We are already in one. Daniel Greenfield explains:
This is a civil war.
There aren’t any soldiers marching on Charleston… or Myrtle Beach. Nobody’s getting shot in the streets. Except in Chicago… and Baltimore, Detroit and Washington D.C.
But that’s not a civil war. It’s just what happens when Democrats run a city into the ground. And then they dig a hole in the ground so they can bury it even deeper.
If you look deep enough into that great big Democrat hole, you might even see where Jimmy Hoffa is buried.
But it’s not guns that make a civil war. It’s politics.
Guns are how a civil war ends. Politics is how it begins.
How do civil wars happen?
Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge.
That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.
I know you’re all thinking about President Trump.
He won and the establishment, the media, the democrats, rejected the results. They came up with a whole bunch of conspiracy theories to explain why he didn’t really win. It was the Russians. And the FBI. And sexism, Obama, Bernie Sanders and white people.
It’s easier to make a list of the things that Hillary Clinton doesn’t blame for losing the election. It’s going to be a short list.
A really short list. Herself.
The Mueller investigation is about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it’s not the first time they’ve done this.
The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn’t really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There’s a pattern here.
Trump didn’t really win the election. Bush didn’t really win the election. Every time a Republican president won an election this century, the Democrats insist he didn’t really win.
Now say a third Republican president wins an election in say, 2024.
What are the odds that they’ll say that he didn’t really win? Right now, it looks like 100 percent.
What do sure odds of the Dems rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don’t accept the results of any election that they don’t win.
It means they don’t believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections.
That’s a civil war.
There’s no shooting. At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice. But the Democrats have rejected our system of government.
This isn’t dissent. It’s not disagreement.
You can hate the other party. You can think they’re the worst thing that ever happened to the country. But then you work harder to win the next election. When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don’t win, what you want is a dictatorship.
Your very own dictatorship.
The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to the left, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it’s inherently illegitimate.
The attacks on Trump show that elections don’t matter to the left.
Republicans can win an election, but they have a major flaw. They’re not leftists.
That’s what the leftist dictatorship looks like.
The left lost Congress. They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats.
Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can’t scratch his own back without his say so, that’s the civil war.
Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that’s not the system that runs this country.
The left’s system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.
If it’s in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. His power is unlimited.
He’s a dictator.
But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can’t do anything. He isn’t even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented.
A Democrat in the White House has “discretion” to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn’t even have the “discretion” to reverse him.
That’s how the game is played. That’s how our country is run.
When Democrats control the Senate, then Harry Reid and his boys and girls are the sane, wise heads that keep the crazy guys in the House in check.
But when Republicans control the Senate, then it’s an outmoded body inspired by racism.
When Democrats run the Supreme Court, then it has the power to decide everything in the country. But when Republicans control the Supreme Court, it’s a dangerous body that no one should pay attention to.
When a Democrat is in the White House, states aren’t even allowed to enforce immigration law. But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws.
Under Obama, a state wasn’t allowed to go to the bathroom without asking permission. But under Trump, Jerry Brown can go around saying that California is an independent republic and sign treaties with other countries.
The Constitution has something to say about that.
Whether it’s Federal or State, Executive, Legislative or Judiciary, the left moves power around to run the country. If it controls an institution, then that institution is suddenly the supreme power in the land.
This is what I call a moving dictatorship.
There isn’t one guy in a room somewhere issuing the orders. Instead there’s a network of them. And the network moves around.
If the guys and girls in the network win elections, they can do it from the White House. If they lose the White House, they’ll do it from Congress. If they don’t have either one, they’ll use the Supreme Court.
If they don’t have either the White House, Congress or the Supreme Court, they’re screwed. Right?
They just go on issuing them through circuit courts and the bureaucracy. State governments announce that they’re independent republics. Corporations begin threatening and suing the government.
There’s no consistent legal standard. Only a political one.
Under Obama, states weren’t allowed to enforce immigration laws. That was the job of the Federal government. And the states weren’t allowed to interfere with the job that the Feds weren’t doing.
Now Trump comes into office and starts enforcing immigration laws again. And California announces it’s a sanctuary state and passes a law punishing businesses that cooperate with Federal immigration enforcement.
So what do we have here?
It’s illegal for states to enforce immigration law because that’s the province of the Federal government. But it’s legal for states to ban the Federal government from enforcing immigration law.
