Theme: Coercion

  • Um, excuse me Trevor, but; 1) The military can’t constitutionally use arms again

    Um, excuse me Trevor, but;
    1) The military can’t constitutionally use arms against the citizenry.
    2) Estimates are that very few servicemen would comply if ordered. Those that might would largely resist in place. And the rest would defect to the citizenry.
    3) There are only about 200,000 total field personnel out of the 2M total in service. The rest are maintenance, logistics and administrative. Yet there are something around 10M men who would ‘be everywhere’.
    4) Our military is zero wins four losses against similar domestics, in comparatively tiny territories.
    5) It would take very vew people to plunge the USA, especially the dense urban cities with but a few days of supplies, into darkness, cold, and starvation – especially during the winter months.
    6) I’ve done a revolution already, and the moment you fire on the people, especially if they’re trying to restore the constitution, then your government is dead for eternity, and the gloves will come off. Police, Fire, Emergency, News Reporters, Linemen, Power Station crews, don’t show up or even show for work once you’ve sent men to ‘advise’ them and their families at home. (personal experience).
    7) The people are sovereign over the government only because men bear military grade arms and in sufficient numbers can defeat the government and the military. The second amendment is the only one that insures the rest. And in particular insures that democracy, that always drives back to authoritarianism, never succeeds in its deterministic ends.
    8) If you think military, Guard, ex-military, and police, are going to fight to preserve woke, trans, feminism, leftism, the further destruction of the constitution of natural law, and the continued ‘march through the institutions of cultural production’, then you are a product of the solipsistic feminine magical thinking minds that brought us to this conflict.

    Reply addressees: @CTrevorNelson


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-10 13:43:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1645422308712906752

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1644586030128041985

  • Um, excuse me Trevor, but; 1) The military can’t constitutionally use arms again

    Um, excuse me Trevor, but;
    1) The military can’t constitutionally use arms against the citizenry.
    2) Estimates are that very few servicemen would comply if ordered. Those that might would largely resist in place. And the rest would defect to the citizenry.
    3) There are only about 200,000 total field personnel out of the 2M total in service. The rest are maintenance, logistics and administrative. Yet there are something around 10M men who would ‘be everywhere’.
    4) Our military is zero wins four losses against similar domestics, in comparatively tiny territories.
    5) It would take very vew people to plunge the USA, especially the dense urban cities with but a few days of supplies, into darkness, cold, and starvation – especially during the winter months.
    6) I’ve done a revolution already, and the moment you fire on the people, especially if they’re trying to restore the constitution, then your government is dead for eternity, and the gloves will come off. Police, Fire, Emergency, News Reporters, Linemen, Power Station crews, don’t show up or even show for work once you’ve sent men to ‘advise’ them and their families at home. (personal experience).
    7) The people are sovereign over the government only because men bear military grade arms and in sufficient numbers can defeat the government and the military. The second amendment is the only one that insures the rest. And in particular insures that democracy, that always drives back to authoritarianism, never succeeds in its deterministic ends.
    8) If you think military, Guard, ex-military, and police, are going to fight to preserve woke, trans, feminism, leftism, the further destruction of the constitution of natural law, and the continued ‘march through the institutions of cultural production’, then you are a product of the solipsistic feminine magical thinking minds that brought us to this conflict.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-10 13:43:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1645422308868120576

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1644586030128041985

  • No. Though we have about eight holes in the american constitution that have allo

    No. Though we have about eight holes in the american constitution that have allowed the camel’s nose of authoritarianism into the tent of rule of law.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-09 00:18:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1644857360408625156

    Reply addressees: @KingBlueJames

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1644856339712049155

  • Why on earth would I delete the tweet? 😉 Your magical thinking: – helping the f

    Why on earth would I delete the tweet? 😉

    Your magical thinking:
    – helping the feds
    – showing how to hold a rally while not taking the bait.
    – sweating my b—s off in the summer sun.
    Can you testify to any of that? (Or any of your claims?) Of course not.

