Wednesday Morning Breakfast For The Brain

Good morning Deplorables, it’s hump day.

Playing With Fire: Democrats and Their Military Quislings Flirt With Borderline Seditious Military Coup

Via Revolver News

As the election approaches, more and more ominous evidence is quickly piling up that the U.S. military’s nearly 250-year separation from national politics is eroding. Frightening signs indicate that senior members of the military are open to an anti-Trump coup d’etat. If such a coup happens, Democrats will gleefully cheer it on.

Revolver wants make clear that this article is not based on any inside information. Nobody on the Joint Chiefs of Staff is passing on warnings about what the military is planning. Instead, this article is based on a reading of public statements and events, which are already worrisome enough.

The first red flag is buried in Bob Woodward’s latest book on the Trump Administration, Rage. According to the book, former Defense Secretary James Mattis spent much of his tenure in office plotting to undermine the elected leader who appointed him.

The book documents private grumblings, periods of exasperation and wrestling about whether to quit among the so-called adults of the Trump orbit: Mattis, [then Director of National Intelligence Dan] Coats and then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

The Post glances over this incident quickly, treating it as just one more example of a disgruntled senior Trump official. But it is far more than that. This is the top defense official in the United States, himself a former general, discussing “collective action” against the president with a top intelligence official. “Collective action” could take many forms, perhaps a concerted effort to invoke the 25th Amendment and have the president declared incapacitated and removed. This would be a coup, and it would be motivated not by Trump’s incapacity, which is justa fig leaf, but by political disagreements.

Later, when the President had rioters cleared from Lafayette Square after several days of violence and destruction, Mattis suggested the president’s decision was illegal.

When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside. [The Atlantic]

Dispersing violent rioters who have already nearly burned down a church is not “violating the Constitutional rights of fellow citizens.” Make no mistake, Mattis knows exactly what he is suggesting. When soldiers are given an illegal order, they must refuse. Mattis is laying the groundwork for soldiers and generals to refuse the president’s orders. From there, it is a very small step to simply removing the president entirely.

Mattis is now a private citizen. But there are worrying signs the current military brass, the commanders, are steeling themselves to intervene in civilian politics. On June 2, after the worst week of rioting in America since the MLK assassination riots, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley issued a public memo that served as a public warning to the president.

“As members of the Joint Force…you embody the ideals of our Constitution,” Milley wrote. “Please remind all of our troops and leaders that we will uphold the values of our nation, and operate consistent with national laws and our own high standards of conduct at all times.”

Remember the context. President Trump had just publicly floated the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act to suppress rioting in cities where local mayors were unable, or unwilling, to protect ordinary citizens. Press outlets like CNN suggested that this law, which has been used in many cases exactly like this summer’s riots, would be illegal for President Trump to use. In the middle of that crisis, Milley’s rhetoric about the Constitution and “the right to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly” was, in essence, a repetition of the press’s propaganda that that deadly riots across the country were “mostly peaceful protests.”

In this context, Milley’s vow to “uphold the values of our nation” takes on a darker tone. It sounds less like a promise and more like a warning that if Trump invokes the Insurrection Act against rioters, the military will defy him.

Milley should have been removed from command for his memo. But of course, President Trump is not remotely the authoritarian that perhaps he should be. Milley remains in office, ready to defy the president whenever he feels like it.

Democrats and their allies are counting on commanders like Milley to swing into action if necessary.

Read the entire article HERE.

Pelosi’s Choice: Steal the Election or Be Destroyed

By Tom Luongo/Gold, Goats & Guns

I’ve learned a few things about politics by watching my goats over the years. Herd queens have to be beaten to step aside. They won’t give up status willingly.

I saw this first hand when a vicious challenge ended with a broken horn, humiliation and blood. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is a tough old goat who is clearly making her last stand, facing the toughest fight of her political career.

Congress is at a crossroads over a stimulus package before the election. Pelosi has run out of good choices to force the Republicans into another bad deal, which is her trademark move.

Internal squabbling and strategic missteps has her charting a most dangerous path.

The House returns to session today facing an impasse over another stimulus bill which see both sides entrenched in their positions.

Just under two months until the election, however, the big question is, “Who has the leverage?”

Pelosi always fronts that she’s on top of things. She rules House Democrats with an iron fist and somehow always manages to win these confrontations.

But this time may be very different. Why?

This time she has no leverage. This time the Republicans have the upper hand. Even Bloomberg had to admit that the situation is not in Pelosi’s favor, while talking about all of her options.

Among the unlikely events that could now break the deadlock: President Donald Trump changing tack amid alarm about poll numbers, a sudden reversal of economic indicators that have recently trended upward, and Pelosi or Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell facing a revolt by their own vulnerable, moderate members.

It isn’t that the economic situation is good. It is that there is simply no justification for continued abject panic over COVID-19 to keep people on the dole.

Public opinion has turned against Pelosi and the Democrats in places where they pushed too hard. People want their lives back and for the looting and rioting to end.

Now they are faced with a stark choice: hope the polls are right and Joe Biden will be president on November 4th or challenge the election if they aren’t.

Neither of those choices leave Pelosi with any option to cave to Senate Republicans, especially as Mitch McConnell gave his people the opportunity to vote for something last week to take back to the voters.

All Chuck Schumer could do is filibuster.

