First, a few links:
Now, a brief video:
Savor that video. We haven’t seen anything like it in a century of Establishmentarian rule…and should we lose President Trump, we may not see anything like it ever again.
After reading the above-linked articles, my first thought was “what will President Trump say about this?” After seeing the little video, I said to myself that “I should have known.”
Establishmentarians have lived by the rule that Thou shalt speak no ill of a member of our little club. Note that even Barack Hussein Obama, who castigated the Bush II Administration for many things – unjustly, in most cases – never criticized Dubya himself. Obama knew the rule. Establishmentarians know that the public has come to see them without party labels: “the politicians,” or “the government.” To denigrate or condemn one, regardless of party affiliation, would cast doubt upon the whole of our Ruling Elite – and the paramount need of any Establishment is to remain Established. “The aim of the High is to remain where they are.”
President Donald Trump is from outside the Establishment. His possession of great wealth is irrelevant; as the saying goes, they wouldn’t have him on toast. He’s too candid, too outspoken, and too resolved upon doing what he thinks best. That’s three mortal sins against the Established Order, and for those there can never be adequate penance…not that Trump would ever agree to kowtow to them.
Treason is defined in the Constitution of the United States:
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. [Article III, Section 3, first paragraph.]
…so according to the definition above, they who have striven with all their forces to destroy President Trump have not committed treason. But Trump has a bombastic style; he tends to overstate his case. What they are guilty of is difficult to define, but their intent – to remove President Trump from the office to which he was elected, or failing that to obstruct the use of his powers of office – is not.
At the very least, such persons ought to be expelled from the federal government and forbidden ever again to work in it. It will be up to the Attorney-General to determine whether they’re guilty of prosecutable offenses.
For many years thinkers have debated whether a great man seizes the times, or the times create and elevate the man. Ultimately it doesn’t matter. The United States was near to losing its way completely. The continuation of the Obamunist agenda by a President Hillary Clinton would have nullified our Constitution and the rights it guarantees in toto. We came that close to losing everything.
We’re still teetering, for reasons I need not recapitulate here. But we have a chance to recover, and the reason is President Donald J. Trump.
I, for one, am grateful.
2 comments:
I can't say whether he will eventually be considered a Great Man. However, he's a Good Enough for the Job Man.
That's enough to get my vote - again.
Whether or not our great President can win re-election against the stacked deck, he has a chance to re-establish the constitution should he be bold enough to act. When the Durham/Barr team finally indict the Obama cretins of the Russia collusion plot, the President should direct the an expanded indictment of the entire demonRat establishment from the lowest functionaries to the highest power brokers and finally the demonRat party itself should be prosecuted and outlawed. Thus there will be no opposition in the November election and he can get on with the business of cleaning up the Augean Stable of government corruption.
Post a Comment