The only consistent pattern here is that the left decided to make it illegal to enforce immigration law.
It may do that sometimes under the guise of Federal power or states rights. But those are just fronts. The only consistent thing is that leftist policies are mandatory and opposing them is illegal.
Everything else is just a song and dance routine.
That’s how it works. It’s the moving dictatorship. It’s the tyranny of the network.
You can’t pin it down. There’s no one office or one guy. It’s a network of them. It’s an ideological dictatorship. Some people call it the deep state. But that doesn’t even begin to capture what it is.
To understand it, you have to think about things like the Cold War and Communist infiltration.
A better term than Deep State is Shadow Government.
Parts of the Shadow Government aren’t even in the government. They are wherever the left holds power. It can be in the non-profit sector and among major corporations. Power gets moved around like a New York City shell game. Where’s the quarter? Nope, it’s not there anymore.
The shadow government is an ideological network. These days it calls itself by a hashtag #Resistance. Under any name, it runs the country. Most of the time we don’t realize that. When things are normal, when there’s a Democrat in the White House or a bunch of Democrats in Congress, it’s business as usual.
Even with most Republican presidents, you didn’t notice anything too out of the ordinary. Sure, the Democrats got their way most of the time. But that’s how the game is usually played.
It’s only when someone came on the scene who didn’t play the game by the same rules, that the network exposed itself. The shadow government emerged out of hiding and came for Trump.
And that’s the civil war.
This is a war over who runs the country. Do the people who vote run the country or does this network that can lose an election, but still get its agenda through, run the country?
We’ve been having this fight for a while. But this century things have escalated.
They escalated a whole lot after Trump’s win because the network isn’t pretending anymore. It sees the opportunity to delegitimize the whole idea of elections.
Now the network isn’t running the country from cover. It’s actually out here trying to overturn the results of an election and remove the president from office.
It’s rejected the victories of two Republican presidents this century.
And if we don’t stand up and confront it, and expose it for what it is, it’s going to go on doing it in every election. And eventually Federal judges are going to gain enough power that they really will overturn elections.
It happens in other countries. If you think it can’t happen here, you haven’t been paying attention to the left.
Right now, Federal judges are declaring that President Trump isn’t allowed to govern because his Tweets show he’s a racist. How long until they say that a president isn’t even allowed to take office because they don’t like his views?
That’s where we’re headed.
Civil wars swing around a very basic question. The most basic question of them all. Who runs the country?
Is it me? Is it you? Is it Grandma? Or is it bunch of people who made running the government into their career?
America was founded on getting away from professional government. The British monarchy was a professional government. Like all professional governments, it was hereditary. Professional classes eventually decide to pass down their privileges to their kids.
America was different. We had a volunteer government. That’s what the Founding Fathers built.
This is a civil war between volunteer governments elected by the people and professional governments elected by… well… uh… themselves.
Of the establishment, by the establishment and for the establishment.
You know, the people who always say they know better, no matter how many times they screw up, because they’re the professionals. They’ve been in Washington D.C. politics since they were in diapers.
Freedom can only exist under a volunteer government. Because everyone is in charge. Power belongs to the people.
A professional government is going to have to stamp out freedom sooner or later. Freedom under a professional government can only be a fiction. Whenever the people disagree with the professionals, they’re going to have to get put down. That’s just how it is. No matter how it’s disguised, a professional government is tyranny.
Ours is really well disguised, but if it walks like a duck and locks you up like a duck, it’s a tyranny.
Now what’s the left.
Forget all the deep answers. The left is a professional government.
It’s whole idea is that everything needs to be controlled by a big central government to make society just. That means everything from your soda sizes to whether you can mow your lawn needs to be decided in Washington D.C.
Volunteer governments are unjust. Professional governments are fair. That’s the credo of the left.
Its network, the one we were just discussing, it takes over professional governments because it shares their basic ideas. Professional governments, no matter who runs them, are convinced that everything should run through the professionals. And the professionals are usually lefties. If they aren’t, they will be.
Just ask Mueller and establishment guys like him.
What infuriates professional government more than anything else? An amateur, someone like President Trump who didn’t spend his entire adult life practicing to be president, taking over the job.
President Trump is what volunteer government is all about.
When you’re a government professional, you’re invested in keeping the system going. But when you’re a volunteer, you can do all the things that the experts tell you can’t be done. You can look at the mess we’re in with fresh eyes and do the common sense things that President Trump is doing.
