Nom de plume: Rivrdog

Constitutional Crisis?

Yes, Constitutional Crisis!

 
Below is a re-post from my FB page 3 days ago, but Judge Napolitano just did a piece of Fox about the Memo and FISA at the end of the Ten am hour (EST). He correctly pointed out what I said three days ago: Why did the House Intelligence Committee sit on the Memo all during the time that the FISA Re-authorizatin Bill was being worked up, passed and sent to POTUS for signature?

The Judge said that if the Memo HAD been released, this FISA Re-authorization would not have whizzed right through, as it did.

Okay, then, more news: Rep Nunes, who runs that Committee, now seems to be backpedalling on the Memo, not holding to his previous release date of 3/18. We all know that Deep State, threatened to the core by the Memo, is putting HUGE pressure on Nunes, but will he cave and find an excuse to further delay #ReleaseTheMemo?

The Judge suggested that the Memo should be released on the Floor of the House, where it is Constitutionally protected from everything and everyone, and I would guess that includes Deep State Court action.

BTW, if you haven't thought about it, the Memo and all the by-play surrounding it is the very definition of a Constitutional Crisis. We don't have the exact words of the Memo, but enough has been leaked to show us that Federal Agencies conspired between themselves (the "Deep State") first, to try to prevent Trump's election, then when he was elected anyway, to present a case IN FISA COURT, to directly undermine his Presidency. You can call that a "soft coup" if YOU want, I call it an attempted Coup in which the bullets just haven't been fired yet.

This Nation is now VERY close to those bullets being fired to try to remove this Administration. Countervailing force WILL be applied when that happens ("when", not "if"), and this Republic dies then. What comes after will depend on who wins that Civil War. 

(the post from three days ago)
January 19 at 6:58pm ·
If #ReleaseTheMemo was in full cry BEFORE FISA was just reauthorized, what was the hurry to re-authorize? The answer is that Deep State's power is at stake. There's a VERY good chance that if the voting public had known about this horrible abuse of FISA before the Act came up for renewal, it would never have been renewed in it's present form.

The fact that the FISA kangaroo-court system was hustled through when the hustlers KNEW it had been badly abused means the hustlers were ALL acting for, or at least in favor of Deep State.

Wasn't there some pro-FISA shoving coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave?

(end of post)

The quality factor in Investigations

In police work, "evidence" is any fact(s) which help the investigator prove that the alleged perpetrator did break the law. Some evidence is obvious: was the suspect at the scene of the crime or not? Other evidence is not as obvious: can unknown witnesses be discovered who can establish the suspect's presence at the crime scene? Finally, some evidence is obscure, such as who might know the suspect and be able to suggest if suspect might be the type to commit this crime? These three examples go to the quality of the evidence, and when the investigator turns the case in for prosecution, the legal quality of the evidence is the primary factor in deciding whether the case is prosecuted or not.

This primer on quality of evidence is taught in every police academy in the free world, because courts are required to consider the best evidence when deciding guilt or innocence, not just here in the USA, but in every Nation which has a liberty-based legal system. Note that the Best Evidence Rule covers the admission of documentary evidence, but the Court also considers the quality of other evidence, such as eyewitness testimony. You don't want to be tried for crimes in the other kind of nations where the Judge has sole discretion to use evidence or not, and how to evaluate evidence or not.

In my first Police Academy (I attended two because of a break in police service caused by being called back into the military: I was just over the five-year point when I went back to copping, and Oregon's DPSST (POST) rules say five years is the max, no waivers.), I was taught that evidence quality is determined by the concept of directness: the farther the evidence was from being totally direct (e.g.: suspect arrested at crime scene, loot in pockets), the lower it's quality, the more work had to be done to establish it for Court presentation. As a rookie, I made my first Armed Robbery case on one eyewitness account. The eyewitness had observed the suspect drive his 1963 Chevy Impala hardtop to the drive-up window of the burger joint, had observed as he presented his gun, got a bag of cash and drove away. The eyewitness wrote down the robbers description, wrote down the license plate, then as I arrived, that witness handed me his note, which I entered into evidence, along with all the other interview results. I sent my APB, attention to the hometown cops of the registered owner, and 90 minutes later, the local gendarmes there (next state over) had him in jail. I got a rare Detective Division attaboy for that one and the suspect plead guilty to Robbery First, getting ten years in prison. No plea bargain was acceptable to the DA for that case, built as it was on the highest quality of evidence.

