RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2021/01/jaques-barzun-and-the-tragedy-of-race-thinking/

“This anxious wrangling which goes on about books and plays seems at times trivial but it is in fact fundamental. If democratic culture yields on this point no prospect lies ahead but that of increased animosity among pressure groups…”

The 1965 quote above is from Jacques Barzun (1907-2012), who made a very important contribution to the debate about racism and affirmative action. He issued a warning that went unheeded, and the explosive emergence of Black Lives Matter underlines the value of his advice.

Barzun grew up in a French household, where his parents conducted a modernist salon, and he completed high school in the US. He entered Columbia College in 1923, graduating four years later at the top of his class, then he taught at Columbia University and became a full professor in 1945, Dean of the Graduate Faculties in 1955, and the inaugural Dean of Faculties and Provost of the University in 1958. In his long career as a teacher, scholar and administrator he wrote, edited or translated some 40 books.

His first serious research was a dissertation on class and race in pre-revolutionary France, published some years later as Race, A Study in Modern Superstition (1937).  This was not written as a tract for the times because it grew out of research on cultural history that started long before Hitler became a significant figure. Barzun claimed the protracted dispute in France over the “race” of the nobility versus the bourgeoisie became one of the divisive factors that contributed to the French Revolution. Moreover “race-thinking” persisted after the Revolution as a component of the struggles between nations, political parties, religious faiths and social groups. For Barzun, “race-thinking” is one of the ways to justify collective hostility and it is most dangerous and powerful when it  operates in partnership with other motives such as the nationalism of the Nazis, the  socialism of the communists and, nowadays, the radicalism of Black Lives Matter.

https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/10/flashback-just-months-ago-democrats-blocked-a-resolution-condemning-mob-violence/

When a mob of rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol building on Thursday, leaders from both political parties universally condemned the historic act of political violence.

“To those who wreaked havoc in our Capitol today- you did not win,” Vice-President Mike Pence stated to the chamber shortly after the rioters were expelled from the building by police using tear gas and percussion grenades. “Violence never wins.” He was joined by the Republican senators across the board, including those who had backed plans to object to the election’s certification.

After months ignoring and justifying Black Lives Matter and Antifa riots, Democrats also condemned the Capitol violence. “This assault is just that. It shows the weakness of those who’ve had to show through violence what their message was,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said.

Senate Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., echoed the sentiment, arguing those who using political violence should face the harshest penalties available. “Those who performed these reprehensible acts cannot be called protesters – no, these were rioters and insurrectionists, goons and thugs, domestic terrorists… they must and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.”

The cross-party condemnations came as a welcomed move. But that very the same Congress was anything but united on the issue of mob violence remarkably recently.

This July, those same congressional Democrats killed a resolution aimed at curbing mob violence. The bill, which was spearheaded by Utah Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, came about after an unarmed Utah man was murdered by a mob of left-wing activists. At least 30 people, ranging in age from 14-77, were killed in largely left-wing riots in summer 2020.

https://foxbangor.com/national-news/trump-speech-before-capitol-riot-not-enough-for-impeachment-charges-turley/

Democrats are moving to remove President Trump from office after Wednesday’s U.S. Capitol riot, but George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said he doesn’t believe Trump committed an impeachable offense.

‘He does not call for riots. He does not call for violence,’ law professor points out

Democrats are moving to remove President Trump from office after Wednesday’s U.S. Capitol riot, but George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said he doesn’t believe Trump committed an impeachable offense.

Turley explained to “Fox & Friends Weekend” that the president’s call to protest does not constitute insurrection and that Congress must deliberate carefully on the charges to carry out the process constitutionally. Trump invited supporters to rally in Washington Jan. 6, saying it would be “wild,” and gave a speech where he said ralliers would march “peacefully” to the Capitol. During the speech, he repeated the unproven claim that the election was stolen from him.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/533469-swift-second-impeachment-would-damage-the-constitution

The author Franz Kafka once wrote, “My guiding principle is this. Guilt is never to be doubted.” Democrats suddenly appear close to adopting that standard into the Constitution as they prepare for a second impeachment of President Trump. With seeking his removal for incitement, Democrats would gut not only the impeachment standard but also free speech, all in a mad rush to remove Trump just days before his term ends.

