Victor Davis Hanson: These are the actual insurrectionists

[Big Blitz]

A Masterpiece:

 

 

 

Recently, Democrats have been despondent over President Joe Biden’s sinking poll numbers.... 

 

...As a result, the left now variously alleges that either in 2022, when they expect to lose the Congress, or in 2024, when they fear losing the presidency, Republicans will “destroy democracy” or stage a coup.

 

.....but who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College? Who wishes to destroy the more than 180 year-old Senate filibuster, the over 150-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court, and the more than 60 year-old, 50 state union?

 

Who is attacking the founding constitutional idea of two senators per state?

 

The Constitution also clearly states that “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who slammed through the impeachment of president Donald Trump without a presiding chief justice?

 

Never had a president been either impeached twice or tried in the Senate as a private citizen. Who did both? The left further broke prior precedent by impeaching Trump without a special counsel’s report, formal hearings, witnesses, and cross-examinations.

 

Who exactly is violating federal civil rights legislation?

 

New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in December decided to ration potentially lifesaving new COVID-19 medicines, partially on the basis of race, in the name of “equity.”

 

The agency also allegedly used racial preferences to determine who would be first tested for COVID-19. Yet such racial discrimination seems in direct violation of various title clauses of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

 

In summer 2020, many local- and state-mandated quarantines and bans on public assemblies were simply ignored with impunity — if demonstrators were associated with Black Lives Matter or protesting the police.

 

Currently, the Biden administration is also flagrantly embracing the neo-Confederate idea of nullifying federal law. The administration has allowed nearly 2 million foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally across the southern border — in hopes they will soon be loyal constituents.

 

The administration has not asked illegal entrants either to be tested for or vaccinated against COVID-19. Yet all U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are threatened with dismissal if they fail to become vaccinated. Such selective exemption of lawbreaking non-U.S. citizens, but not millions of U.S. citizens, seems in conflict with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

 

After entering the United States illegally, millions of immigrants are protected by some 550 “sanctuary city” jurisdictions. These revolutionary areas all brazenly nullify immigration law by refusing to allow federal immigration authorities to deport illegal immigrant lawbreakers.

 

Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to concoct a dossier of dirt against her presidential opponent. She disguised her own role by projecting her efforts to use Russian sources onto Trump. She used her contacts in government and media to seed the dossier to create a national hysteria about “Russian collusion.”

 

Clinton urged Biden not to accept the 2020 result if he lost, and herself claimed Trump was not a legitimately elected president. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has violated laws governing the chain of command.

 

Some retired officers violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by slandering their commander-in-chief. Others publicly were on record calling for the military to intervene to remove an elected president.

 

Some of the nation’s top officials in the FBI and intelligence committee have misled or lied under oath either to federal investigators or the U.S. Congress, again, mostly with impunity.

 

All these sustained revolutionary activities were justified as necessary to achieve the supposedly noble ends of removing Trump. The result is Third World-like jurisprudence in America aimed at rewarding friends and punishing enemies, masked by service to social justice.

 

We are in a dangerous revolutionary cycle. But the threat is not from loud, buffoonish one-day rioters on Jan. 6. Such characters did not for 120 days loot, burn, attack courthouses and police precincts, cause over 30 deaths, injure 2,000 policemen, and destroy at least $2 billion in property — all under the banner of revolutionary justice.

 

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/victor-davis-hanson-who-are-the-real-insurrectionists/

 

 

 

The most insidious part of all this has been the Left's careful focus to call the "loud buffoons" of January 6th as an attack on our "Democracy."  

 

Not the Constitution.  Not our founding principles that have paved the way for active participation in our Republic.  They don't respect any of those things.  So attack on our democracy is used and that's just just code for "an attack on an election we *won*   

[SoCal Deek]

Remember what Mr Obama said: We need to fundamentally transform America. He wasn’t kidding. It’s just that very few people knew what he meant or intended. 

[Tiberius]

How stupid 

[Albwan]

27 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

How stupid 

What's stupid is comparing that joke of a peaceful moron gathering to Pearl Harbor, the civil war

or the the holocaust. Your whole side is bound together by being actual insurrectionists and it's been proven

over and over again. Marxists don't care because *duh* means to an end.

 

[Tiberius]

5 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

.....but who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College?  