Take the above basic lesson in criminal justice, and apply it (or, I should say try to apply it) to the case of Hillary Rodham Clinton and her illegal email server, now widely assumed to have been hacked by the Russians. Now read this article, R.T.W.T., and apply your quality of evidence evaluation to the work the FBI (under Director Comey, whose wife had just gotten an $8.5M defense contract) which Bureau then said, and has been saying ever sine, "oh, those evil Russians".

As I read the Net Right Daily article, I recognize that the FBI's claim of hacking evidence doesn't withstand the first layer of evaluation, let alone the three layers which the article's author applied to that bogus claim. You try my evaluation and see what you get.

Time to indict Hillary. Get it done, Mr. Sessions. 

It's WAR, Mr. Trump

Up with the first of the fleet of garbage wagons this ayem, get the newspaper in: the fishwrap is blaring MORE WaPo #FakeNews in huge headline font. My reaction is to look at the calendar and see when my next gun maintenance cycle starts, but then starting my Twitter app, it seems that I might be using my Militia hardware before that maintenance cycle plays out....

The USA is at war now.

The Left, now far more organized and coordinated than they were during the election cycle last Fall, now consider themselves in a fight for their very political existence. Apparently, they failed to realize just how fast their two generations of dragging USA-governance towards Marxism could be undone by a determined American POTUS who was NOT sucked in by that political religion.

The Left realizes their error now, and after gnashing their teeth over HRC's loss for six months, they have reverted to the one thing the Left does FAR better than other political units: they can re-organize quickly to meet external threats.

They have re-organized now, and they march as a cohesive force with ONE objective: removal of POTUS45 from office. Sean Hannity pushed this last night, very concisely, too. My problem with Hannity is his communication style: he leads up to making an obvious point, then leaves his audience to write the punchline. That is poor communications. Sean, old buddy, you have to finish your point. You didn't, so I will.

Hannity's "five groups" all have something in common besides TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). They are all, by their choice of political bedfellows, working for world Marxism. Yes, that includes some who call themselves Republicans (Never-Trumpers), it includes the core leadership of the Democratic Party, and it includes all the "bi-partisan" forces within the Beltway (all the NGOs, etc). This group could also be referred to by the more-benign titles of "UniParty", "One World Order", "Globalists", "Establishment", etc. The core distinction of the entire Uniparty is that their train travels on Socialist rails.

World Marxism is in it's Second Phase. It's First Phase was to establish itself as a political force, and despite the Socialist Party failing to govern effectively EVERYWHERE it has been installed (or installed itself, as with the USSR), it is very persistent, because it plays to the personal greed of all the Little People. In this space, we call those Little People the Free Shit Army. Socialism doesn't work, but by buying votes in Nations stupid enough to give the vote to stupid people, Socialism can almost always get itself elected. When it can't, it just pulls Deadly Force out of it's bag of tricks and installs itself anyway. The Second Phase will be mostly Revolution, most of the time. Nothing else is left to the failed Marxists.

In the USA, we just elected an anti-Marxist. Our election process is mostly un-assailable by the sort of rabble attacks it has undergone for the past six months, but now that the Left has focus, it's trying to use the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to remove POTUS45 from office. This Amendment has never been used. It was generated two years after the assassination of JFK, because it was thought that the period of hours between the bullet striking JFK's head and the declaration of death in Dallas was a hyper-dangerous time for the USA, and some method ought to be available to make sure Presidential leadership succession was guaranteed to be available.

The gist of the Left's argument, shallow as it is, is contained in Section Four of the 25A:

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

The Left believes that if all of Hannity's Five Groups came together, they could, in Congress, be the "other such body as the law provides". This is bulltwaddle, of course. The Congress would have to write, debate and send to POTUS45 a Bill for an Act to make themselves that "body". POTUS would veto it, then there would have to be an over-ride attempt, which would fail. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Along the way, the SCOTUS would be asked to get involved. That would fail also. Even a Liberal SCOTUS would never directly remove a sitting President, to do so would mean the End of the Republic, and they know it. SCOTUS' cushy positions would end quickly, as USA, Version 2.0 would be unlikely to maintain a Federal Judiciary & SCOTUS as they sit today.

So, the War on POTUS, as it is brought now, is doomed to failure. EVERY student of conflict style, as I claim to be, can see this failure. The left has their own conflict analysts, some of them quite good, so why would they even try this stunt?

