Oh NOW You Say You Didn't Mean It

July 17, 2024 by Karl Denninger

The new "turn down the temperature" game from the Democrats and Biden, of course.

This, after he and his surrogates have basically called anyone who they brand "MAGA" Hitler adherents and Trump, of course, has been branded Hitler himself, in fact they've run blended visages of the two.  Then there's Griffin who literally ran around with Trump's severed head in her hand, in effigy of course, but that's not "real"?  Never mind that claiming someone, if elected, will end our Republic is moral justification for any act taken to prevent it, including violent acts.  It stops just short of the line of advocating assassination but it certainly does morally justify it, assuming the speaker really believes it.  Thus the obvious problem -- if you stop those characterizations (and call for others to do so) were you lying then or are you lying now?

As Biden has said "c'mon man."

Let's not forget that Biden's VP specifically justified burning, looting and murdering in the lead-up to the 2020 elections.  The Federal Government punished nobody for those crimes -- and there were thousands of them caught on live television. Indeed the CDC literally made excuses for exempting riots from covid protocols while being perfectly ok with arresting someone for walking their dog or going for a run outdoors.  The government not only didn't arrest and punish any of the rioters and arsonists Harris specifically endorsed these acts as "mostly peaceful" even though businesses were burned and looted, and more than a few people were murdered.  Biden's DHS has allowed several murderers into this country and released them; at least one was wanted in his original nation for murder and went on to murder a woman here.  Not one prosecution under 8 USC 1324 against a single individual or company harboring and employing those illegals has been lodged and Mayorkas is still in office, along with those who intentionally released those criminals.  Biden wishes to argue that "we must not go there (toward violence in settlement of differences) as a nation" as he said in his address last night but his Administration has served up exactly that sort of violence on many Americans though his deliberate policy decisions and, when others have served up violence over policy decisions he has deliberately refused to charge, prosecute and jail any of them so long as they serve the policies and positions of Democrats.

So let's decipher what Joe really meant.

You see, I get the problem the Administration has now.  Its not just that the obvious risk of the same sort of thing happening to Biden and/or Harris suddenly turns all the violence against ordinary Americans they've suborned, and their violent language, into personal risk where as long as he and Kamala were imposing it on you in service of the Democrat agenda the entire Administration was perfectly good with it.

Oh no, its much worse and in reality its all about his impending and now-inevitable loss of power; Biden's advisors realize he lost the election Saturday and there's nothing he can do about it.  Trump got winged, the guy that shot him intended to kill him, and but for the Grace of God the Democrats would have been dancing in the streets ala certain people after 9/11 and so on.  Instead of either dying or showing weakness by hiding under the lectern Trump stands up and defiantly gives to those who would undertake such actions in service of such an agenda, even at the extent of trying to murder him, a very-symbolic and powerful FUCK YOU! in the form of his fist held high -- with blood from his injury, which came within an inch or less of killing him and which he quite-clearly heard whizz on by as it went through his ear, running down his face.

It's not every day that someone violently opposed to a candidate hands them an opportunity to show, under stress, the response that an enemy of the nation will get if they try to give us a bloody nose or worse and we're still able to respond NO MATTER WHO IT IS THAT DOES IT.  When that sort of thing happens sometimes the person wounded does cower under the desk, displaying weakness -- and thus at best gets sympathy.  But that's not what happened this time -- at all.  Trump didn't let them carry him out or low-crawl away like a scared rat.  Nope; instead you got the equivalent of a one-finger salute to anyone who would pull that shit.

Trump's response is exactly what 99% of the population thinks the response to that sort of event should be too and, in my opinion, that majority position is exactly correct.

Talk is cheap and everyone claims they'll be "the best" when it comes to such maximum-pressure situations.  But 99% of the time in a political campaign you have to take the candidate's word for it because, of course, that nasty situation hasn't arisen yet.  Oh maybe they had cancer, or were in a war, or whatever at some point in the past and they play the sympathy card with varying degrees of success but this is here, now and today and of course you're hiring that person for today and tomorrow, not yesterday.

Notice how nobody on the Democrat side is talking about replacing Biden anymore?  That's because they all know it doesn't matter; whoever they run they will lose and diverting resources into that race at this point is a complete waste of time and money.  All they have left is trying to prevent the raw detonation of their entire House and Senate caucus and that's a serious problem because huge percentages of their side of the aisle have launched the same sort of incendiary attacks which now look an awful lot like they were a solicitation to the assassination of their political rival and the potential civil war it could ignite.

I'm no fan of Trump as everyone who's read this column for any length of time knows.  But even I, in that instant, recognized that if the flag goes up this nation has to have a President who, even if bloodied and bleeding, will rise off the floor and say FUCK YOU to whoever did it, -- and then go execute whatever has to be done.

There's not one American with undivided loyalty who can argue with that position; the only people who can are those who have not just dual loyalty but their primary loyalty is other than American.  And while we have some of those people here, all the illegals for starters, and we even have some people in Congress who meet that definition as we continually see when it comes to their positions on certain foreign nations, the fact of the matter is that the illegals aren't supposed to be able to vote and the others are too small of a percentage of the total population to overrule the rest of us.