And common sense is the enemy of government professionals. It’s why Trump is such a threat.
A Republican government professional would be bad enough. But a Republican government volunteer does that thing you’re not supposed to do in government… think differently.
Professional government is a guild. Like medieval guilds. You can’t serve in if you’re not a member. If you haven’t been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals. If you aren’t in the club.
And Trump isn’t in the club. He brought in a bunch of people who aren’t in the club with him.
Now we’re seeing what the pros do when amateurs try to walk in on them. They spy on them, they investigate them and they send them to jail. They use the tools of power to bring them down.
That’s not a free country.
It’s not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an “insurance policy” against Trump winning the election. It’s not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition. It’s not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media. It’s not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn’t supposed to win, won.
We’re in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and leftist professional government.
The pros have made it clear that they’re not going to accept election results anymore. They’re just going to make us do whatever they want. They’re in charge and we better do what they say.
That’s the war we’re in. And it’s important that we understand that.
Because this isn’t a shooting war yet. And I don’t want to see it become one.
And before the shooting starts, civil wars are fought with arguments. To win, you have to understand what the big picture argument is. It’s easy to get bogged down in arguments that don’t matter or won’t really change anything.
This is the argument that changes everything.
Do we have a government of the people and by the people? Or do we have a tyranny of the professionals?
The Democrats try to dress up this argument in leftist social justice babble. Those fights are worth having. But sometimes we need to pull back the curtain on what this is really about.
They’ve tried to rig the system. They’ve done it by gerrymandering, by changing the demographics of entire states through immigration, by abusing the judiciary and by a thousand different tricks.
But civil wars come down to an easy question. Who runs the country?
They’ve given us their answer and we need to give them our answer.
Both sides talk about taking back the country. But who are they taking it back for?
The left uses identity politics. It puts supposed representatives of entire identity groups up front. We’re taking the country back for women and for black people, and so on and so forth…
But nobody elected their representatives.
Identity groups don’t vote for leaders. All the black people in the country never voted to make Shaun King al Al Sharpton their representative. And women sure as hell didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton.
What we have in America is a representative government. A representative government makes freedom possible because it actually represents people, instead of representing ideas.
The left’s identity politics only represents ideas. Nobody gets to vote on them.
Instead the left puts out representatives from different identity politics groups, there’s your gay guy, there’s three women, there’s a black man, as fronts for their professional government system.
When they’re taking back the country, it’s always for professional government. It’s never for the people.
When conservatives fight to take back the country, it’s for the people. It’s for volunteer government the way that the Founding Fathers wanted it to be.
This is a civil war over whether the American people are going to govern themselves. Or are they going to be governed.
Are we going to have a government of the people, by the people and for the people… or are we going to have a government.
The kind of government that most countries have where a few special people decide what’s best for everyone.
We tried that kind of government under the British monarchy. And we had a revolution because we didn’t like it.
But that revolution was met with a counterrevolution by the left. The left wants a monarchy. It wants King Obama or Queen Oprah.
It wants to end government of the people, by the people and for the people. That’s what they’re fighting for. That’s what we’re fighting against. The stakes are as big as they’re ever going to get. Do elections matter anymore?
I live in the state of Ronald Reagan. I can go visit the Ronald Reagan Library any time I want to. But today California has one party elections. There are lots of elections and propositions. There’s all the theater of democracy, but none of the substance. Its political system is as free and open as the Soviet Union.
And that can be America.
The Trump years are going to decide if America survives. When his time in office is done, we’re either going to be California or a free nation once again.
The civil war is out in the open now and we need to fight the good fight. And we must fight to win.
How Do You Say ‘Fake News’ in Russian?
Russian news sites portray the U.S. presidential election as a prelude to civil war.
By Amy Mackinnon | Foreign Policy November 1, 2018:
The Russian media is obsessed with the American civil war. No, not the one that erupted in 1861 over the secession of the South—the civil war that’s coming with the next U.S. presidential election.
More than 30 articles were published in the past few days on some of the country’s most popular news sites ahead of a hotly contested congressional election in the United States next week, all suggesting that Americans might turn their many guns against each other.
Our Top Weekend Reads
Uncertainty in Bolivia after the resignation of President Evo Morales, a resurgence of Iraqi nationalism challenges…
“The next presidential election could lead to a definitive split in American society and a new civil war,” reported the Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti. The agency’s website is the second most widely read news site in Russia, according to data from Rambler.Ru.