The answer is to generate confusion and class conflict. Marx was all about that concept. Read this short paper and you will know why this struggle is about Marxism, and only about Marxism. Marxism is about the Struggle. There must always be a Struggle for there to be Marxism.

Marxism is VERY vulnerable. It doesn't succeed often because for it to succeed, it HAS to use force, so despite Marx' and Engels' scholarly approach, it takes a Stalin to emplace Marxism. Here in the USA, the vast majority does NOT want to see or undergo a Marxist revolution, but the Left is speeding towards that conclusion of their offer of conflict to POTUS45.

My prediction? We WILL see a Marxist revolt break out, but when it does, it will fail spectacularly. How we come out of that failure will show the world the resilience of the American Way.

 

Terrible Tuesday

Terrible Tuesday if you are a Special Snowflake. Your Snowflake Queen just lost, for the third time! Faithless electors took seven votes from her, two from Trump, so the final tally will give Hillaroon 225, Trump 304. Oh, the HUMANITY!

Maudlin Monday

First day in three that I have been been able to sit at the Blogstation Alpha. The present sciatic hip attack was especially hurtful. There may be some spinal surgery in my future.

The world marches on, though. As I write, the Special Snowflakes, #NotMyPresident tribe, are going over the cliff as is usual for those lemmings. In a few more hours, the Electors will have had their say and will confirm the election of Mr. M.A.G.A. Trump as President.

The muzzoids have made another "statement", assassinating the Russian Ambassador in Ankara as he made a cultural visit to a photography exhibit there. I hear one report that the assassin, who confirmed his muzzoid status by several "Aloha Snackbars" and a short rant before the cops mowed him down, might have been a cop himself. If so, it would seem that Turkish President-for-life Recip Ergodan's muzzification is complete. My take on it: I'll wager that when Obummer got this news, he did fist-pumps. I will also wager that Mr. Trump, upon taking office in a month, will start a review of our membership in NATO, under whose umbrella an Islamist Turkey shelters these days.

More news of joy: The President of the International Monetary Fund, Mme Christine Lagarde, was just found guilty of corruption (light version called "negligence") by a Froggish court. Yes, I will, in fact, quote from Russian sources instead of the New Yawk Slimes. The IMF, of course, it the financial arm of the New World Order, a commie-enabling group you have probably heard of...

There is probably more joyous news coming down the pike. As I read it, I will post it.

Ta ta, my friends

Election '16 - First Look - Section Two

Analyzing the Candidates

(footnoted, the notes are below the fold)

Donald J. Trump

From the stupidly-supersized crowd of 16 candidates, through the ridiculously-arranged debates which meant NOTHING, one candidate had the pizzaz to catch the eye of the GOP primary voters. Note that the GOP Primaries were NOT rigged to push one candidate as the Democratic Party Primaries were¹. The GOP choices all broke down to either RINOs favored by the GOP Establishment, or not. The Not candidates were Cruz and Trump. Cruz IS part of the Establishment, being a United States Senator, but he tried to present himself as if he was the leader of a "Conservative Party". Of course, there isn't such a party now, nor is there likely to ever be one^2.  With Congress' miniscule 8-percent "favorable" rating³, and the GOP's rating just slightly better among it's own voters, the inevitable happened: the Establishment-backed candidates fell behind and were mostly gone in the first three months of the campaign. By April, the lone Establishment candidate, Gov. Kasich of OH. was teetering, running less than 10 percent in the last few primaries. The establishment kept him alive financially, and so in CA, the last big Primary, it boiled down to Cruz, "THE" Conservative (if you believe that bulltwaddle, I didn't), Kasich, Mister Establishment, falling somewhere between a Conservative and a RINO (I could never decide on the weak evidence presented for either case), and Trump, the "Maverick" candidate, who made a point to dump on the Establishment every chance he got, rightfully IMHO, because he had the polling stats to back it up. 