Democrats are seeking to remove Trump on the basis of his remarks to supporters before the rioting at the Capitol. Like others, I condemned those remarks as he gave them, calling them reckless and wrong. I also opposed the challenges to electoral votes in Congress. But his address does not meet the definition for incitement under the criminal code. It would be viewed as protected speech by the Supreme Court.

When I testified in the impeachment hearings of Trump and Bill Clinton, I noted that an article of impeachment does not have to be based on any clear crime but that Congress has looked to the criminal code to weigh impeachment offenses. For this controversy now, any such comparison would dispel claims of criminal incitement. Despite broad and justified condemnation of his words, Trump never actually called for violence or riots. But he urged his supporters to march on the Capitol to raise their opposition to the certification of electoral votes and to back the recent challenges made by a few members of Congress. Trump told the crowd “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices be heard.”

These kinds of legal challenges have been made by Democrats in the past under the Electoral Count Act, and so Trump was pressing Republicans in Congress to join the effort on his behalf. He ended his remarks by saying a protest at the Capitol was meant to provide Republicans “the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.” He told the crowd, “Let us walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.” Moreover, marches are common across the country to protest actions by the government.

FNC’s Kurtz: Many in Media Aren’t Considering ‘Free Speech Implications’ of Trump Twitter Ban https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021/01/09/fncs-kurtz-many-in-media-arent-considering-free-speech-implications-of-trump-twitter-ban/
Nancy Pelosi, in ‘60 Minutes’ interview, slams Trump as ‘deranged,’ calls for ‘prosecution’ https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nancy-pelosi-in-60-minutes-interview-slams-trump-as-deranged-calls-for-prosecution
Patrice Onwuka: Twitter, Facebook banning of Trump continues crackdown on conservatives — censorship dangerous https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trump-twitter-facebook-patrice-onwuka
Tucker Carlson: From Twitter to CNN, the left is coming for your speech https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-on-twitter-and-cnn
9 Big Tech Platforms that Have Blacklisted President Donald Trump https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2021/01/09/9-big-tech-platforms-that-have-blacklisted-president-donald-trump/
Why ban of @realDonaldTrump proves Twitter not ‘just a platform’ https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/why-ban-of-realdonaldtrump-proves-twitter-not-just-a-platform/
Ignoring the concerns of Trump supporters will destroy America
https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/whitlock-ignoring-the-concerns-of-trump-supporters-will-destroy-america
WATCH: Armed Antifa Attack Trump Supporters, Cops in San Diego https://www.breitbart.com/law-and-order/2021/01/09/watch-armed-antifa-attack-trump-supporters-cops-in-san-diego/
 Liberal Reporter: ‘The New…Authoritarian Liberal-left…Is Going to be Absolutely Ruthless’ https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2021/01/09/liberal-reporter-sees-right-through-big-techs-reason-to-ban-trump-n2582855?
Thought Control by Controlling the News https://townhall.com/columnists/jeffdavidson/2021/01/09/thought-control-by-controlling-the-news-n2582854?

Rush Limbaugh Deactivates His Twitter Account After President Trump Banned https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2021/01/08/rush-limbaugh-deactivates-his-twitter-account-after-president-trump-banned/
Apple Joins Google in Blacklisting Parler https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2021/01/09/apple-joins-google-in-blacklisting-parler/

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/as_democrat_lies_compound_the_truth_will_out.html

Have you ever lied, or ever watched someone else lie?  What commonly occurs is a compounding of more lies, designed to cover the original lie and subsequently keep the truth from being discovered.

It is not enough that the left cheated (a lie).  What we are witnessing today is the left flailing about, working tirelessly to conceal its deceit.

If leftists rightfully won the 2020 presidential election, and now the subsequent Georgia Senate runoff, one would think we’d see a measured process for transitioning Joe Biden and Kamala Harris into the presidency and vice presidency.   

What we’re seeing instead is chaos.  A myriad of leftist entities, from pols to Media, Big Tech, Hollywood, and others, are whipped into a frenzy to silence dissent and cut short the president’s term.