This is factually completely wrong and moronic. The spirit of the constitution, "We the People" was federalized a long time ago. This is pure ignorance/sh it being fed to the cult who gobble it up unquestionably 

 

This guy needs a lesson in the Constitution because he is sure ignorant of how it works 

[B-Man]

10 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

This is factually completely wrong and moronic. The spirit of the constitution, "We the People" was federalized a long time ago. This is pure ignorance/sh it being fed to the cult who gobble it up unquestionably 

 

This guy needs a lesson in the Constitution because he is sure ignorant of how it works 

 

Victor Davis Hanson needs a lesson, because he doesn't agree with Tiberius.

 

NO response by any of us could demonstrate the shallowness and floundering of the Left here on this board than Tibsy's reply has.

 

 

Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

Victor Davis Hanson needs a lesson, because he doesn't agree with Tiberius.

 

NO response by any of us could demonstrate the shallowness and floundering of the Left here on this board than Tibsy's reply has.

 

 

Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

He made a stupid point, defend him. He is factual wrong, eat it up cultist 

[Orlando Tim]

22 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

This is factually completely wrong and moronic. The spirit of the constitution, "We the People" was federalized a long time ago. This is pure ignorance/sh it being fed to the cult who gobble it up unquestionably 

 

This guy needs a lesson in the Constitution because he is sure ignorant of how it works 

You don't think getting rid of the electoral college would be destructive to our current Republic? 

[JaCrispy]

27 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

This is factually completely wrong and moronic. The spirit of the constitution, "We the People" was federalized a long time ago. This is pure ignorance/sh it being fed to the cult who gobble it up unquestionably 

 

This guy needs a lesson in the Constitution because he is sure ignorant of how it works 

Hey man, not sure it helps your cause if you call everyone who disagrees with you, part of a cult...it just makes people shut down to what you’re trying to say- even if you have good points to make...

 

Imo, issues tend to be more nuanced and overlapping, and less black and white...👍

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, JaCrispy said:

Hey man, not sure it helps your cause if you call everyone who disagrees with you, part of a cult...it just makes people shut down to what you’re trying to say- even if you have good points to make...

 

Imo, issues tend to be more nuanced and overlapping, and less black and white...👍

There is no cause here. I'm not going to convert anyone. Do you think you will? We are all pretty much set in our opinions, right? And VDH is a jack ass 

11 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

You don't think getting rid of the electoral college would be destructive to our current Republic? 

Oh no, that would be a good thing. It serves no good purpose at all. Let the people decide 

[JaCrispy]

8 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

There is no cause here. I'm not going to convert anyone. Do you think you will? We are all pretty much set in our opinions, right? And VDH is a jack ass 

I’ve always thought I was set in my ways...And then sometimes, I unexpectedly, change my mind in the middle of a conversation...I think we are always changing, maturing, evolving...we have to, right?

 

The key is that BOTH Right and Left have legitimate points to make...but the secret to success in a society is that it takes a balance of moderation from both...you need motivation/incentive combined with compassion- but if either side has too much influence, you start to see a deterioration of civilization...and the hard part is knowing the right amount of each in an ever evolving world...👍

Edited January 7, 2022 by JaCrispy

[Tiberius]

3 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

I’ve always thought I was set in my ways...And then sometimes, I unexpectedly, change my mind in the middle of a conversation...I think we are always changing, maturing, evolving...we have to, right?

 

The key is that BOTH Right and Left have legitimate points to make...but the secret to success in a society is that it takes a balance of moderation from both...you need motivation/incentive combined with compassion- but if either side has too much influence, you start to see a deterioration of civilization...and the hard part is knowing the right amount of each in an ever evolving world...👍

Ya sure, but BS is still BS, and calling it out is a good thing, not bad. The left floats BS, too and I won’t defend that 

[Tenhigh]

24 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Ya sure, but BS is still BS, and calling it out is a good thing, not bad. The left floats BS, too and I won’t defend that 

So explain what is BS about it, Tibs.

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, Tenhigh said:

So explain what is BS about it, Tibs.

The Constitution does indeed already Federally mandate rules, provisions and standards about elections. It's right in the Constitution. He is a blow hard 

[Tenhigh]

25 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The Constitution does indeed already Federally mandate rules, provisions and standards about elections. It's right in the Constitution. He is a blow hard 

Show us where he is wrong.