Trump, The Dumper (of all things Establishment) took a BRILLIANT position as to self-projection. He took himself, already well-known via his TV personna, to the lowest level, knowing that the Establishment ALWAYS puts on the most "hoity-toity" airs that are possible. This set up CONTRAST⁴ with the Establishment candidates. It also lured them into chasing his language and style, instead of attacking his message, which would have shown him to be elusive and transitory on some issues. He used name-calling, a rubric of false-logic. His main challenger, Ted Cruz, was supposedly a "Great Debater", but for some reason, he got sucked down to Trump's level and never successfully pointed out the logical faults in Trump's speeches as they came and went. Trump more or less successfully marginalized Ted Cruz. Cruz himself was easier to marginalize than his supporters, who eventually tapped into Establishment money after they showed solidarity. Cruz, a loner in the Senate with few accomplishments of note, was propped up by the Establishment, who had never trusted him, from the end of the Primaries to the Convention. At the Convention, the Establishment tried unsuccessfully to mount a floor-fight by illegal rules-change which would have "relieved" pledged delegates of their pledges. Oregon's delegation, to their everlasting guilt, fully intended to violate State and possibly Federal law and lead this final act of #NeverTrump shame.

Hillary Rodham Clinton

HRC has been campaigning since the start of Obama's second term as President. Previously referred to as "The Smartest Woman in the Country", she has attempted for the past three and a half years to position herself as the INEVITABLE HILLARY. In other words, "Mr. & Mrs. America, get over it, I am your next President." Well, inevitability works sometimes. It has put some strange bedfellows in the White House before. The problem is, as revealed in the "Guccifer Dump V.2.0"¹, HRC never really intended to rely on a purely political campaign, not unusual for her because she has put her finger on the scale in everything she has ever done. She used evasive talking points throughout the lead-up to her campaign against challengers Kevin McCarthy, former MD Governor, and Senator Bernie Sanders, (Socialist), VT. McCarthy, apparently a stalking horse, was dismissed by the liberal press before he got started. That same HRC-bought-and-paid-for media tried also to marginalize Sanders, but had zero success at that. Sanders soon developed a large following among the liberal youth of America, who, having been fed a steady diet of Socialism for decades in their colleges, found their "Marx-in-Shining-Armor"⁶ in the person of Sanders. It seemed to this pundit that 80-90% of the Democratic Party energy in the hustings went to Bernie. Interestingly, Bernie's message was almost pure Socialism, and fiscally irresponsible socialism at that. His kid-squad failed to grasp the fact that if his program was adopted, it would destroy what was left of the US economy. So much for those expensive college educations, eh? The damage was done though, because the "Bernie-Bots" as this "Children's Crusade" became known as, managed to remain cohesive, likely due to their Marxist indoctrination in college. Sanders continued to run up significant primary wins right to the end of the primary season, but because of the (D)-Party system of "super-delegates", pre-pledged to HRC, Sanders never had a chance⁵. The final result WAS as "inevitable" as the Clinton War Room could make it. HRC is the official candidate for President, and WILL stand for election, despite the mountain of Probable Cause of almost-uncountable election felonies she could be indicted on. Her corruption is totally protected by the present corrupt Administration of Barack Hussein Obama, the subject of the next Section of this opus.

Footnotes below the fold.

 

Election '16 - First Look - Section One

I might have waited until the coronation of Queen Hillary was over and done with, but since it is only a formality for the DNC, that would be wasted time. Without further ado, here is my take on the race for President.

Method (Sections).

1. Analyze the ideals and history of the parties.
2. Analyze the candidates.
3. Analyze the present Administration and it's effect on the election.
4. Tie it all up, exposing the logical gaps.
5.  Prognosticate

History of the Parties.

Republican Party: the Grand Old Party's ideal has always been Business First, prosperity follows, nothing bad happens during prosperous times¹. This is an ideal which makes sense to most everyone who isn't what we call now a "social justice warrior", a fad amongst the youth mostly, which says if you aren't trying to upset the apple-cart, you ain't shit. SJWs aren't in the GOP, they are invariably found somewhere to the left of Karl Marx. The first and greatest (IMHO) Republican President of the post-WW2 era was GEN. Eisenhower, who oversaw the rebuilding of a robust post-war economy, the rise of major new technologies and his best work, improvements in continental infrastructure (the Interstate Highway system). Pause for the ugly Vietnam War period. Under the GOP, the USA recovered from the post-Vietnam recession and "malaise" of Jimmah Cahtuh by electing Ronald Reagan, who did all the usual GOP things - rebuilt the excessively-reduced military, let business have free rein, defeated the USSR in the Cold War. The next GOP Presidents were the Bushes, who showed us how BAD the GOP can get without a charismatic leader. Bush41 said he would cut taxes, he increased them. He engaged an Islamist dictator in war, defeated him in 100 hours, then let him remain a dictator. Bush43, the Texan who couldn't talk straight, had a little business experience, mostly as a MLB franchise owner (which doesn't count, professional sports are an engineered market). He ran up the most debt of any GOP prexy, let down his daddy's healthy watchfulness of the Jihadis, was attacked on 9-11-01 and responded poorly with our military assets. He only had one goal: kill Saddam Hussein, whom his daddy had left alive, because Saddam had "put out a contract" on his daddy's head. Bush43's war was very unpopular, and essentially gave rise to the SJW movement that plagues the USA today. Comes now The Donald, riding his particular wave of entrepreneurial talent. He has an excellent chance of interrupting the decline of the USA, but he faces huge opposition, see below.

