This Would Be Funny If It Were Not So Serious

One of the problems with the political left’s claim that January 6th was an insurrection is that none of the ‘insurrectionists’ had weapons. The only person shot was an unarmed civilian by a policeman, and there are a lot of questions surrounding the incident. I somehow think real insurrectionists might have been armed. I also wonder why they are called insurrectionists when there is public video showing the police waving them into the building. But a narrative is a narrative I guess. At any rate, the political left is not done with January 6th. Their next step is somewhat unbelievable.

Yesterday BizPacReview posted the following:

The FBI has previously stated that no firearms were found in connection to the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol, but despite that contention, the media is now breathlessly reporting that authorities have found guns in the homes of protesters.

“Numerous people arrested in connection with January 6 have also had weapons in their homes, including this latest case just today — 3 pistols and an AR-15,” Mother Jones explosively tweeted in reference to an NBC report.

“Some January 6 defendants, including additional Oath Keeper members charged with conspiracy, have lied to investigators and went to significant lengths to destroy evidence of their communications related to the insurrection, according to court documents. Others have kept weapons in their homes in violation of pretrial orders. And some defendants have threatened future attacks,” they reported.

The defendants have not been found guilty of anything yet. They still have Second Amendment rights. I seriously doubt the part about future attacks since there was never an attack to begin with.

The article continues:

NBC New York is reporting that a man named Antonio Vuksanaj was arrested Thursday in connection with the Jan. 6 protest on federal trespassing-related charges. An AR-15 as well as three other guns were allegedly found in his home. The media outlet notes that it is unclear if these were his and if they were possessed legally. It should have been fairly simple for a major media outlet to find out if that was or wasn’t the case but it apparently doesn’t make for as good a headline.

Vuksanaj was turned in by a tipster and has pleaded not guilty. He’s facing trespassing and disorderly conduct-related charges which don’t appear to have any connection to possessing firearms. Nevertheless, outlets such as Mother Jones are seizing on the fact that he had guns at home which may or may not have been perfectly legal.

The article also notes:

Sanborn (Jill Sanborn, an FBI official) contended at the time that nobody from the riot was facing weapons charges, though a firearm was recovered from a van containing Molotov cocktails found near the Capitol. It is not publicly known whose van that was and if those involved were actual protesters taking part in the riot.

Please follow the link above to the article. The tweets in response to the Mother Jones article are hilarious. Mother Jones needs to go back to her days of Acapulco Gold and give up on the magazine.

The Roots Of January 6th

The Constitution does not grant us our rights–it specifically states that our rights come from God. The Constitution is there to protect those rights. Unfortunately, many of our leaders have forgotten that. Those on the political left have begun to use our federal agencies as an arm of the Democrat party. They have also learned to use the media to blunt the blow when information about their questionable activities is about to come out.

Yesterday American Greatness posted an article that noted the role played by The New York Times in downplaying the pending indictment against Michael Sussman. Sussman, as you probably remember, was instrumental in getting the idea that Donald Trump was colluding with the Russians out into the public square. Well, The New York Times is at it again.

The article reports:

On Saturday, the Times published a carefully constructed bombshell intended to soften the blow of an explosive scandal in the making: the FBI had at least one informant among the group of Proud Boys who marched on the Capitol on January 6. The informant, according to “confidential documents” furnished to the paper, started working with the FBI in July 2020 and was in close contact with his FBI handler before, during, and after the Capitol protest. 

“After meeting his fellow Proud Boys at the Washington Monument that morning, the informant described his path to the Capitol grounds where he saw barriers knocked down and Trump supporters streaming into the building, the records show,” reporters Alan Feuer and Adam Goldman (the Times reporter most responsible for priming the ground for news that was unfavorable to the Russia collusion narrative) wrote on September 25. “In a detailed account of his activities contained in the records, the informant, who was part of a group chat of other Proud Boys, described meeting up with scores of men from chapters around the country at 10 a.m. on Jan. 6 at the Washington Monument and eventually marching to the Capitol. He said that when he arrived, throngs of people were already streaming past the first barrier outside the building, which, he later learned, was taken down by one of his Proud Boy acquaintances and a young woman with him.”

In other words, one of the informant’s Proud Boy “acquaintances” was removing temporary barriers to allow a crowd to enter the restricted grounds around the building.

Sounds legit.

The article also notes that there was another informant who took part in the sacking of the Capitol.

The article concludes with the following story:

In fact, after Beattie’s articles posted in June, Alan Feuer, the same reporter who co-authored this weekend’s spin story, wrote a piece disclosing Rhodes had been interviewed by the FBI in May. (Feuer’s article, conveniently, was posted after FBI Director Wray testified twice on Capitol Hill this week.)

Further, in my interview with him this week, Thomas Caldwell, one of the first people arrested in the Oath Keepers case, told me Rhodes approached him during a Stop the Steal rally in Virginia last November. Rhodes told Caldwell the Oath Keepers provided security for conservatives and asked if he’d be interested in assisting in the future.

Caldwell gave Rhodes his contact information, which led to Rhodes connecting Caldwell with other Oath Keepers; plans were made to travel to D.C. and meet near the Capitol after Trump’s speech on January 6.

Caldwell’s home was raided and he was arrested on January 19, just two weeks after the protest. Prosecutors already had a trove of evidence against Caldwell, which is highly curious considering Caldwell never entered the building and was charged with no violent crime.

How did the government get Caldwell’s information so quickly? It certainly suggests the involvement of someone working on the inside, someone who immediately provided investigators with incriminating evidence.

Someone like an FBI informant.

One thing is certain; the Times damage-control article is just the tip of the FBI iceberg. And more proof January 6 was an inside job.

How are the actions of the FBI considered Constitutional?

When Your False Flag Event Doesn’t Happen

I firmly believe that the rally held in Washington, D.C., yesterday was supposed to be a ‘false flag’ event. I am sure that those on the political left were hoping a large crowd would show up and act like the ‘protesters’ at Black Lives Matter protests. Despite the fact that the rally was for a good cause–there are people in Washington, D.C., jails that as you read this are being denied their Constitutional rights–the rally was small. Many people who are aware of the situation of the January 6th political prisoners were not willing to take a chance on being part of a ‘false flag’ event. Although that was probably wise, it is obvious that a damper is being placed on the free speech of conservatives.