I really don't know the Constitution well enough to say either way.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Tenhigh

[Big Blitz]

59 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The Constitution does indeed already Federally mandate rules, provisions and standards about elections. It's right in the Constitution. He is a blow hard 

 

 

Yes it does.

 

It's a State issue.  

 

/the end

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

Yes it does.

 

It's a State issue.  

 

/the end

Too bad the Constitution says otherwise...IN SEVERAL SECTIONS! 

 

Read the constitution! Even though puppet masters like Hanson relies on your ignorance 

[Big Blitz]

35 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Too bad the Constitution says otherwise...IN SEVERAL SECTIONS! 

 

Read the constitution! Even though puppet masters like Hanson relies on your ignorance 

 

 

Yea um thats not good enough Tibs. 

 

And I've read the document, understand the document, I've read the Federalist Papers, and I know WHY each of the 17 amendments since the BOR were passed.  

 

 

So tell us, what does it say about the Federal Government and elections?

 

Enlighten us Tibs.  

[Tiberius]

4 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

Yea um thats not good enough Tibs. 

 

And I've read the document, understand the document, I've read the Federalist Papers, and I know WHY each of the 17 amendments since the BOR were passed.  

 

 

So tell us, what does it say about the Federal Government and elections?

 

Enlighten us Tibs.  

You don't know, do you? Just admit it 

[Big Blitz]

23 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

You don't know, do you? Just admit it 

 

 

No apparently you don't.  

 

You called VDH's claim that Democrats are trying to Federalize election laws trash, without evidence why not!   

 

We're still waiting for you (preferably in your own words) to tell us where in the Constitution it says elections are the Federal Government's responsibility 

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

No apparently you don't.  

 

You called VDH's claim that Democrats are trying to Federalize election laws trash, without evidence why not!   

 

We're still waiting for you (preferably in your own words) to tell us where in the Constitution it says elections are the Federal Government's responsibility 

The Federal constitution totally has voting and election sections on how they may be conducted. . States can't do whatever they want with elections. You seriously didn't know that? 

 

[Wacka]

17 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The Federal constitution totally has voting and election sections on how they may be conducted. . States can't do whatever they want with elections. You seriously didn't know that? 

 

Then quote those parts.

I think the 10th amendment, the most violated one, covers this.

 

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people"

[The Frankish Reich]

4 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

Victor Davis Hanson needs a lesson, because he doesn't agree with Tiberius.

 

NO response by any of us could demonstrate the shallowness and floundering of the Left here on this board than Tibsy's reply has.

 

 

Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, THE Victor Davis Hanson, the self-appointed Sage of Fresno, Chair of the Classics Department at Fresno State, to which elite young classicists the world over flock.

There's a certain kind of minor league academic who manages to ingratiate himself (always him, not her) with the right wing commentariat, who then hold him up as some kind of uber intellectual. The bar is awfully low, low enough for even this bozo to hurdle.

Victor Davis Hanson is a joke. And a boring one to boot.

[Tenhigh]

13 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Yes, THE Victor Davis Hanson, the self-appointed Sage of Fresno, Chair of the Classics Department at Fresno State, to which elite young classicists the world over flock.

There's a certain kind of minor league academic who manages to ingratiate himself (always him, not her) with the right wing commentariat, who then hold him up as some kind of uber intellectual. The bar is awfully low, low enough for even this bozo to hurdle.

Victor Davis Hanson is a joke. And a boring one to boot.

What does this add to the conversation?

[The Frankish Reich]

1 minute ago, Tenhigh said:

What does this add to the conversation?

Well, in case you didn't notice, one of your fellow travelers saw fit to underscore the name Victor Davis Hanson as if he were citing to one of the titans of academia. 

[Tenhigh]

11 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Well, in case you didn't notice, one of your fellow travelers saw fit to underscore the name Victor Davis Hanson as if he were citing to one of the titans of academia. 

Sweet Jeebus, an UNDERSCORE?   So nothing then, just attacking the guys character instead of his content?  But as long as everyone else is doing it...

 

 

I have been looking into this topic a bit, and I have to say that I think Tibs is actually right this time.  From what I have read so far it seems like States can make whatever laws they like regarding federal elections, but congress by law can supercede these rules, as per article 1 section 4.