Democratic Party: (Note that I don't use the word "Democrat". That would be incorrect) The Democratic Party is all Social Change, all the time. Take from the Rich, give to the Poor (raking off a healthy vig, of course), but most of the "Poor" are folks who have had the work ethic beaten out of them, or who have been to college in the past 20 years where they learned that work is NOT their primary goal in life, that would be Social Justice. The "Justice" in Social Justice means what the Democratic Party says it means, it is not derived from History, Logic or study of the workings of governance. Under the Democratic Party, post WW2, we have the last Democratic Party conservative, Harry Truman, most noted for ending WW2 with nuclear warfare vs. Japan. JFK was a milder form of Truman, but was assassinated in office. That gave us LBJ, unfit for office on Day One of his Administration, but who recognized that the Democratic Party's way out of major problems is to start a war, which he did, then set the US military up to lose it, also another D classic maneuver in the past fifty years. Then J Carter, who inherited the Nixon-Ford economics disaster and made it worse ("malaise") then Bill Clinton, who brought Mafia-style governance to the White House (see his list of dead bodies). Clinton inherited the Dot-Com Bubble, allowing him to claim the only National Surplus in the past umpteen years (then the bubble burst). Via smoke, mirrors and REALLY strong grips backstage, Bill, like a Deus Ex Machina, still sails along as an "economic expert" for some illogical reason. The Obama Collapse came next, but it will be dealt with in Section #3. Now Hillary waits in the wings for her chance to (save the country) (make herself rich) (screw everything up) (destroy the Constitution)/ Mark all which apply.

1. My definition of the GOP ideal.

End of Section One

 

 

A Clarion Call

The death of SCOTUS Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, the truest Constitutional Conservative on the Supreme Court, brings this Nation to a bright line, to a decision point where the entire future of these United States hangs in the balance.

There are only two possibilities going forward from here: A liberal Justice is nominated and confirmed, ending forever any possibility that the Constitution will ever again be interpreted as our Founders wrote it, OR, a moderate or conservative justice will be appointed and confirmed, giving our Nation the guidance it is supposed to have, that of a Constitution carefully written to guide the actions of free people in an environment of Liberty.

Details matter. It is hard to imagine President Obama nominating anyone but a jurist who REFUSES to believe that the original concepts of Liberty must be maintained. Obama will nominate someone who believes in the false concept that the Constitution is a "Living Document", completely adjustable in interpretation to suit the political whims of the political Left.

A little history. You may not recall, because Civics, as presently taught, does not EVER portray President Franklin Roosevelt as attempting to destroy the Constitution, but he did, in fact, try exactly that, but the simple expedient of increasing the size of the Supreme Court, giving him the opportunity to change it from a conservative Court to a Court which would knuckle under to his Statist plans, most of which either were or bordered on socialism. This episode was known as "FDR's attempt to pack the Court", and I first learned about it at my mother's knee when I was about first-grade age. She was prescient on this issue, and knew that I was unlikely to ever learn this bitter lesson in public school, so she home-schooled me on it herself. Now, the idea of "packing the Court" has not come up just yet, and may not, but I wouldn't be surprised to see the idea come up as a faux-compromise: the Left allows the appointment of a moderate or conservative Justice, but at a time certain in the future, the size of the Court will be increased.

All of us who are politically to the right of Karl Marx need to raise our voices, NOW, and demand that no liberal candidate achieves confirmation. This will REQUIRE that we coalesce around a candidate for President who can and will LEAD this Nation, not allowing it to be led by a cabal of back-room players who are bought and sold on a daily basis, as is now the case in BOTH political parties. Our new leader MUST acknowledge that our Constitution is, as the late Justice Scalia said many times, based on it's exceptionally clear language, language which CANNOT be interpreted in any way except by it's actual words and how those words were used when our founding document was actually written.

