices were heard, such voices would dilute the propagandists’ messaging; for sane voices would operate as an effective antidote to the viral propaganda plague.And Big Tech succeeded. Massive disinformation and misinformation campaigns had their desired, intended effect.The Billionaire Globalist elites’ last gambit paid off. With tens of millions of Americans voting for their stooges, Biden and Harris, having fallen victim to years of propaganda, and with significant help from the manufacturers of voting machines, and with assistance from the illegal actions of courts and State officials who permitted massive illegal voting to occur throughout the Country, the stooges, Biden and Harris, seem to obtain more votes than Trump. But appearances can be deceiving.Did Biden and Harris beat out Trump and Pence? Or did millions of seemingly legitimate votes that went to Biden and Pence operate merely as an effective smokescreen to hide the fact that Trump obtained millions of votes more than Biden and Harris?Ought not the DOJ investigate the illegal collusion of the Big Tech companies and polling companies that manipulated the public mind into falsely believing that Trump could not win the election? Did these companies cajole millions more Americans into casting votes for Biden/Harris when they otherwise would not have done so, would likely not have done so, had Americans’ access to all the available information instead of just some of it: the propaganda?Lacking any concrete reasons for not voting for Trump many voters simply relied on their hatred of him based on the constant fake news—a well-organized, well-funded, and well-executed campaign of disinformation and misinformation—dished out by a seditious Press, along with the unconscionable, insufferable censoring of information by Big Tech. This coordinated, interminable attack on free speech amounts to systematic, deliberate information starvation, and methodical psychological conditioning, resulting in ‘mass psychosis.’The propagandists have induced—seduced—millions of Americans into selling their souls, having voted for the Manchurian Candidate and the Globalist’s Delight, Joe Biden, a fourth charlatan, following in the steps of Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Barack Obama.What these Americans’ think ushers in the Nation’s salvation, instead portends its ruin. This is not an honest deal from the top but “a deal from the bottom” of the deck. We, Americans, will see an end to our Nation as a free Constitutional Republic; an end to our fundamental freedoms that we, as Americans, fought long and hard to secure and, thence, to enjoy. What is difficult to secure and preserve will be extraordinarily arduous to reclaim once lost.This is the first U.S. Presidential election where many in the electorate didn’t vote for a President so much as voting against one, and that shows the extensive power and range of propaganda to influence broad swaths of the population, illustrative of broad-based mind control. Biden and Harris have said damn little about what they intend to do once they become President and Vice President, respectively, if they become Office holders. And they have often contradicted themselves when they discuss their policy aims at all. Still, Americans can glean much from the words and actions of those they obviously represent: The Globalist elites, and the Radical Left Marxists and Anarchists know full-well that most Americans who did vote for them don’t stomach a return to neoliberal globalization and the systematic dismantling of the Constitution. So, the Biden/Harris team handlers told the two to keep their mouths shut. And a compliant Press did nothing to prod the two for information and Big Tech Billionaires kept a lid on alternative news and commentary sources lest the illusion of a return to normalcy and tranquility through a Biden/Harris administration, be shattered. But the life, security, and well-being of America’s children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren will be in jeopardy.The Press and Big Tech induced many Americans to vote against their own best interests. While the Press and Big Tech discouraged what they termed Hate Speech, they did their best to encourage Americans to positively loathe Trump. And, if Biden becomes the 46^th President, they will have done their part to turn the Country back over to the billionaire neoliberal Globalist Destructors of the Old National Order—which saw our Nation become the greatest, most productive, most powerful, wealthiest, on Earth—directing the vestiges of our Nation to embrace their New World Order.With the integrity of our elections legitimately being called into question, most Americans will not accept installation of Biden into Office; nor should they.The result may very well lead to civil war. And, the Globalists will be ready for this too, no doubt.While roving rabid mobs of Antifa and BLM degenerates are certainly no match for vigilant, cool, well-armed American patriots, the new Minutemen, it must need be considered that the Globalists will have, through their stooges, Biden and Harris, access to State National Guard, the U.S. military, even U.N. troops.Expect a long conflict if the 2020 election scandal is not thoroughly investigated and remedy effectuated.We will see how well Biden—this lame, physically and mentally weak “Unity President,”—succeeds in this first big test of “his” Presidency. From what we have seen, just weeks before the inauguration, it doesn’t look good for him; nor for us._________________________________________Copyright © 2020 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.