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-i/clauses/750

 

 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Tenhigh

[Doc]

All I can say is thank goodness for Joe Manchin!  The Marxists won’t be getting their way. 

[The Frankish Reich]

19 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

Sweet Jeebus, an UNDERSCORE?   So nothing then, just attacking the guys character instead of his content? 

The reply was of the order of, "You have the nerve to argue with the Victor Davis Hanson?" We call that type of argument an "appeal to authority," as in Victor Davis Hanson should be considered authoritative. I pointed out that he is certainly not, at least not with respect to things way far afield from ancient Greece and Rome ....

21 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

I have been looking into this topic a bit, and I have to say that I think Tibs is actually right this time.  From what I have read so far it seems like States can make whatever laws they like regarding federal elections, but congress by law can supercede these rules, as per article 1 section 4.

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-i/clauses/750

 

Good. I am glad you really did the research.

I know you probably won't read it because it is the NYT, but David Brooks has a pretty good take on Democratic overreach in their voting rights bill:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/06/opinion/democrats-fail-defending-democracy.html

 

The emergency is in the third phase — Republican efforts to overturn votes that have been counted. But Democratic voting bills — the For the People Act and its update, the Freedom to Vote Act — were not overhauled to address the threats that have been blindingly obvious since Jan. 6 last year. They are sprawling measures covering everything from mail-in ballots to campaign finance. They basically include every idea that’s been on activist agendas for years.

These bills are hard to explain and hard to pass. By catering to D.C. interest groups, Democrats have spent a year distracting themselves from the emergency right in front of us.

[Tenhigh]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

The reply was of the order of, "You have the nerve to argue with the Victor Davis Hanson?" We call that type of argument an "appeal to authority," as in Victor Davis Hanson should be considered authoritative. I pointed out that he is certainly not, at least not with respect to things way far afield from ancient Greece and Rome ....

Good. I am glad you really did the research.

I know you probably won't read it because it is the NYT, but David Brooks has a pretty good take on Democratic overreach in their voting rights bill:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/06/opinion/democrats-fail-defending-democracy.html

 

The emergency is in the third phase — Republican efforts to overturn votes that have been counted. But Democratic voting bills — the For the People Act and its update, the Freedom to Vote Act — were not overhauled to address the threats that have been blindingly obvious since Jan. 6 last year. They are sprawling measures covering everything from mail-in ballots to campaign finance. They basically include every idea that’s been on activist agendas for years.

These bills are hard to explain and hard to pass. By catering to D.C. interest groups, Democrats have spent a year distracting themselves from the emergency right in front of us.

I think it's kind of cowardly to only read things from sources that you agree with.  As for his argument that Republicans are trying to overturn votes that are already counted, I tend to believe that it's either pretty thin or very shortsighted.  

 

But I'm personally a huge fan of requiring voter IDs for all, but I do think they should be free or low cost.  I also am a proponent of the Republican efforts to get rid of ballot harvesting at the state level.  I think that is probably the easiest way to commit voter fraud, and it's kind of a despicable practice, imo. 

[716er]

3 minutes ago, LeviF said:

Which of them has been charged with insurrection?

 

[The Frankish Reich]

36 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

But I'm personally a huge fan of requiring voter IDs for all, but I do think they should be free or low cost.  I also am a proponent of the Republican efforts to get rid of ballot harvesting at the state level. 

Believe it or not, I agree with you on these points.

Check out the topics on voting, etc.

Many of the instances we've seen so far of "fraudulent voting" are more like instances of "where am I allowed to vote." Like this one about snowbirds in a retirement community:

https://www.tampabay.com/news/crime/2021/12/15/3-voters-from-the-villages-charged-with-voting-fraud/

 

You have two homes, you can only vote for President in one state. Or you're a college student; do you vote where your parents live or where your school is located?

I honestly don't know the answer to these questions (my kid in college asked me!) and I'm a lawyer so I ought to be able to figure it out. It's kind of like "choose one and only one" but which one?  We need to tighten up the rules and the process.

But as Brooks points out, none of these problems compare to the current threat that state legislature, state officials, or even a future corrupt VP presiding over the Senate might insert themselves into the process to flip a Presidential election. That came close to happening in 2020. And remember: next time around, or the time after that the shoe may be on the other foot with a Democratic state official/legislature or a Democratic VP deciding unilaterally what votes ought to count and what ones won't be counted. We like to have clear rules before the dispute arises, as it inevitably will again. We don't, and we won't.