The "who is a conservative" games presently being played out in the GOP field have, by need, just ended. The GOP Presidential race now becomes one of "who is the best American".

That "Ruh-Roh" feeling about the 2A

The feeling is, that the major attack on it which will be the hallmark of Obama's failed presidency is but weeks away, maybe days away.

Yesterday, Obama made a speech about terrorism and internal security. I listened. As the lies started to flow, I was lulled momentarily by the fact that it was all, well, so BOILERPLATE. We will kill ISIS....yada-yada. Home-grown terrorists are harder to catch and get ahead of....yada-yada. I almost zoned the prez totally out as I was doing scut work in the kitchen at the time.

Then the alarm bells started going off. the "Ruh-Roh Alarm" sounded loudly. I re-focused. I followed Fox' handy talking points crawl at the bottom of the screen. The Obama-rama Show wrapped up, and the alarms were still going off.

Why? What alarms? Glad you asked!

OBAMA NEVER MENTIONED GUNS IN THAT SPEECH, NOT ONCE.

He not only didn't mention it, but his two favorite follow-ons were missing: no words on "it's Congress' fault", no "It's the NRA's fault", no "gun-show loophole's" fault. Especially, no "I have a pen and a phone" reference to Executive Action.

Here's a little thing from my military days: when you are at war, a shooting war, and you stumble right onto the enemy and THEY DON'T SHOOT AT YOU, that is worth some brain work to find out why. In infantry warfare, when this happens with reconnaisance patrols, the usual reason is that the enemy has something major going on nearby they don't want you to discover (a hidden HQ, for example), so they let you on through without resistance, hoping that the major-something doesn't get discovered and quickly attacked by a larger force than you represent.

I had this vibe about Obama's speech yesterday. Just now, I got up at 0645, went downstairs to get a clean coffee cup, and while I was getting it, Fox News was expounding on the thoughts I have just expressed, above. Apparently, they did some digging (or just read some O-flunky's lips), and Fox has concluded, as I did yesterday, that some Gun Control Executive Action is forthcoming, fairly immediately.

A fellow blogger of this region, one I read most days (except when he's all pedantic about IPSC, because he is a Rules Monster in that sport), just pointed out that The Hill, a notable, if mostly Left, publication about "Washington Inside", ventures that Obama is readying his Un-Constitutional Edict now, and it will be released, with suitable fanfare, right after the holidays (or sooner, I would surmise).

What will the edict bring?

Well, if Bloomie was in on it, it will bring at least a National Capacity Limit for magazines (resurrect Clinton's, most likely), likely some sort of "Assault Weapons Ban" (again, resurrect Clinton's, but tighten it up so that chosen manufacturers can't grease palms like Bill Ruger did with his Ranch Rifle and buy their way out of it). I'm guessing that there won't be confiscation in it, for now. Obama is likely content to leave that up to Hillary, who has said that she would go down that road. If Hillary doesn't make it to POTUS, there won't be Federal confiscations, except maybe for a 50-cal ban and grab. 50BMG weapons are at risk because they are one RCH (look it up, it's military slang) away from being designated as Destructive Devices now, and that could be done easily by edict.

So, it's time to ask: if POTUS tries to kill the 2A by edict (Clinton did it with Congress, you will recall), what will the GOPe Congress do?

Absolutely Nothing. Need proof: Look at the super-pork bill they just passed. These are NOT the Conservative droids you are looking for...

What will Yours Truly do? Absolutely Nothing. Yep, I am not going to go to war over anything less than active confiscations, which I WILL use my skills against. Why am I promising nothing? You haven't read this blog for long, have you, my friends? If you had, you will note that I advised the purchase of all firearms, magazines and ammo that might be banned from sale, way back in '08, when it began to look like Obama was going to get the (D) nomination. If you DIDN'T follow this blog, and DIDN'T accumulate your weapons since then, you have an immediate task to do so, if you want any.

Told 'ya.

A different Threat, plus your responses

The events unfolding in San Bernardino show us a different threat. Not an unknown threat, just a different one.

We have been used to seeing various formats of homicidal/suicidal Jihad here: 9-11, the various Jihadi gun attacks since then, etc. All these attacks had one common characteristic: the Muslims involved were all determined to kill members of the Western Civilization, but pretty much stuck to methods which left their shock troops dead with the event. One-way attacks. Don't "pass go", Get your 72 raisins immediately.