Today, Townhall posted some tweets about the rally. Below are two of them.

 

 

When The Media Totally Goes Off The Rails

It must be difficult right now to hold a job in the mainstream media. Think of all the pretending you have to do–Joe Biden is a good President, Kamala Harris is qualified to take over as President if necessary, the 2020 election was not stolen, January 6th was the end of our Republic. And the beat goes on.

On Sunday, Newsbusters posted an article about a recent discussion that occurred on CNN.

The article reports:

As we have all learned from Joe Biden’s presidency, the phoniest/baloney-est claim from liberals is that they have a deep desire for national unity. There is no unity in compromise, only in surrender to the Left.

At the end of Sunday’s Reliable Sources, fill-in host John Avlon interviewed the PBS gasbag Ken Burns, asking him about national unity, and he’s as phony as Biden. This is CNN, so Avlon demands unity in exaggerating the January 6 riot:

AVLON: You’ve made the point in terms of the quest for unity, that at the end of the day, Americans usually can rally together when something catastrophic has occurred. Sometimes that’s what’s required to focus it on our underlying humanity. And yet, the attack on the Capitol on January 6 does not seem to have united us. Instead, there is remains an effort to rewrite even that recent history. So, what hope do you have about a path forward when we have not been able to unite around an attack on our capital, the worst and the first since the War of 1812?

BURNS: Yeah — it’s terrifying. This is one of the great crises along with the Civil War, the Depression, and the Second World War that we have in large measure because things fall apart, the center cannot hold, mere entropy is loosed upon the world.

Somehow I suspect that neither one of these men has ever served in the armed forces.

The article concludes:

BURNS: And I don’t think there’s any right- thinking American — we can disagree on how you get things done — what the role of government is that I don’t think anybody wants this noble experiment to dissolve just when we have in our grasp the possibilities and the tools with which to solve these things. And we have looming ahead of us, this huge global threat of climate change that has to be addressed, and we can’t now permit the Flat Earth Society any more time.

The obvious question is who decides what the Flat Earth Society or its equivalent is. The left is convinced that the only path to unity is forcing everyone to agree with them.

The Friday Night News Dump

If you are a political person who has to report on a story that does not support the media narrative, the best time to leak the story is on a Friday night. It is really advantageous to leak the story on a Friday night when something like the fall of Afghanistan is occurring. The chances of anyone seeing your story are minuscule compared to what they normally would be. So it is not surprising that the following story was posted by Reuters at 5 pm on Friday, August 20th.

Reuters reports:

The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

“Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases,” said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. “Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.”

This is not news to anyone with a brain. There were a lot of eyewitness accounts about people who were not dressed like the Trump supporters at the rally and did not have the attitude that was prevalent at the rally. There was also the fact that the attack on the Capitol occurred before the rally was over. There was also the fact that President Trump instructed those at the rally to go to the Capitol to show their support for the Congressmen protesting the possible election fraud and to do it peacefully. This news article goes against the picture the Democrats and some Republicans were attempting to paint. Therefore it was released at dinnertime on Friday.

The article continues:

Stone, a veteran Republican operative and self-described “dirty trickster”, and Jones, founder of a conspiracy-driven radio show and webcast, are both allies of Trump and had been involved in pro-Trump events in Washington on Jan. 5, the day before the riot.

FBI investigators did find that cells of protesters, including followers of the far-right Oath Keepers and Proud Boys groups, had aimed to break into the Capitol. But they found no evidence that the groups had serious plans about what to do if they made it inside, the sources said.

The article includes a picture of one aspect of what happened in the Capitol that day with a predictable caption. There are no pictures taken from the video of the police waving the protesters in.

The article notes:

Prosecutors have filed conspiracy charges against 40 of those defendants, alleging that they engaged in some degree of planning before the attack.

Many of those defendants are still being held in intolerable conditions in the Washington, D.C., jail without bail or visits from their families. They are essentially political prisoners in America.

The article includes the usual spin, failing to mention that the assault on the Capitol began before President Trump told his supporters to peacefully march there and referring to the President’s speech as incendiary.

Again, the article at Reuters is a classic example of a Friday-night news dump. They spun it as best they could, but a well-informed reader will see right through the spin.

A New Low In American Justice

Yesterday American Greatness posted an article about Timothy Hale-Cusanelli, an Army reservist arrested on January 15 for his involvement in the January 6 protest in Washington, D.C.

The article reports:

During a status hearing Friday afternoon for Timothy Hale-Cusanelli, an Army reservist arrested on January 15 for his involvement in the January 6 protest in Washington, D.C., an assistant U.S. attorney admitted the government will not meet its discovery obligations for all Capitol defendants until early 2022.

Kathyrn Fifield, the lead attorney representing the Justice Department, informed Judge Trevor McFadden that the “incalculable” volume of video collected by the government related to the Capitol breach investigation will prevent defendants and their lawyers from accessing the full body of evidence against them for several more months. “No system exists to wrap its arms around [all this evidence],” Fifield told McFadden. This includes at least 14,000 hours of surveillance video plus thousands of hours of body-worn camera footage from law enforcement.

Fifield resisted setting a 2021 trial date for Hale; McFadden and Jonathan Crisp, Hale’s court-appointed attorney, told the government last month that unless a plea arrangement was agreed upon, a trial would be set for later this year because Hale already has been incarcerated for more than six months. “If we do set a trial date, the government cannot meet discovery obligations until early 2022. That’s a conservative estimate,” Fifield said.

The article notes the strange handling of this case:

Despite the lack of evidence against him, Hale has been behind bars since January. He is not charged with any violent crimes but the Justice Department repeatedly—and successfully—has sought his pre-trial detention. (McFadden denied Hale’s release in March.) 

The article concludes:

On July 7, the D.C. Circuit Court denied Hale’s appeal seeking release.

McFadden scolded the government for its backwards process. “You would not arrest [someone] then gather evidence later. That’s not how this works.” When Fifield said full discovery is in the best interest of the defendant, McFadden shot back: “Freedom also is important to the defendant.” The Trump-appointed judge raised concerns over Sixth Amendment violations. “This does not feel what the Constitution [and] the Speedy Trial Act envisions.”

