Could the Venezuelan government get away with the garbage it’s gotten with if the citizenry was well-armed? Probably not. From José Niño at mises.org:
Is Venezuela paying the price for adopting gun control?
The shocking nature of Venezuela’s economic collapse has been covered ad nauseam. However, one aspect of the Venezuelan crisis that does not receive much coverage is the country’s gun control regime.
Fox News recently published an excellent article highlighting Venezuelan citizens’ regret over the gun control policies the Venezuelan government has implemented since 2012. Naturally, this regret is warranted. The Venezuelan government is among the most tyrannical in the world, with a proven track record of violating basic civil liberties such as free speech, debasing its national currency, confiscating private property, and creating economic controls that destroy the country’s productivity.
Elections have proven to be useless, as they’ve been mired with corruption and charges of government tampering. For many, taking up arms is the only option left for the country to shake off its tyrannical government. However, the Venezuelan government has done well to prevent an uprising by passing draconian gun control which will be detailed below.
Venezuela’s Lack of a Second Amendment Tradition
Historically speaking, Venezuela has never had a robust history of private gun ownership like that of the United States. The absence of a Second Amendment or check on the federal government’s monopoly on firearm usage is a vestige of its colonial legacy. Its Spanish colonial overlords did not possess a political culture of civilian firearms ownership. It was mostly the military and the landed nobility that held firearms throughout the colonial era. This tradition has persisted even after Latin American countries broke away from Spain in the 1820s.
Somehow advocating for effective border and immigration control makes one a racist and white supremicist. From Ann Coulter at anncoulter.com:
By finally returning to the issue that won him the election, President Trump once again has a winning hand. That’s why we’re hearing so much about “white supremacy” this week.
Liberals lie all the time, but when they know they’re vulnerable they lie even more than all the time. They’re vulnerable on immigration. Even heroic, nonstop lying doesn’t help — as CNN has discovered.
So, naturally, the media have turned to their larger project of relentlessly trying to discredit conservatives as “white supremacists.”
Unfortunately for them, apart from a few crackpots — whom I assume exist in a country of 320 million people — there are no “white supremacists.” There were white supremacists 50 years ago, and they were all Democrats. (See my book Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama.)
Today, “white supremacy” is nothing but a comfortable fantasy the left developed to explain its sick preoccupation with white people.
It would be a triumph of hope over experience and the historical record to expect great things out of President Trump’s Attorney General selection, William Barr. His role in the Ruby Ridge whitewash is disturbing. From James Bovard at theamericanconservative.com:
Trump’s AG pick was top cop during the federal siege and killing of Randy Weaver’s wife and son.
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for Attorney General nominee William Barr have focused heavily on Barr’s views on Special Counsel Robert Mueller. But nobody is asking about Barr’s legal crusade for blanket immunity for federal agents who killed American citizens.
Barr received a routine questionnaire from the Judiciary Committee asking him to disclose his past work including pro bono activities “serving the disadvantaged.” The “disadvantaged” that Barr spent the most time helping was an FBI agent who slayed an Idaho mother holding her baby in 1992. Barr spent two weeks organizing former Attorneys General and others to support “an FBI sniper in defending against criminal charges in connection with the Ruby Ridge incident.” Barr also “assisted in framing legal arguments advanced… in the district court and the subsequent appeal to the Ninth Circuit,” he told the committee.
That charitable work (for an FBI agent who already had a federally-paid law firm defending him) helped tamp down one of the biggest scandals during Barr’s time as Attorney General from 1991 to early 1993. Barr was responsible for both the U.S. Marshals Service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, two federal agencies whose misconduct at Ruby Ridge “helped to weaken the bond of trust that must exist between ordinary Americans and our law enforcement agencies,” according to a 1995 Senate Judiciary Committee report.
The FBI that was unable find any malfeasance by Hillary Clinton has left no pebble unturned in its pursuit of President Trump. From Moon of Alabama at moonofalabama.org:
Despite the loss of major narratives, the war of the deep state against U.S. President Trump continues unabated. The main of tool in this war are allegations of relations between Trump and anything Russia. The war runs along several parallel paths.
The narrative war in the media is most visible one. When any of the fake stories about Trump and Russia gets debunked and disposed, new ones are created or others intensified.
In parallel to these propaganda efforts the deep state created an investigation that Trump has no way to escape from. Enabled by one of the Obama administrations last acts the investigation is using signal intelligence to entrap and flip the people surrounding Trump (see section three below). The big price will be Trump himself. Here we take a look at what transpired during the last weeks.
