The reason retired General Mark Milley, American Traitor, despises President Trump? MONEY.

Posted on Monday, October 28, 2024 by BZ

As a general axiom, and certainly one of BZ’s Axioms, “when people say it’s not about the money — it’s about the money.”

And this is certainly true of retired General Mark Milley, also a traitor to the United States of America.

Anyone remember when Milley stated he would notify Communist China if President Trump decided to act against Communist China?

From the New York Post, the same newspaper that published the TRUTH about the Hunter Biden laptop, then had its stories wiped from the internet, then hundreds of thousands of social media users on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other digital locations, were likewise suppressed, censored and, in many cases, accounts were closed permanently. Because of the truth.

So here’s some truth. Followed by even more truth.

Milley admits he would tell Chinese general if US launched an attack

by Mark Moore, 9-29-21

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley admitted Wednesday that he would give his Chinese counterpart a heads up if the US launched an attack against Beijing, during a second day of grilling on Capitol Hill that touched on his two reported calls to the Chinese general.

”I said, hell, I’ll call you. But we’re not going to attack you,” Milley told the House Armed Services Committee about one of his conversations with Gen. Li Zuocheng of the People’s Liberation Army.

Milley was questioned about two calls he made to Li — in October 2020 before the presidential election and on Jan. 8, two days after the Capitol riot.

He told members of the panel that he reached out to Li to assure him that President Donald Trump did not intend to launch a military strike.

It was clearly evident that General Milley had forgotten his place, and his role in allegedly serving the United States of America, and had very clearly forgotten his oath, and to whom he swore allegiance.

“You articulating that, that you would tell him, you would give him a call, is worthy of your resignation. I just think that’s against our country that you would call our No.1 adversary and tell him that,” she told Milley.

According to “Peril,” the book by Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, Milley told Li he would give the Chinese advance warning of an attack.

To the US. Not to its enemies. Milley believed he owed Communist China a warning, rather than our very own president, whom he betrayed. It is not Milley’s job, not any general officer’s job, to conduct policy and communicate policy of this nature to largest enemy of the United States, that being Communist China.

But this is a clear delineator of who he truly is, at his core. An abject traitor. It is he who believed he was the president, not the actual sitting President of the United States, Donald Trump. He believed it was up to him to set policy, not Congress. By assuring Communist China, our obvious enemy, Milley managed to completely do away with two entire branches of the government.

Yet he kept his job. In my estimation, a rather serious error on Trump’s part.

First, let us examine the US code section regarding treason, 18 US Code § 2381, which rather plainly and succinctly reads:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

The penalty for a conviction of treason — a penalty that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg paid in 1953 — is death.

Please explain what part of Milley’s actions do not constitute treason. Allow me to repeat, at the risk of being repetitive: “Milley told Li he would give the Chinese advance warning of an attack.”

Point being made, General Milley has recently commented on Donald Trump, due to his candidacy for president. General Milley said Trump is “fascist to the core.”

Trump’s former Joint Chiefs chair: Trump is ‘fascist to the core’

by Steve Benen, 10-14-24

As The Washington Post reported, Milley apparently put subtlety aside when speaking to Bob Woodward for the longtime journalist’s new book.

Retired Gen. Mark A. Milley warned that former president Donald Trump is a “fascist to the core” and “the most dangerous person to this country” in new comments voicing his mounting alarm at the prospect of the Republican nominee’s election to another term, according to a forthcoming book by Washington Post associate editor Bob Woodward.

Apparently, however, Trump was insufficiently fascist for Milley to resign from his position, make an actual stand, and potentially affect his retirement. Trump was just kinda fascist, not totally fascist, a wee bit fascist, but enough to verbally complain.

In general, let’s examine the meaning of the word, and understand how those who accuse others of fascism are doing the precise same thing themselves, only worse.

Fascism:
A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

Let’s look at history. Most references are to Italy’s Mussolini (1922 to 1943). Applied to President Trump, let’s go point by point.

Was Trump a dictator? Did he have complete power?
No. He was frequently opposed by numerous groups, and both parties, Republicans and Demorats. He was successfully sued over some of his actions. He was the subject of numerous “investigations” by Demorats which frequently found nothing. In fact, as directly opposed to a dictator, Trump was impeached twice, acquitted once. That’s nothing to which a dictator is subject.

I should remind everyone that Trump was impeached for a “phone call” to Ukraine.

Here on January 23rd of 2020, however, entirely ignored, is then Vice President Biden crowing about his threats to pull $1 BILLION DOLLARS in loan guarantees, shoving Ukraine towards insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire the prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, investigating Burisma Holdings — where his son, Hunter Biden, sat on the board.

This is public bribery, with Joe Biden also intimating that then-President Barack Hussein Obama, March of 2016, was likewise in on the deal.

Of course, nothing happened to Joe Biden, though this is immured forever on the internet.

Did Hunter Biden make money? Why yes, a veritable shit-ton of it.

From 2013 through 2018 Hunter Biden and his company brought in about $11 million via his roles as an attorney and a board member with a Ukrainian firm accused of bribery and his work with a Chinese businessman now accused of fraud, according to an NBC News analysis of a copy of Biden’s hard drive and iCloud account and documents released by Republicans on two Senate committees.