Despite the government’s confession that it is not prepared to make its case against Hale, McFadden set a trial date of November 9, 2021. (He did not release Hale, who has no criminal record, from prison.)

“No January Sixer should be made to suffer in a jail cell while the DOJ continues to delay discovery simply because it can,” one defense attorney told me by text this afternoon. “This is unprecedented, unreasonable, unconstitutional, and wrong.”

This is what a dictatorship detaining political prisoners looks like. Where are the people in Congress who swore an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. This is a total violation of the Constitution they swore to defend, and most of Congress has been totally silent about the matter.

The Civil Rights Of Some Americans Are Being Ignored

On June 2nd, The World Tribune posted an article about the prisoners held in Washington, D.C., after the riot of January 6th.

The article reports:

If you listen to Democrats and anti-Trump liberal Republicans like Sen. Mitt Romney and Rep. Liz Cheney, you’d think that nothing was being done about the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. Never mind the FBI’s all-out hunts and raids across 44 states. Never mind the continued detention of an unknown number of pro-Trump supporters. Never mind the more than 2,000 criminal charges brought by federal prosecutors against nearly 500 Americans arrested over the past four months.

Nope. Absolutely nothing is being done, the gaslighters insist, so these partisan opportunists are pushing forward with their witch-hunt commission to uncover the “facts.”

Republicans are right to oppose this charade and the continued weaponization of Jan. 6. It’s not about finding the truth. It’s about foisting the same old false narratives about conservatives on the public. It’s about holding every Republican and Trump supporter accountable for the violent or reckless actions of a few.

Patriots should be united in demanding answers about the murder of Jan. 6 protester Ashli Babbitt. GOP Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona is leading the way on that and has called for the feds to “release the tapes” in her case and others. American Greatness editor Julie Kelly reports there are some “14,000 hours of footage” being suppressed by Washington, D.C., prosecutors and judges. Republicans should also be united in raising the alarm over abusive treatment of detained Jan. 6 protesters held in solitary confinement, which even Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Dick Durbin have criticized.

Defense attorney Marty Tankleff, who represents two Jan. 6 detainees being held in the Washington jail and is aiding in the defense of a third, has raised the alarm over the un-American conditions of solitary confinement imposed on MAGA rally-goers. “These are individuals who are only accused of crimes,” he told me, “being held in 23-hour lockdown” and denied basic amenities.

Defense Attorney Tankleff has an interesting history:

If there is one lawyer in America who understands what it’s like to endure human rights violations in prison, it’s Tankleff. At age 17, the New York lawyer and adjunct professor at Georgetown University was himself wrongfully accused and convicted of the murder of his own parents. He spent nearly 18 years clearing his name and amassing evidence and witnesses that his father’s former business partner had orchestrated a hit on his parents. Tankleff’s conviction was overturned in 2007; he won two multimillion-dollar wrongful conviction civil suits, earned his law degree and was sworn in to practice law in New York in 2020.

The article concludes:

But for Tankleff, “the biggest issue is the inability of those who are incarcerated to aid in their own defense. There’s hundreds of hours of video, and there’s no way the Department of Corrections is going to allow either lawyers to sit there for hours after hours or those who are incarcerated and denied bail to get laptop computers (which has been done in cases throughout this country) where you can actually provide all the discovery on laptops. To me, none of the individuals should be denied.”

There is no good reason to keep these defendants locked up pending trial. “There are plenty of safeguards that could be implemented to protect the return to court of many of these individuals,” Tankleff argues. “And if they were granted bail, they would have an opportunity to go to their lawyers’ offices, aid in their own defense, review the discovery and really understand the accusations against them.”

We don’t need a Kabuki commission. We need action: Release the tapes. Free the Jan. 6 defendants. Shut down the American gulag.

Why isn’t the Biden administration protecting the civil rights of these American citizens?

This Needs To Be Repeated Every Day Until It Ends

The Federalist posted an article today about the contrast between how the Justice Department is treating those arrested in Washington on January 6th and those arrested during the riots in America’s major cities last summer.

The article reports:

One would think a major report from a group representing America’s top law enforcement leaders analyzing the widespread riots of 2020 would have garnered significant media attention. One also would think such a report would garner widespread discussion after the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capital due to the parallels between it and the 2020 riots. Given our hyper-partisan environment, however, one would be woefully wrong.

Specifically, back in October 2020, the Major Cities Chiefs (MCC) released a comprehensive report full of data from dozens of cities that provides deep insights into the 2020 riots that plagued America after George Floyd’s death in Minnesota. The MCC’s “Report on the 2020 Protests and Civil Unrest” served as an excellent after-action report that cities, states, and the federal government could use to reform their practices and, equally importantly, to prepare for future riots.

The article notes the difference in the events of last summer and the events of January 6th:

Now here’s a prime example of dissimilar treatment for far worse actions. The January 6 riot involved no guns or fires among protesters, only makeshift weapons like flag poles, batons, and objects from the area.

In contrast, the 2020 riots involved guns, incendiary devices, lasers, paint bombs, and fireworks that were used to torch buildings and cars, hurt police officers, and destroy meaningful parts of many U.S. cities. Despite the far greater violence and destruction the 2020 rioters perpetrated, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) haven’t hunted those rioters down with anywhere near the vigor and vim used against what are in many cases at most trespassers.

…In stark contrast, the left and the media continue to falsely claim law enforcement officers were killed on January 6. While some law enforcement officers were certainly injured during that riot, the numbers and severity are far below the law enforcement injuries from the 2020 riots.

More than 2,000 law enforcement officers were injured during the 2020 riots, with numerous officers being shot and one, retired captain David Dorn, brutally murdered while protecting his friend’s shop from rioters. The 2020 rioters also shot other protestors.

In contrast, the only person violently killed on January 6 was the unarmed protester Ashli Babbitt, at the hands of a Capitol Police officer whose identity still remains unconfirmed by public officials.

The article notes:

Left-wing rioters wisely did their acts in cities controlled by Democrats and with Democrat district attorneys, who went soft on them despite their disproportionate violence. In contrast, those who rioted on January 6 had the great misfortune of being in a jurisdiction controlled by anti-Trump Democrats and zealously left-wing U.S. attorneys looking to impress their fellow leftists.