“In Harvard they’re predicting war within the United States,” read a headline on Gazeta.ru, another popular Russian news site.
The source for these articles? An opinion piece published jointly in the Boston Globe and the U.K.’s Sunday Times late last month by the historian and conservative commentator Niall Ferguson, a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. (Ferguson taught previously at Harvard.)
In the article, Ferguson explores some arguments made by other historians about political polarization and violence in the United States. He refers to a “cultural civil war” being waged on social media. But while the divisions in the country are troubling, he concludes, civil war is not imminent.
“The evidence suggests that the extreme right and extreme left are two noisy minorities. They would be lost without one another, but they turn everyone else off,” he wrote.
But Ferguson’s nuance, and the fact that he was writing an opinion piece, were largely absent from the Russian media accounts.
While it’s not clear how so many Russian news sites decided to amplify the one article, stories that seek to undermine faith in Western democracy among Russian audiences are a staple of the Russian media, much of which is state-controlled.
“It suits the Kremlin’s narrative to portray U.S. democracy as dysfunctional and failing,” said Ben Nimmo, the information defense fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab.
Russian President Vladimir Putin waits to greet the South Korean prime minister ahead of their meeting on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, Russia, on Sept. 12. (Sergei Chirikov/AFP/Getty Images)
Russians Don’t Like the Kremlin’s Election Interference Either
In one gubernatorial race, a scandal might be a sign of Putin’s decline.
Report | Amy Mackinnon
Emily Haber, the German ambassador to the United States, and Henne Schuwer, the Dutch ambassador to the United States. (Paul Zinken/Picture Alliance via Getty Images/Benoit Doppagne/AFP/Getty Images/Foreign Policy illustration)
Two Eurocrats and Their Trans-Atlantic Quest to Woo Idaho
Ambassadors try to understand more about Trump’s America by seeing it for themselves.
2018 U.S. Midterm Elections | Robbie Gramer
A nighttime view of the White House in Washington, D.C., on May 27, 2017. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images)
Russian Troll or Clumsy Publicity Hound?
A Russian media executive says he’s come to Washington to test the limits of American freedom.
Report | Amy Mackinnon
“It allows the Kremlin to argue that Western democracy is something to be feared, not emulated, and it allows it to point to the U.S. as weak,” he said.
The idea that the United States is drifting toward civil war is recurring theme in the Russian media, according to Julia Davis, the founder of the website Russian Media Monitor and a featured expert at the Atlantic Council’s Disinformation Portal.
“Lately it’s especially popular, because it’s a distraction for Putin as people are struggling there,” Davis said. President Vladimir Putin’s popularity has declined steadily since the Russian government announced plans to raise the retirement age earlier this year.
Davis said she believes that there is a remarkable degree of coordination taking place among Russian news outlets.
A U.S. indictment unsealed last month against a woman alleged to have been the chief accountant of “Project Lakhta,” a multimillion-dollar operation to interfere in the U.S. midterm elections, revealed how Russian plotters gave operatives instructions and talking points on disseminating an Infowars article on social media. In the article, conservative radio host Michael Savage warned that Americans would “resort to mob violence” if President Donald Trump were removed from office.
Ferguson, the author of the recent opinion piece that caught Russian media’s eye, told Foreign Policy that he does not believe that the United States is on the brink of civil war and that his article sought to “referee” other arguments put forward elsewhere by his colleagues.
“It’s entirely unsurprising that the Russian media will try to sex it up into a piece about civil war in the United States because there’s nothing Vladimir Putin would like more,” he said.
Coverage of Ferguson’s article in the Russian media highlights the challenge of contending with information that is distorted to the point of inaccuracy but is not explicitly fake.
“They prefer to take them from the Western media because it gives it a veil of legitimacy, and then they blow it up,” said Davis of the Russian Media Monitor.
Nina Jankowicz, a global fellow at the Kennan Institute, said that she observed a similar approach in the disinformation spread during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign.
“These stories that I would label as disinformation not only have kernels of truth, but they are true and exploit real fissures in our society,”Jankowicz said.
“It’s not just about fake news. And I think that’s what makes it so difficult for consumers to grapple with. You need time and context to really parse that,” she added.
Have a tip we should know? Your anonymity is NEVER compromised. Email email@example.com
The Truth Must be Told
Your contribution supports independent journalism
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Please contribute here.
Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.