    Note instead that you’ve done nothing but LARP?
    I do realize you’re trying to parent the lost boys.
    I also realize you’re misleading them about the progress of the war in UA, and the possibility of RU victory. And I realize why you’re doing it. And it’s not all bad.
    Now, you can work with the lost boys.
    I can’t. We can’t. Our team ran an experiment and it turned out they’re political dead weight because they’re too emotional – and anti-intellectual.
    So we work with grownups instead.
    And, it’s a useful division of labor.
    Even if you’re piping thru Hamlin.
    It’s better for the lost boys than being lost. 😉

    Reply addressees: @GonzaloLira1968


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-07 17:59:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1644399621140094979

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1644323509487689730

  • Why on earth would I delete the tweet? 😉 Your magical thinking: – helping the f

    Why on earth would I delete the tweet? 😉

    Your magical thinking:
    – helping the feds
    – showing how to hold a rally while not taking the bait.
    – sweating my b—s off in the summer sun.
    Can you testify to any of that? (Or any of your claims?) Of course not.

    Note instead that you’ve done nothing but LARP?
    I do realize you’re trying to parent the lost boys.
    I also realize you’re misleading them about the progress of the war in UA, and the possibility of RU victory. And I realize why you’re doing it. And it’s not all bad.
    Now, you can work with the lost boys.
    I can’t. We can’t. Our team ran an experiment and it turned out they’re political dead weight because they’re too emotional – and anti-intellectual.
    So we work with grownups instead.
    And, it’s a useful division of labor.
    Even if you’re piping thru Hamlin.
    It’s better for the lost boys than being lost. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-07 17:59:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1644399621249048576

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1644323509487689730

  • Misrepresentation. And also evades the question. The question is why were the pe

    Misrepresentation. And also evades the question. The question is why were the people compelled to a vaccine that was not a vaccine but a therapy, and that did produce risks and deaths, that masks were meaningful when they werent, when the flu itself wasn’t serverely life threatening, except to groups of people who were comorbid, and could have been isolated. The correct answer was that it was a choice whether to take the vaccine or not.

    Reply addressees: @jasonmarcelTO @feltiae @hugh_mankind @hedleyrees


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-06 13:22:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643967396519051265

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643957797183275008

  • Misrepresentation. And also evades the question. The question is why were the pe

    Misrepresentation. And also evades the question. The question is why were the people compelled to a vaccine that was not a vaccine but a therapy, and that did produce risks and deaths, that masks were meaningful when they werent, when the flu itself wasn’t serverely life threatening, except to groups of people who were comorbid, and could have been isolated. The correct answer was that it was a choice whether to take the vaccine or not.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-06 13:22:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643967396586172417

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643957797183275008

  • Nonsense. It’s a payment to a blackmailer to not expose infidelity. Meanwhile th

    Nonsense. It’s a payment to a blackmailer to not expose infidelity. Meanwhile this prosecutor drops nearly every felony charge in front of him letting vast numbers of violent criminals go free.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-05 22:02:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643735886503243777

    Reply addressees: @Tee4EjamiNDays @crcwilkinson @JesseBWatters @dbongino

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643731851603787777

  • No. But we do not allow political prosecution of ex presidents for anything prio

    No. But we do not allow political prosecution of ex presidents for anything prior to the end of service for anything other than high crimes (which this matter is not), precisely to prevent what is happening now: the politicization by lawfare of the justice system.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-05 16:31:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643652540746047489

    Reply addressees: @Eric_CoffeeCake @shuter_marian @Tee4EjamiNDays @crcwilkinson @JesseBWatters @dbongino @POTUS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643650685139820545

  • If you read earlier in the thread, that’s what I said. However, asymmetric prose

    If you read earlier in the thread, that’s what I said. However, asymmetric prosecution, political prosecution, divergence from federal law, and violating the prohibition on prosecution of ex-presidents is something that will likely end up in the supreme court, and worse, might…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-05 15:08:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643631585177083910

    Reply addressees: @shuter_marian @Tee4EjamiNDays @crcwilkinson @JesseBWatters @dbongino

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643626122993696774