Most of the people involved in the civil unrest that took place last summer have had their charges dropped. Many of the people involved in the January 6th unrest have been refused bail. Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It is a chilling commentary on what has happened to our justice system in recent years.

The Questions That Were Neither Asked Nor Answered

Yesterday Fox News posted an article about comments made by the National Police Association Spokeswoman Betsy Brantner Smith about the Congressional hearings about the events of January 6th.

The article reports:

The National Police Association on Wednesday slammed Congress’ investigation of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot as a politically motivated “dog and pony show” that has no intention of uncovering the truth of what really happened that day.

In an interview with Fox News on Wednesday, association spokeswoman Betsy Brantner Smith, a retired police sergeant who describes herself as a conservative, said Congress should hear from the thousands of police officers who were injured during the George Floyd riots last year.

…”Myself, like millions of Americans, sat there watching the testimony thinking, ‘Wait, where are the police officers who appeared – appeared – to let some of the protesters in?” she asked. “Where is the police officer who shot Ashli Babbitt? In fact, why aren’t we talking about Ashli Babbitt? I mean there’s so much more here.”

Brantner Smith’s comments came the day after four law enforcement officers who responded to the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol gave testimony to a House select committee about their experience.

Brantner Smith said those officers have been “politicized by Congress,” and that while their stories are important, the American public also deserves to hear the stories of the “more than 2,000” men and women in law enforcement who were injured during last year’s violent protests.

She cited a poll last week by the NPA and Rasmussen Reports that found 66% of likely U.S. voters think Congress should investigate the riots spurred by Floyd’s murder last May.

The article concludes:

“The veracity of the defund the police movement is directly related to crime in that area,” she continued. “We’re not saving Black lives by defunding the police, by reimagining police, by vilifying the police. And that’s what I think is so disingenuous, and I think it’s confusing for people. Because I think a lot of Americans say, of course, black lives matter. I mean, who doesn’t believe that black lives matter? But yet these policies in the name of Black Lives Matter are actually killing more Black people, damaging the lives of Black people than the police ever have.”

“We’re reaching a tipping point and I think yesterday kind of woke some people up — I hope. I hope,” she said.

Show trials are not going to help the ongoing crime problem that has developed in American cities since the ‘defund the police’ movement. Residents of the cities where crime has spiraled out of control need to seriously consider who they will vote for in their next mayoral and city council elections. That decision could be the beginning of a solution to the crime problem.

Somehow The Truth Got Lost In The Drama

I watched a portion of the hearings about January 6th yesterday. It was high drama and very little truth. I am sorry that the police and the congressmen were so traumatized by unarmed citizens after the Capitol police waved those citizens into the building (there is video evidence of this). The hearings were a sad reflection of the political left trying to paint opposing views as dangerous. What happened on January 5th was inexcusable, but it wasn’t an insurrection–insurrections involve guns and violence (much like what we saw in major cities last summer). The only person killed was an unarmed civilian. That needs to be investigated, but the politically biased hearings that are taking place will never investigate that.

Yesterday Red State posted an article about the lies told in the hearings.

The article reports:

Actually, if we are going to use the broad rubric that Thompson is using, thousands of people lost their lives for a variety of different reasons across the country. Regardless, only one was a direct result of something done at the Capitol that day. That would be Ashli Babbitt, who was shot and killed by an unidentified police officer. No, Officer Brian Sicknick did not die of injuries he sustained in the line of duty. He died a day later of a stroke he suffered nearly 12 hours after the events of January 6th. That is not in dispute. Any connection to January 6th is purely speculative, and in no other situation do we blame the deaths of officers who die of natural causes on stress endured while on duty. That’s not how any of this works.

Thompson is also lumping in two officers who later committed suicide despite there being no direct evidence whatsoever that their decisions were based on January 6th. All the other deaths in the “seven” mentioned were of natural causes.

Then there was the claim that January 6th was the worst attack on the Capitol since 1812.

…Further, the Capitol building has been bombed numerous times throughout its history, resulting in extensive damage. The idea that the meandering trespassers of January 6th represented a greater threat than literally being shot or blown up does not pass muster. It’s the kind of claim a hysteric makes without regard for the facts.

Officer Harry Dunn also used the analogy of a hitman in an attempt to link President Trump to what happened at the Capitol. That is also a false charge.

The article also notes:

A lot of things happened on January 6th. What did not happen is a hitman directly ordering people to attack the Capitol, in this case, Donald Trump. During his speech, Trump specifically asked people to peacefully protest. That some of the protesters didn’t is ultimately on them for choosing not to listen. We have agency in this country, and people are responsible for their own actions.

The ‘peaceful protest’ at the Capitol was much more peaceful than the ‘peaceful protests’ in major cities last summer. Unfortunately the protesters from last summer are not being charged with crimes and there will be no Washington hearings on the cause of those ‘protests.’ We can expect more ‘peaceful protests’ this summer due to the defunding of the police in some of our cities and the lack of support for the police by some mayors of these cities.

America didn’t used to have show trials. This is one. It does not portend good things for the future of the country.

Who Decided The Polices Involved?

Yesterday Trending Politics posted an article about freshmen Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, who is leading Republican efforts to find out why those involved in the events of January 6th are being treated so differently than those members of Antifa and Black Lives matter who were involved in the riots last summer.

The article reports:

A group of Republican lawmakers led by freshmen Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado are demanding that the Biden administration explain the alleged unequal treatment of Black Lives Matter and Antifa protesters, many of whom have never spent a night in jail, and those who have been incarcerated for months following the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.

In a letter, Boebert and 10 other House Republicans asked Attorney General Merrick Garland to address “the apparent inconsistent application of the law with respect to rioters across the country,” according to the Washington Times.

“The foundation of our criminal justice system requires that all defendants are treated equally before the law, but the Biden regime is not living up to this solemn obligation,” said Boebert, in a statement.

The lawmakers say that prosecutors in Oregon have signed off on at least 12 “deferred resolution agreements in federal felony cases” resulting from clashes during last year’s protests in Portland, while some rioters from Jan. 6 are being held in solitary confinement.

