Insurrection and sedition

The business of senior military turning on Trump has been on Twitter, DR posted this one in comments:

“Sources are telling Dan Bongino that they are genuinely concerned that some upper level people in our military are openly talking about defying the President of the United States. “That’s got a name. That’s called a mutiny.”

There is this:

And a former colleague appalled at what these men are doing [this is a click pic and click till it embiggens job]:

Then there’s this:

I don’t agree with the Donald on Floyd but that’s not the point. They have censored the duly elected President whilst resident in the country. Then it is at a lower level too:

More censorship of not compliant with narrative:

What astounds me about all of it is how they get away with it. Who the hell is Dorsey on Twitter anyway? The issue is, of course, that these people have gradually been put in place, always global left, only global left, whether they know what they’re doing or not [youtube is another] and anyone conservative in the sense of free enterprise supporting can’t just take the companies as China would and they know it.

So there’s the question of breaking the law on discrimination, which they, the BBC, all of them, consistently do and no one in charge does anything – look at Johnson. Moans about anti-tory bias – OK, then charge the heads with the crime.

But they know that the courts are nobbled. While we’ve been going about our business, these relentless vipers have quietly been put in place.

The way around it? Well we see Trump trying to, Johnson not in the least and in the former’s case, he seems to be playing a lone hand, everyone’s hand against him. Yet judging by motorcades and social media, he’s still very popular with people as a whole.

I’ll not address the sickos on the other side now, that’s for the next post.

3 comments for “Insurrection and sedition

  1. Distant Relative
    June 6, 2020 at 09:11

    Re Mattis
    Clue in title

    This from Lara Logan’s tweets
    ” Hearing what Gen “Mad Dog” Mattis had to say today, I am reminded of something I learned about Trump’s pick for Sec Def during the transition, as the President-elect was about to take the oath of office. Several sources inside the transition team confirmed…

    They were shocked by who Mattis wanted as his number 2 – he was pushing for Michelle Flournoy, the same person HRC had reportedly picked to lead DOD in her Administration, acc to sources/articles at the time, such as one Politico published in Nov 2016. They put it this way:

    Always wondered why Mattis would want someone like that at his side? Seems unlikely she would have been loyal to the President she would have served – was he?

    Men like him knew Gen Mike Flynn was loyal to the US not Russia, yet they said nothing? As Sec Def, Mattis would have had access to all intelligence. What happened to that military code of honor in Flynn’s case? What about his Commander-in-Chief? He was silent then – but not now. ”

  2. Distant Relative
    June 6, 2020 at 17:25

    Sorry to bother you but I think the comment I posted this a.m. on Mattis is probably in the bin.

  3. james wilson
    June 6, 2020 at 19:07

    Obama, among others, promoted men, and women of course, not unlike him. That is how you end up with a photo of a line of male officers in red high heels displaying approval for equality in the military. The left was, even in recent memory, terrified of the military and police, but have since learned how to turn things to their advantage.

    Trump was bullshitting himself about cleaning the swamp because he had no idea what was waiting for him. He carries two traits that don’t belong together–he’s quick on his feet and a slow learner.

Comments are closed.