With San Berdoo, we have just seen an attack in which the Jihadis had trained and prepared to strike with force and effect, but moved on quickly to, presumably, strike again later. Far from the normal homicide/suicide attack, this is more like revolutionary attack. This resembles what we used to refer to as a "partisan" attack. Similar to the tactics of the French or Yugoslavian partisans who attacked the Nazis during WW2. What we just saw could have been very successful for the Jihadis, and the only reason it wasn't, was better training and discipline/communication on the part of the police authorities.

My purpose here is not to figure out how to defeat this different flavor of Jihad, but to prepare the average citizen to survive it. Methods of defeat for the Muslim Jihad will have to wait for a National Command Authority determined to defeat Islamic Jihad itself, and we don't have such leadership now, we have the opposite. We have political and command leadership determined to NOT face down islamic Jihad instead of the other way around. The effect for John Q. Citizen is that he will probably have to face the shock troops of Jihad alone, possibly with the help of local police.

A personal note: I am trained in various aspects of public safety, and as events unfolded and were reported yesterday in San Berdnardino, I evaluated the events as if they were the result of criminal gang activity, since, to me, the events more resembled the activity of, say, Mexican drug cartels or the criminal gang MS-13 (both very active in San Bernardino), and both are orgs not unwilling to create mass murder to get their point across. I was wrong in that analysis, mostly because I applied the usual standard of homicide/suicide Jihad, then rejected it, and this event did not fit that model.

So, how to prepare?

1. Arm up. The protected citizen will be armed at all times, with handgun(s) within hands' reach at home and away, and a long gun close by as well. You will have to figure out how to conform to "safe storage" laws to accomplish this in your home and in your car (presumably, your "away" long gun stays in the car). At home, I have quick-reaction pistol safes (plural), and the long gun goes back in the big safe when kids are present, so I comply. In the car, I carry on my person as I am permitted to do, and my long gun is a Kel-tec folding rifle with internal lock, carried in a locking gun case, kept in the locked trunk of the vehicle.That complies with local law as well (it would NOT comply in CA or several Eastern states though).
2. Train up. At this point, if you have not already done so, join a local gun club or commercial firearms practice facility. Your preference should be one which has practice facilities for handgun (any caliber), rifle (any caliber) and shotgun. With the exceptions of no 50BMG and no full-auto, my club fits these requirements. You will need to allot sufficient funds for ammo, and/or begin to reload your chosen calibers. You will need to allot sufficient time to practice, probably a minimum of once per month in the training phase, and four times per year with all defense firearms as a maintenance-of-training effort.
3. Smarten up. Apply some common sense as to your selection of events to attend, particularly if you will be responsible for others' safety. Large outdoor events are Jihad targets of opportunity, as are crowded shopping malls. Organized athletic events in arenas and stadia are probably safer to some degree, but the Jihadis wouold love to target one for the kill ratio that they could achieve. Consider applying a sliding scale of risk to your life and it's chosen events. Yeah, that's a bummer, but we are at war, dude! You are probably safest at home, relatively safe out and about in your vehicle, safe enough doing shopping that is NOT done in large, crowded venues at peak predictable times. You are less safe in any public crowd, on mass transportation, at any outdoor event which has been heavily advertised as to attendance prospects. The training and/or dedication of your local policing authority is a factor in your relative safety also. Evaluate it.
4. Vote up. National elections are close at hand. Regardless of your political affiliation, you need to vote for your own safety. Safety is personal, and politicians and political parties which refuse to recognize your personal safety as their Job #1 should NOT get your vote. This is not about flavors of morality, this is about survival. See my note on National Command Authority, above.

Again, we are at war. The war has been brought to these shores by Islam, and it's not going to get "wished away", even though this seems to be the primary "combat strategy" of the current political Administration. YOU are responsible for your OWN safety, so make safety happen for you, NOW!

A final word. Religion. Your personal religious creed should give you the mental strength to survive the mental rigors of mortal combat. It is NOT required for that purpose, but if you hold to a creed, it will pay you to increase your attention to it in these anxious times. Your creed is your business under our Constitution. Your survival is a natural AND Constitutional Right under our system. You MUST consider anyone who attacks you for your creed or attacks your Right to survival as your enemy. Islam is attacking/denying both.