“Reports are circulating that the Biden regime has held January 6th rioters in solitary confinement, while at the same time, they are letting BLM rioters that attacked federal buildings off with just a few hours of community service,” Boebert said.

The article concludes with a quote from a letter written by four Senate Republicans led by Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas in June:

“DOJ’s apparent unwillingness to punish individuals who committed crimes during the spring and summer 2020 protests stands in stark contrast to the treatment of the individuals charged in connection with the breach of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.,” said Tuesday’s letter from Boebert and the 10 other House members.

“Whether it is a mob breaking laws in D.C. or a mob in Portland or Minneapolis, the standard of justice should be the same in America,” they added.

The treatment of the people who entered the Capitol Building on January 6th is much more representative of a country ruled by a dictatorship than a free democratic republic.

Let The Games Begin

It’s no secret that the 2022 election season began in November of 2020. We still have more than a year to go before that election, and the jockeying for position is obvious. One aspect of this pre-election maneuvering is the Democrats’ formation of a committee to investigate the events of January 6th. There ave been some deals made, and there are now five Republicans that have been chosen for the committee. These selections are subject to the approval of Speaker Pelosi. Three of the Republicans chosen voted against the certification of the 2020 presidential election.

Yesterday NewsMax posted an article about the formation of the committee.

The article reports:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was noncommittal in approving of House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s Republican picks for her Jan. 6 select committee, saying she will decide when she is “ready.”

“I’m not prepared to make a statement on that, but I’m considering his proposals,” Pelosi told CNN on Tuesday, the New York Post reported. “I want to be clear how people voted affirming the election of Joe Biden is not a criterion for service.”

Among McCarthy’s five picks, three voted against certifying the Electoral College votes: Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Banks, R-Ind.; House Judiciary Ranking Member Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio; and Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas.

Banks is leading the GOP on the panel and will also be joined on the committee by House Administration Ranking Member Rodney Davis, R-Ill.; and Rep. Kelly Armstrong, R-N.D.

The committee, put in place by Pelosi after the Senate failed to pass the Jan. 6 Commission, will hold its first hearing next week, taking testimony from law enforcement officials who were assaulted by protesters.

McCarthy has been critical of the partisan bent on the committee to review the events of Jan. 6, and House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., questions Pelosi’s own handling of the security of the Capitol, potentially bringing some scrutiny on the originator of the panel.

Pelosi has permitted just five Republicans on the 12-member committee and has the authority to veto selections.

This is going to be interesting to watch. The purpose of the committee is to smear President Trump and somehow connect him to the incursion into the Capitol Building on January 6th. I suspect that if Speaker Pelosi feels that is not possible with the Republican committee selections, she will either refuse to accept the Republican committee members, cancel the committee, and blame the Republicans or she will begin a media blitz to discredit the people chosen.

Stay tuned.

When Our Justice System Is Unjust

The Epoch Times posted an article today about the treatment of some of the people who entered the Capitol Building on January 6th.

The article reports:

A federal appeals court on Wednesday upheld the pretrial detention of a Capitol breach suspect largely on the basis of his past history of “violent language” though he did not commit acts of violence, potentially making it harder for other defendants accused in connection with the Jan. 6 incident to secure release ahead of their trials.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C Circuit on July 7 upheld a lower court ruling ordering the pretrial detention of Timothy Hale-Cusanelli, who faces both felony and misdemeanor charges in connection with the Jan. 6 incident, including for allegedly entering a restricted building and disorderly conduct, though he is not accused of committing violent acts.

In an opinion (pdf), Judge Robert Wilkins said that the appeals court concluded that the non-violent nature of Hale-Cusanelli’s alleged offenses weighed “just slightly” in favor of release, as did his lack of criminal history, but that this was outweighed by factors including “overwhelming” evidence against him in the case, as well as a “well-documented history of racist and violent language” and that he “has been generally engaged in hateful conduct, if not necessarily violent conduct.”

Note that the Judge considers ‘hateful conduct’ a reason to deny the pretrial release request. The man has no criminal history and was not accused of committing violence. He is essentially being held for ‘thought crimes.’ Contrast this with the dismissal of the cases against most of the people who were burning down major American cities last summer. Something is very wrong here.

The article concludes:

It is unclear how the district court’s new ruling might affect other Capitol breach defendants, with several dozen remaining in pretrial custody of the more than 535 arrested and charged in connection with the incident.

It comes as former President Donald Trump on Wednesday spoke at a press conference at his Bedminster golf club in New Jersey, criticizing how Capitol breach defendants were being treated.

“People are being treated unbelievably unfairly,” Trump said. “When you look at people in prison and nothing happens to Antifa and they burned down cities and killed people,” he said, referring to last summer’s unrest in the wake of the police-custody death of George Floyd.

“There were no guns at the Capitol,” Trump said, “except for the gun that shot Ashli Babbitt,” referring to the military veteran shot and killed by a Capitol police officer during the Jan. 6 incident.

At the same time, two high-profile conservative legal activists are claiming the Department of Justice (DOJ) is using a double standard in its treatment of Capitol breach suspects, compared to those who were arrested during last summer’s riots.

Frankly, I Don’t Know What To Think Of This

The Gateway Pundit posted an article today that included the following video:

The video shows police firing flash bombs at peaceful protestors on January 6th. As you know, the powers that be in Washington have been very reluctant to release any of the video captured by security cameras or cell phones on that day. The videos posted at The Gateway Pundit might explain that reluctance.

The article reports:

As we reported earlier — On Jan. 6 Capitol Police started firing flash grenades and rubber bullets at peaceful protesters with US and MAGA flags.

From the video you can see the protesters are NOT on the Capitol steps and were behind barriers.
There were children, veterans and seniors in the crowd.

…Flash bang grenades in close range can cause hearing loss, eye damage, and other injuries.

This is your government Declaring War on its people!

Please follow the link to the article for more videos from that day. Unfortunately, as long as the Democrats are in charge of the House of Representatives, there will never be an honest investigation of what actually occurred on January 6th. We were the police and their riot control weapons all of last summer when several of our major cities burned? Where is that investigation?