 

 

[LeviF]

49 minutes ago, 716er said:

 

Insurrection is the wrong word in both cases. 
 

But in any case one political party has all the power in the country currently. And they can’t manage to get measly PC to charge anyone with insurrection. Makes ya think. 

[Big Blitz]

4 hours ago, Tenhigh said:

Sweet Jeebus, an UNDERSCORE?   So nothing then, just attacking the guys character instead of his content?  But as long as everyone else is doing it...

 

 

I have been looking into this topic a bit, and I have to say that I think Tibs is actually right this time.  From what I have read so far it seems like States can make whatever laws they like regarding federal elections, but congress by law can supercede these rules, as per article 1 section 4.

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-i/clauses/750

 

 

 

 

That clause applies to Congressional elections only - in any case where a state attempts to interrupt or prohibit the election of members of the House - in that specific case they would have to pass a law that supercedes any state attempt to do that.

 

 

The Democrats are trying to argue that making you register 30 days before an election and voting in person is an interruption of the election process.     

 

 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Big Blitz

[Tenhigh]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Believe it or not, I agree with you on these points.

Check out the topics on voting, etc.

Many of the instances we've seen so far of "fraudulent voting" are more like instances of "where am I allowed to vote." Like this one about snowbirds in a retirement community:

https://www.tampabay.com/news/crime/2021/12/15/3-voters-from-the-villages-charged-with-voting-fraud/

 

You have two homes, you can only vote for President in one state. Or you're a college student; do you vote where your parents live or where your school is located?

I honestly don't know the answer to these questions (my kid in college asked me!) and I'm a lawyer so I ought to be able to figure it out. It's kind of like "choose one and only one" but which one?  We need to tighten up the rules and the process.

But as Brooks points out, none of these problems compare to the current threat that state legislature, state officials, or even a future corrupt VP presiding over the Senate might insert themselves into the process to flip a Presidential election. That came close to happening in 2020. And remember: next time around, or the time after that the shoe may be on the other foot with a Democratic state official/legislature or a Democratic VP deciding unilaterally what votes ought to count and what ones won't be counted. We like to have clear rules before the dispute arises, as it inevitably will again. We don't, and we won't.

 

 

I don't believe that Florida shifted any vote certification. Regarding Georgia, I think it's mostly faux outrage manufactured by the president/administration with the whole "Jim Crow on steroids" comments.  

[thenorthremembers]

The plebians showed up to the palace...thats the real issue.

[Westside]

30 minutes ago, thenorthremembers said:

The plebians showed up to the palace...thats the real issue.

Is that your last name?

[thenorthremembers]

6 minutes ago, Westside said:

Is that your last name?

Not sure what youre getting at but no.

[L Ron Burgundy]

16 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

Hey man, not sure it helps your cause if you call everyone who disagrees with you, part of a cult...it just makes people shut down to what you’re trying to say- even if you have good points to make...

 

Imo, issues tend to be more nuanced and overlapping, and less black and white...👍

Have you said the same to the morons that throw out the word Marxists all the time?  Ya know, the geniuses whom 90% of couldn't define what it is without a dictionary in front of them.

[Buffalo716]

17 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

I’ve always thought I was set in my ways...And then sometimes, I unexpectedly, change my mind in the middle of a conversation...I think we are always changing, maturing, evolving...we have to, right?

 

The key is that BOTH Right and Left have legitimate points to make...but the secret to success in a society is that it takes a balance of moderation from both...you need motivation/incentive combined with compassion- but if either side has too much influence, you start to see a deterioration of civilization...and the hard part is knowing the right amount of each in an ever evolving world...👍

I think your common sense is lost on certain segments of the population

 

I understand everything you're saying loud and clear... But it seems that there's certain people in this country who will turn a blind eye and only hear what the mainstream media tells them

[Orlando Tim]

22 hours ago, Tiberius said:

 

Oh no, that would be a good thing. It serves no good purpose at all. Let the people decide 

If in your "understanding" of American history you do see the purpose of the electoral college then you are not ready for any argument about the structure of our elections.