There are the 25th Amendment, impeachment, punishment, and threats of punishment of anyone who dares question the legitimacy of the vote, and now mass censorship of the president and American citizens?  Are these necessary when a peaceful transition of power is scheduled to occur in a mere 10 days?  

If you have the truth, pound the truth. If you don’t have the truth, pound the table.

What we are witnessing is a tantrum of spoiled children, pounding the table.

We know they lied.  They know they lied.  We know they know they lied.  The more that they flail about, the more at peace you should feel that our cause is just.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/01/conceding_defeat_to_fraud_is_not_patriotic.html

I. Introduction

In the aftermath of the protests that devolved into deadly riots in Washington, D.C. and resulted in the breach of the Capitol building, there is a temptation to stand down and not question any further whether Joe Biden is the duly elected president of the United States.  That question, which is key to preserving our democracy, must not go unanswered, violence or no violence.  We hear claims that what occurred in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday happens only in third-world countries.  Perhaps the more germane question is whether these types of elections are third-world phenomena and fall well short of the integrity we should demand of our election process and the officials who preside over it.

 I make no claim that the voting irregularities writ large are of a scope that would change the outcome of the presidential election because I honestly do not know.  But this uncertainty, which I believe that many share, and not just supporters of Donald Trump, is a cancer on the Republic because it strikes at the foundation of our democracy.  If we can’t trust the elections, we can’t trust the politicians who come to power as a result of those elections, and without trust there is no democracy and ultimately there is no country.

II. The “Patriotic Myths”

The first myth is that patriotism demands that we now stand down in questioning the results of the presidential election.  In fact, the opposite is true.  There are no circumstances in which outstanding, credible questions regarding the integrity of our elections should go unanswered because without ensuring the integrity of our elections, we can have no enduring fidelity to those politicians who emerge victorious from those elections.

The second myth is that there is ample time to study the election results and procedures after Mr. Biden’s inauguration.  But what if the wrong man occupies the Oval Office, one not duly elected by a fair and impartial vote of the American people?  What are the American people supposed to do after the fact?  What is the constitutional procedure for removing a sitting president from office should it be discovered ex post facto that he was the product of a fraudulent election?  

The third myth is that a true patriot knows when to stand down even if there are voting irregularities.  The necessary implication is that Mr. Trump is not a patriot because he refuses to go away quietly and simply accept defeat, deserved or otherwise.  I do not doubt that Mr. Trump’s ego plays a prominent role in his challenging the election results.  He does not like to lose.  But there is a much larger issue at play.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/01/09/the-virtue-of-the-new-totalitarians/

What was the most disturbing thing to happen in the last few days? 

Some say it was the horrifying spectacle of the mob besieging and breaking into the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday. 

That was indeed disturbing, especially the pageant of wanton assaults on property in the seat of our government and, most of all, the images of Ashli Babbitt, the young woman who was shot and killed, apparently by law enforcement. 

There is much we do not know about what happened that afternoon. But I think Tucker Carlson was right about two essential things. 

One, that President Trump bears some responsibility for what happened. He “recklessly encouraged,” as Carlson put it, his distraught supporters. I should note, by the way, that I believe that the president’s supporters are right to be distraught—and not just because their guy lost. That’s the nature of elections. One candidate wins, the other loses. So long as the election is fair, and is seen to be fair, all is well. The loser, and the loser’s supporters, may mutter, but they accept the result and go home. 

But in the 2020 election there were huge and, in my view, determinative irregularities. Had the votes been fairly counted, I believe, Trump would have won. But they weren’t. 

Hence the anger among his supporters. The president should have appreciated their anger and acted accordingly. He ought also to have appreciated that by January 6, the game was over. There was nothing Vice President Mike Pence could have done that would have changed the outcome of the election. When Trump concluded his remarks to the crowd by encouraging them to “walk down Pennsylvania Avenue” and go “to the Capitol,” he was playing with fire. He ought to have discerned as much.

But I believe Carlson is also correct that the president did not intend or foresee the mayhem that followed. As the transcript of his remarks shows, he encouraged the crowd “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” He ought to have known that more could transpire. A huge, fired-up crowd is a mob just waiting to happen. But Carlson was right: this was a “political protest” that “got out of hand,” not an “insurrection” or an act of “domestic terrorism,” as Joe Biden and others we quick to claim.