Unfortunately This Is Not An Isolated Incident

On Thursday, PJ Media posted an article about a resident of New York City who attended the rally for President Trump in Washington on January 6th.

The article reports:

Joseph Bolanos doesn’t wear horns, isn’t a crackpot, and isn’t a terrorist. He has been a neighborhood watch leader in New York City’s Upper West Side for 23 years. In 2012, as president of the West 76th Street Block Association, Bolanos put up signs reading “rat xing” to shame the city into cleaning up the garbage. The neighbors loved him. Now the 69 year old is a neighborhood pariah. One neighbor who brought him Thanksgiving dinner recently wrote him a nasty-gram wishing him death. “I hope Antifa gets you,” the note read.

What changed? Bolanos attended the Trump speech on January 6. He did nothing wrong. He didn’t breach the U.S. Capitol. He never even went inside. He watched the former president deliver a “boring” speech, left early, went back to his friend’s hotel (where he has geotagged photos to prove it), and later went to the Capitol building, where he stood outside with friends after it was all over.

His Leftist neighbors, shocked that he went to see Trump and “had those views,” called the FBI January 6th tip line to report him.

“I opened the door and there’s about 10 tactical police soldiers and one is pointing a rifle at my head. [They had] a battering ram and a crowbar.”

It could have been worse. He could have been raided and then rounded up and imprisoned in solitary confinement for little to no reason as hundreds of other people have following the Capitol riot on January 6.

The article continues:

NBC, tipped off about the raid in advance, was there when the FBI Terrorism Task Force raided the apartments with battering rams and carried out box after box of items taken from the homes. The NYC affiliate reported in February:

Several neighbors claimed the man boasted of being at the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6 riots and took video of the event. Some said he called it a great day on the street, at a local cafe and on social media.

“I was walking down the street and I overheard him bragging about having been there and having taken video,” said neighbor Dennis Regan.

[…] One neighbor said that Bolanos had been “a great leader of the block and helped us in all kinds of ways,” but also said he didn’t know Bolanos “had those views.” Some some said the man who had become a face of the block had changed from the man they once knew.

“I used to talk with him a lot, but lately he never said anything,” said Luis Aguilar, a superintendent in the area. “He would walk by, he wouldn’t say hello like he used to do before.”

Although he has not been charged, sources familiar with the investigation say charges could come in the coming days. Sources told NBC New York the FBI wants to look at his electronics as prosecutors in D.C. decide on specific counts.

The article notes:

It has been four months and Bolanos hasn’t gotten back his devices, nor have any charges been filed against him.

Unfortunately this is not an isolated incident. I know someone personally who attended the rally (did not enter the Capitol because she became aware that the people urging the crowd on were not part of the pro-Trump rally), had her PayPal account canceled, and had an employee quit, calling her a traitor. This is not acceptable in our Republic. Holding an opposing political view is not grounds for arrest or losing freedom. We need to stand up against this regardless of which party is doing it. Otherwise we will never have the open debate we need to find the best answers to America’s problems.

Insanity Reigns

Don Surber posted an article today about the first person to be sentenced in the January 6th riot.

The article reports:

Elizabeth Pace of WAVE-TV in Louisville, Kentucky, reported, “Indiana grandmother will be first person sentenced in U.S. Capitol riot.” What was the woman’s high and hideous crime?

Parading.

Not insurrecting, but parading.

The story said, “The FBI arrested Anna Morgan-Lloyd, 49, and her friend, Dona Sue Bissey, in late February. According to the criminal complaint, Bissey posted a picture of them inside the Capitol during the insurrection, including comments of most exciting day of their lives.

“Bissey’s case is still pending and scheduled to appear in court July 19.

The article continues:

“Morgan-Lloyd was charged with a single misdemeanor of parading, demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building. She entered a plea deal in exchange of three years of probation, 40 hours of community service and a $500 fine. A federal judge will declare her sentence Wednesday.”

This is such a bogus charge and bogus investigation that my eyeteeth hurt.

This really was a mostly peaceful protest that the media called a riot — unlike those riots that did billions of dollars in damage to city after city, which the media called mostly peaceful protests.

A ban on parading, demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building violates the First Amendment in a manner the press once protested. Now the press hypes up a bunch of people protesting in the Capitol as some sort of combination of Pearl Harbor and 9/11.

How different it was when Marxists stormed the Senate Building in October 2018 to protest the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh.

Remember?

CNN reported, “Comedian Amy Schumer and model-actress Emily Ratajkowski were among more than 300 people arrested Thursday in protests over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.”

Arrested is too strong a word, because the story said, “Capitol Police said they arrested 302 people during the demonstrations. Video from the scene shows the two actresses being detained after an officer asks if they want to be arrested.”

They said yes.

I don’t think they asked Grandma Morgan-Lloyd if she wanted to be arrested.

And Capitol Police did not kill any of the demonstrators in 2018.

Contrast the handing of a grandmother parading around the Capitol (admittedly she should not have been there) and the looters and actual rioters in Washington last summer. Unless someone in Washington is willing to stand up to the abuses in our justice system, we are going to be a banana republic very soon (if we are not already).

Our Justice System Has Become Political

Yesterday The Washington Examiner posted an article telling the story of the people who were arrested in Washington on January 6th. It’s not a story that aligns very well with the constitutional rights of Americans.

The article reports:

Many participants in the Jan. 6 Capitol riots are being held in solitary confinement in Washington, D.C.’s city jail, a situation that’s drawing scrutiny from Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bob Casey and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The Department of Justice has charged 510 individuals in connection with the Jan. 6 breach, which began when supporters of outgoing President Donald Trump stormed the Capitol with the intent of trying to stop the certification of Electoral College votes for Joe Biden as president.

After Jan. 6, Washington, D.C., jail officials decided that all Capitol riot detainees be held in “restrictive housing” as a safety measure for the accused. However, the accused found themselves in solitary confinement 23 hours a day before their trials even started.

“I do not believe in solitary confinement for extended periods of time for anyone,” Warren, a Massachusetts senator and former Harvard Law School professor, said of the Jan. 6 rioters when asked by the Washington Examiner.

I very rarely agree with Senator Warren, but she is right in this case.