It’s clear Pelosi’s strategy has been to allow destruction in battleground states and blame Trump for it. This was their cover story for forcing the Republicans to bail out failing Blue States whose economies were already in trouble regardless of the COVID-19 lockdowns. States like California and Illinois need massive bail outs to survive.

Hell, California needs a lot more than money at this point.

I was asked last week by Sputnik about this situation and what I thought was happening. I didn’t expect a breakthrough in talks then and I don’t today because both sides have seen beyond this fight to what happens after the people vote on November 3rd.

Pelosi is now the villain in this political psycho-drama and all she’s doing is playing to her base, which is dwindling in real terms.

Read the entire article HERE.

Atlantic Op-ed: Democrats Will Riot If They Lose, Therefore Republicans Should Let Joe Biden Win

Via Breitbart News

The Atlantic has published an op-ed that argues that “law-and-order” Republicans should vote for Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden because Democrats will riot if he loses, refusing to accept the results if President Donald Trump wins re-election.

In an essay titled, “The Democrats May Not Be Able to Concede,” Shadi Hamid writes:

A loss by Joe Biden under these circumstances is the worst case not because Trump will destroy America (he can’t), but because it is the outcome most likely to undermine faith in democracy, resulting in more of the social unrest and street battles that cities including Portland, Oregon, and Seattle have seen in recent months. For this reason, strictly law-and-order Republicans who have responded in dismay to scenes of rioting and looting have an interest in Biden winning—even if they could never bring themselves to vote for him.

In presidential elections, once is a fluke; twice is a pattern. I struggle to imagine how, beyond utter shock, millions of Democrats will process a Trump victory. A loss for Biden, after having been the clear favorite all summer, would provoke mass disillusion with electoral politics as a means of change—at a time when disillusion is already dangerously high. If Democrats can’t beat a candidate as unpopular as Trump during a devastating pandemic and a massive economic contraction, then are they even capable of winning presidential elections anymore? Democracy, after all, is supposed to self-correct after mistakes, particularly mistakes as egregious as electing Donald Trump—whose unfitness for the nation’s highest office makes itself apparent with almost every passing day.
…

For democracy to work, the losers of elections need to believe that they can win the next time around. Otherwise their incentives to play the spoiler increase. A breakdown of democracy is always a possibility, but the country is more resilient than it may seem, and consolidated democracies seldom break down in any circumstance. That said, this is one of those propositions that is better left untested.

Read the full op-ed here.

Read the entire article HERE.

Facebook Makes Efforts to Push ‘Global Warming’ Theory on its Users

Via American Greatness

The social media giant Facebook will start ramping up its efforts to suppress information it doesn’t like regarding “climate change,” and will push the theory that climate change is real, according to USA Today.

In a statement released Tuesday, Facebook claimed, without evidence, that “climate change is real, the science is unambiguous, and the need to act grows more urgent by the day.” The platform plans to push this narrative by launching its own “Climate Science Information Center,” which will regularly populate Facebook with its version of “facts” regarding alleged climate change.

A Facebook spokesman added that “our goal is to help people get authoritative information about climate change,” and that “this is one step, and there will be many more.”

The initiative was welcomed by a pro-climate change activist named Michael Mann, who is the director of Penn State University’s Earth System Science Center. Mann claimed that “the public is far less informed about climate change than they need to be,” which he alleged was “very convenient for polluting interests who don’t want to see climate policies move forward.”

In recent weeks, the Left has been ramping up their “climate change” narrative in the wake of devastating fires across the West Coast, particularly California. Although wildfires in California are an annual occurrence, this year’s fires have been substantially worse and more widespread than previous years. The primary cause was the lack of proper deforestation methods in the state, which left hundreds and thousands of dead trees completely exposed in the wilderness rather than being properly disposed of, which provided the perfect kindling for a rapidly-spreading fire in the event that one occurred. Environmentalists who opposed deforestation techniques are now blaming the blazes on global warming, with no evidence.

The social media giant Facebook will start ramping up its efforts to suppress information it doesn’t like regarding “climate change,” and will push the theory that climate change is real, according to USA Today.

In a statement released Tuesday, Facebook claimed, without evidence, that “climate change is real, the science is unambiguous, and the need to act grows more urgent by the day.” The platform plans to push this narrative by launching its own “Climate Science Information Center,” which will regularly populate Facebook with its version of “facts” regarding alleged climate change.

A Facebook spokesman added that “our goal is to help people get authoritative information about climate change,” and that “this is one step, and there will be many more.”

Read the entire article HERE.

Progressive Utopia Of California Becomes First State To Eliminate Electricity Entirely

Via The Babylon Bee (Satire)

SACRAMENTO, CA—California is being heralded as a progressive utopia after eliminating electricity entirely.

Working by candelight at his desk, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a new law that bans electricity, propelling the state into a progressive futuristic paradise. Newsom said he got the idea while experiencing the latest round of rolling blackouts in the state. He decided to make the blackouts the law of the land.

“Other, backward states still use carbon-heavy electricity, gas for heating and cooking, and wasteful air conditioning,” he said proudly as people applauded around him. “But not on my watch. California has progressed beyond these archaic concepts.”

The law also bans vehicles, forcing pedestrians to use innovative new horse-driven carriages.

Next on the legislative docket? The elimination of water-wasting toilets, to be replaced by just going on the sidewalk. A pilot program in San Francisco has been very successful, according to the homeless population there.

Check out all of the Bee’s takes on politics and culture HERE.

Be sure to subscribe to Def-Con News to get Breakfast For The Brain in your morning mailbox.