One major anti-Trump narrative was that ‘Russian influence’ helped to put him into office. This was based on the alleged nefarious influence a Russian clickbait company, the Internet Research Agency (IRA) in St. Peterburg, had on the U.S. electorate. That explanation never made sense. Little of the IRA activities had to do with the election. It used sockpuppets on Facebook and Twitter to attract people to websites filled with puppy pictures or similar nonsense. The IRA would then sell advertisement and promotions on these sites.
The long knives are out for Trump, but he may have a few long knives of his own. From James Howard Kunstler at kunstler.com:
As another president once remarked in a different context — LBJ speaking to a hanger full of grunts in Vietnam — “go on out there, boys, and nail that coonskin to the wall!” That was around the time the war was looking like a lost cause, with 1000 soldiers a month coming home in a box and even the Rotarians of Keokuk, Iowa, starting to doubt the official story of what exactly we thought we were doing over there. It was also, arguably, around the time America stopped being, ahem, “great” and commenced the long, nauseating slide into idiocracy and collapse.
The news media has taken LBJ’s place in today’s Wile E. Coyote phase of our history, cheerleading the congressional hunt for the glittering golden scalp of You-Know-Who in the White House. They got all revved up on Friday in a New York Times front-page salvo with the headline: F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia. The purpose of this blast was to establish the high and grave seriousness of Robert Mueller’s Russia Collusion investigation, because otherwise the yarn has completely shed its credibility. Note: it was around paragraph nine in the story that the team of three Times reporters inserted the sentence that said, “No evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from Russian government officials.” The idea, you see, was to simply drag the teetering narrative back onstage to titillate the paper’s Creative Classnik readership who desperately want to nail that Golden Golem of Greatness to the wall, scalp, paunch, tiny hands, and all.
Posted in Crime, Cronyism, Government, Intelligence, Investigations, Law, Media, Politics
Tagged Hillary Clinton, President Trump, Robert Mueller, Russiagate, Steele dossier
Pro and anti-Trumpers have diametrically opposed movies running through their heads about the outcomes of Robert Mueller’s and John Huber’s investigations. From Luis P. Almeida at lewrockwell.com:
Oh, to have a dollar for every time one hears the word “polarized”. The image that comes to mind when I hear “polarized” are two groups of people on opposite poles of the Earth, frozen into their diametrically opposed views. We have not always been this polarized and perhaps a better image is one of two groups of people migrating to opposite poles like chromosomes undergoing Mitosis. It is hard to argue that this polarization does not exist, the big question today is whether our society is going to violently split or whether unlike cell division we will once again move back toward a common nucleus of reality.
Regardless of what happens next, polarization is so severe that it seems as if people are watching two different movies and then trying to discuss with one another the plot twists and turns. One audience is watching a movie being projected by the corporate, mainstream media and the other group one displayed by the “alternative media”. One group subscribes to a view of history taught in public schools and the other has a revisionist view that is based on a whole different set of sources and facts. These movies create our reality around us and the fact that we’re watching different ones is in great part the reason for the sense of division many of us are feeling.
There will be outrage, certainly, if Trump is overthrown, but will it go beyond some letters to the editor and nasty social media posts. James George Jatras argues that it probably won’t. From Jatras at strategic-culture.org:
It’s a new year and the American cold civil war has shifted to its next phase with the Petrograd Soviet (formerly the Smolny Institute for Noble Maidens), a/k/a Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Democrat-controlled House of Representatives ensconced at one end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Pelosi leads the revolutionary “second pivot” and rival center of authority to the embattled Provisional Government headed by President Donald Trump, headquartered 16 blocks to the northwest.
As of this writing Trump is fighting for his political life. If he loses the Mexican standoff over the government shutdown and his border wall, he’s essentially finished. At this juncture, it looks as though he is prepared to declare a state of emergency and use Pentagon or FEMA funds to order the emplacement of a barrier as a military construction project. This is something for which he has the clearest black-and-white statutory authority under 10 US Code § 2802.
Nonetheless, if he goes that route, any such effort will be gummed up in the courts, just like his use of his plenary authority under 18 US Code 1182(f) to exclude “any aliens or … any class of aliens” whose entry into the US would in his judgment “be detrimental to the interests of the United States” – the germ of his campaign’s promised “Muslim ban” – was wimped down into supposedly “extreme vetting” of aliens from a handful of countries without much indication of what the “vetting” is supposed to filter. It’s likely such litigation would delay the wall or prevent its being built at all.