Even the ACLU has weighed in:

The American Civil Liberties Union, which has recently drawn criticism for favoring liberal causes over its tradition of representing unsympathetic clients and causes, is also weighing in on the side of Trump protesters being held alone.

“Prolonged solitary confinement is torture and certainly should not be used as a punitive tool to intimidate or extract cooperation. We’re pleased to see that message is getting through to Senators,” Tammie Gregg, deputy director of the ACLU National Prison Project, told the Washington Examiner in a statement.

If you remember, Paul Manafort, President Trump’s campaign manager was kept in solitary confinement. He was put in jail for mortgage fraud, not usually considered a crime worthy of solitary confinement. Our Justice Department has become politicized in recent years. If that does not change in the near future, living in America will be like living in a dictatorship–if you hold the wrong political views, your civil rights will not be respected.

A Good Narrative

Yesterday Sara Carter reported the following:

Washington, D.C.’s chief medical examiner has ruled that Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick sustained two strokes and died of natural causes one day after he engaged against rioters at the January 6 Capitol attack, The Washington Post reported Monday afternoon.

Monday’s ruling will probably make it challenging for prosecutors to file homicide charges in Sicknick’s death. A pair of men are accused of assaulting Sicknick by employing a powerful chemical spray meant for bears at him during the riot and have been charged with assaulting the 42-year-old officer with a deadly weapon, but the two haven’t been charged with homicide.

A good narrative doesn’t necessarily have to be true. A good narrative simply needs to be a believable collection or chain of events that tells a desired story. A good narrative can also have the purpose of furthering a political agenda or possibly preventing another narrative from coming to light. Right now I am convinced that since January 6th Americans have been subjected to a very well-crafted narrative about the events of that day.

I don’t know if some of the events of January 6th were false flag events. However, when I look at some of the narrative surrounding the events of that day and what followed, I wonder. Who gave the order to the police to let people into the Capitol building? Why did it take until now for the public to know the cause of death of Brian Sicknick? If it was an ‘armed insurrection,’ why was the only person shot that day an unarmed civilian? Why, as is the custom, wasn’t the name of the policeman who shot the unarmed woman released? Has anyone else noticed that the events of January 6th pretty much ended any meaningful discussion of or reporting of election fraud?

As I said at the beginning of this article, I have no idea how much of the events of January 6th were choreographed by people with a political agenda. I do know that a lot of the narrative that we were fed about that day has proven to be false. Many of the eyewitness accounts do not line up with the media narrative.  At some point, you have to wonder what was gained by that false narrative and who was actually behind it.

Words Matter

We have routinely heard the events at the Capitol on January 6th described as an armed insurrection. That has been the narrative of the mainstream media. However, it seems that there is a basic problem with that narrative.

Just the News posted an article yesterday about the Congressional hearings regarding the event.

The article reports:

No firearms were recovered on the U.S. Capitol grounds on Jan. 6 during the riot, and no shots were fired by the demonstrators, an FBI official on Wednesday told Congress.

“To my knowledge we have not recovered any [firearms] on that day from any of the arrests at the scene at this point,” said Jill Sanborn, assistant director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division. “No one has been charged with a firearms violation.”

Sanborn made her comments during a joint oversight hearing in the Senate to examine the breach of the U.S. Capitol. In addition to Sanborn, witnesses included the commander of the Washington, D.C. National Guard, and civilian officials from the Pentagon.

During testimony, Sanborn responded to questions from Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, who asked whether firearms were present or used during the siege.

“How many shots were fired that we know of?” Johnson asked.

“The only shots fired were the ones that resulted in the death of the one lady,” Sanborn said, referencing Ashli Babbitt, a protester who was shot and killed by a Capitol Police officer during heightened tension inside the building.

The article also notes:

Other testimony examined the timeline of when the National Guard was dispatched to help an overwhelmed civilian police force during the siege on the Capitol.

The National Guard was dispatched to the riot more than three hours after Capitol Police made a desperate call for help with a “dire emergency,” a two-star general testified Wednesday before Congress.

Major Gen. William Walker, who commands the District of Columbia National Guard, told senators that the 1:49 p.m. call for help from the guard on Jan. 6 was approved in a message that reached him after 5 p.m. At that point, troops who were waiting on buses sped to the Capitol, and helped to secure a perimeter, Walker said.

There is something very wrong with both the actions of a few people on January 6th and the response to the events both as they unfolded and later. There is no reason that the area around our nation’s Capitol Building should look like the green zone in Baghdad.

Why Were The Troops Refused?

Yesterday The National Pulse reported the following:

Speaking Steve Hilton on “The Revolution,” the former president outlined how he knew in advance of the crowd size:

“Everyone said we’ll be at the rally. It was, I think, the largest crowd that I have ever spoken to before. I have spoken to big crowds, hundreds of thousands of people, more than that, but hundreds of thousands of people.”

In response, Trump said he “gave the number” to the Department of Defense, insisting that 10,000 members of the National Guard would be needed.

“They took that number, from what I understand, they gave it to people at the Capitol, that is controlled by Pelosi, and I heard they rejected it because they didn’t think it would look good,” added Trump in the interview after his Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) speech.

The article notes that this was confirmed in a Vanity Fair article:

On the evening of January 5—the night before a white supremacist mob stormed Capitol Hill in a siege that would leave five dead—the acting secretary of defense, Christopher Miller, was at the White House with his chief of staff, Kash Patel. They were meeting with President Trump on “an Iran issue,” Miller told me. But then the conversation switched gears. The president, Miller recalled, asked how many troops the Pentagon planned to turn out the following day. “We’re like, ‘We’re going to provide any National Guard support that the District requests,’” Miller responded. “And [Trump] goes, ‘You’re going to need 10,000 people.’ No, I’m not talking bullshit. He said that. And we’re like, ‘Maybe. But you know, someone’s going to have to ask for it.’” At that point Miller remembered the president telling him, “‘You do what you need to do. You do what you need to do.’ He said, ‘You’re going to need 10,000.’ That’s what he said. Swear to God.”

I would like to note here that it wasn’t a white supremacist mob, but you will be hearing it described in that way in the future by those who want to limit your freedom. This has nothing to do with white supremacy–it has to do with creating an image of domestic terrorism that will allow the government to spy on anyone who does not support the current political agenda.

Unanswered Questions

Yesterday Tucker Carlson posted an article at Fox News that asks a lot of questions about the events of January 6th that remain unanswered.

The article notes:

Let’s start with the headline of the day: Five Americans died on the Capitol grounds on Jan. 6. You’ve heard that, but it doesn’t really tell you very much. It’s the details, as always, that matter. Who were these people and how did they die? That’s how you understand what actually happened.

So with that in mind, here are the facts: Four of the five who died that day were Trump supporters. The fifth was a Capitol Hill police officer who apparently also supported Donald Trump. Why is this relevant? Of course, the political views of the deceased shouldn’t matter, but unfortunately, in this case, they do. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and many other elected Democrats claim the mob was coming for them that day. Yet the only recorded casualties on Jan. 6 were people who voted for Donald Trump.

The first among them was a 34-year-old woman from Georgia called Rosanne Boyland. Authorities initially announced that Boyland died of a “medical emergency”. Later video footage suggested she may have accidentally been trampled by the crowd. We’re still not sure, but that’s the best guess.

The second casualty was 55-year-old Kevin Greeson, who died of heart failure while talking to his wife on a cell phone outside the Capitol. “Kevin had a history of high blood pressure,” his wife later said, “and in the midst of the excitement, suffered a heart attack.”

The third was 50-year-old Benjamin Phillips of Ringtown, Pa. Phillips was a Trump supporter who organized a bus trip to Washington for the rally that day. He died of a stroke on the grounds of the Capitol. There is no evidence that Phillips rioted or was injured by rioters or even went inside the Capitol building.

The fourth person to die, the only one from intentional violence, was 35-year-old Ashli Babbitt, a military veteran from San Diego. Babbitt was wearing a Trump cape when she was shot to death by a Capitol Hill police lieutenant. Babbitt’s death was caught on video, so hers is the best-documented death that took place that day. Yet it is surprising how little we know about it.

Babbitt was shot as she tried to crawl through a broken window into the Speaker’s Lobby within the Capitol, and that’s essentially the extent of what we know. Authorities have refused to release the name of the man who shot her or divulge any details of the investigation they say they’ve done. We may never know exactly why this unnamed Capitol Hill police officer took her life.

According to that officer’s attorney, “There is no way to look at the evidence and think that he is anything but a hero.” Of course, we can’t actually look at that evidence, because they’re withholding it. We can’t even know his identity. Killing an unarmed woman may be justified under certain specific circumstances, but since when is it heroic? When the dead woman has read QAnon websites? Republicans aren’t asking that question.

The last death mentioned is that of Officer Brian Sicknick. The media told us that he was beaten to death with a fire extinguisher. There is some credible evidence that suggests that is not the case. (At this point, it might be a good idea to remember that Trump supporters generally support the police and are not inclined to attack them.)

The article notes:

Just one problem: The story they told was a lie from beginning to end. Officer Sicknick was not beaten to death, with a fire extinguisher or anything else. According to an exhaustive and fascinating new analysis on Revolver News, there’s no evidence that Brian Sicknick was hit with a fire extinguisher at any point on Jan 6. The officer’s body apparently bore no signs of trauma. In fact, on the night of Jan. 6, long after rioters at the Capitol had been arrested or dispersed, Brian Sicknick texted his brother from his office. According to his brother, Sicknick said he’d been “pepper sprayed twice” but was otherwise “in good shape”. Twenty-four hours later, Officer Brian Sicknick was dead.

The riot on January 6th was real. That may be the only thing real about everything that has been reported about that day. When the news is as skewed as this is, it would do us well to take a close look at who gains by the misreporting.

Wise Words From A Wise Man

Dennis Prager posted an article at Townhall on Tuesday about what is currently happening in America. Dennis Prager is a student of history.

In an earlier article, posted January 5th, he states:

As a student of totalitarianism since my graduate studies at the Russian Institute of Columbia University’s School of International Affairs (as it was then known), I have always believed that only in a dictatorship could a society be brainwashed. I was wrong. I now understand that mass brainwashing can take place in a nominally free society. The incessant left-wing drumbeat of The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and almost every other major newspaper, plus The Atlantic, The New Yorker, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, NPR, all of Hollywood and almost every school from kindergarten through graduate school, has brainwashed at least half of America every bit as effectively as the German, Soviet and Chinese communist press did (and in the latter case, still does). That thousands of schools will teach the lie that is the New York Times’ “1619 Project” is one of countless examples.

In the latter article he reminds us of some history:

On Jan. 6, 2021, a right-wing mob of a few hundred people broke away from a peaceful right-wing protest involving tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of American conservatives and forced its way into the U.S. Capitol. One Capitol policeman was killed after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher, and one of the right-wing Capitol invaders was shot by a Capitol police officer. (A handful of others who died in the vicinity of the Capitol did so of nonviolent causes.) Aside from smashed windows, the mob seems to have done little damage to the Capitol. Their intent is still not clear. It seems to have been largely catharsis. They hurt no legislators, and if they intended to overthrow the government, they were delusional.

Beginning the next day, the American left used the Capitol mob just as the Nazis used the Reichstag: as an excuse to subjugate its conservative enemies and further squelch civil liberties in America — specifically, freedom of speech.

The article lists the lies told about the event:

The first was blaming the attack on President Donald Trump. Over and over, in every left-wing medium and stated repeatedly by Democrats, Trump is blamed for “inciting” the riot in his speech just before it took place. Almost never is a Trump quote cited. Because there is none. On the contrary, he did say, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard” (italics added).

Another lie was the immediate labeling of the mob attack on the Capitol as “insurrection.” All left-wing media and Democrats now refer to the event as an “insurrection,” a term defined by almost every dictionary as “an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government.” As morally repulsive as the actions of the mob were, they did not constitute a revolt against civil authority or an established government. Disrupting the work of legislators for a few hours — as wrong as that was — does not constitute a “revolt.”

The article points out that the riots of last summer were never labeled as “insurrections.”

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. We are being snookered by a liberal media and by politicians with agendas that are not in line with American principles or the well being of average Americans. It truly is time to wake up to what is happening.