Why was Hunter Biden, a know-nothing about gas and oil, on the board of Burisma at all? For two very important reasons:

Ukraine was and is the corrupt Laundromat To The World Stars, including the Biden Crime Family.
The oldest schemes: purchasing the influence, power, and control, of VP Biden, which required its own quid pro quo.

Did Trump forcibly suppress opposition and criticism?
Hardly. The criticism and opposition was rampant and 24/7. The people who actually suppressed opposition and criticism were the Demorats, the American Media Maggots, the DOJ, and the FBI, with election interference utilized as a large cudgel, by censoring Americans, having social media repress individuals on social media and remove their accounts at the behest of the US government.

Did Trump regiment all industry, commerce?
Not in the slightest. In fact he advocated for American industry and commerce, and for a fair and level playing field in world markets.

Was Trump nationalistic?
To a great degree, Trump was and is a populist, hence his America First theme, and Make America Great Again theme. These came after literally multiple decades of other nations and countries, many our enemy, taking advantage of our largesse, our ignorance, good will, and conciliatory nature. For the first time in a presidency, we were engaged in ZERO wars, because the primary bad actors knew Trump had acted, and would act, against aggression.

Was Trump racist?
According to the Race and Poverty Pimps, yes — who profit from constantly hitting the Cash Throttle. However, when Trump’s statements are examined in full, and not with the salient parts dropped on the editing room floor, you discover that Trump was the opposite of racist. He only became “racist” when he entered the fray for president, running against Hillary Clinton. Here’s just one fact pattern, the truth about Charlottesville — a continuing LIE spit forth from the Demorats, Leftists, Globalists, and the American Media Maggots.

Now let’s look at some timelines. Because facts are inconvenient things sometimes.

Mark Milley joined the board of JP Morgan in February of 2024.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. brought on retired General Mark Milley, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as a senior adviser.

Milley, who spent more than four decades in the US military, will advise the bank’s board of directors, senior leaders and clients on dangers around the world, Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon told employees in a memo Thursday.

JP Morgan Chase is the largest US bank, by assets. And Milley will rock even more personal cash and assets to embiggen his wallet, with his board seat. Since his retirement in 2023, Mark Milley has somehow magically, mystically, jumped into the faculties of Georgetown and Princeton, is making big coin on the paid speaking circuit, and landed a cushy “senior advisor” spot on JP Morgan Chase bank’s board.

Military personnel call this “cashing in,” as a select few like Milley manage to transition from a capped military pay of $204,000 a year to — well, the sky’s the limit. It’s whatever you can negotiate, depending on how much you hate Trump.

Bob Woodward’s book “War,” which you can already locate at Thriftbooks.com, was released on October 15th, this year. In it, Woodward brings in Milley and Milley’s labeling of President Trump a fascist.

What do we know? It takes some time to turn around a book. It takes time to write a book. And Milley already made his deal with JP Morgan Chase in February of this year.

Why the doubling down on Trump being called a fascist, by Mark Milley?

Let’s realize this.

BlackRock and JPMorgan are backing a $15 billion investor fund to rebuild Ukraine

by Vinamrata Chaturvedi, 3-14-24

It would cost almost half-a-trillion dollars to reconstruct Ukraine

A coalition of investors, with support from BlackRock and JPMorgan, are aiming to put together $15 billion in aid to rebuild Ukraine. In a new group known as the Ukraine Development Fund, they are supporting investments from state bodies and capital markets; the fund will bring together a consortium of investors to finance at least $15 billion of reconstruction work in the country after two years of Russian invasion.

You couldn’t possibly think this little scheme was put in the works yesterday, do you?

So you must ask yourself: who has had constant access to every bit of military and intelligence information regarding Ukraine, do you suppose, for at least a decade? That wouldn’t be Mark Milley, would it?

Because, though he’s retired, he and others like him always retain their top secret (and above) clearances, with access to the same information as before via their friends, or directly (shhh, quiet) via computers they have at home, installed by some of the finest former NSA tech employees on the planet.

They know people who know people. And Milley knows people who know people.

President Trump 45 cannot possibly be allowed to become President Trump 47.

The corrupt Ukraine Laundromat never stops. The Machine never quits. It keeps churning out cash like an ATM with no PIN required.

So let me just distill things down to this, because sometimes actions truly are fairly transparent, but not super-intentionally. One has to actually do a little occasional digging. I did a little internet digging.

JP Morgan and BlackRock are backing an investor to rebuild Ukraine, requiring about half a TRILLION DOLLARS.

Would JP Morgan Chase or BlackRock invest unless they believed they could make a staggering amount of money on returns?

WHO has hitched his star to JP Morgan?

General Mark Milley.

Who want to get us out of needless wars?

Donald Trump.

See what’s happening?

See why Milley despises Trump?

Trump threatens The Spice.

The Spice must flow.

More First Amendment regulatory threats

Posted on Thursday, October 19, 2017 by BZ

Leftists and the Deep State can’t wait to continue pushing for the diminishment and possible erasure of your First Amendment rights.

The FEC has been after the Drudge Report for years. So has the FCC. This, on its face, is a ridiculous goal. Matt Drudge hasn’t actually written anything for years; his site is nothing more than a laughingly-simplistic point on the internet that does nothing more than aggregate stories from around the globe.

That’s right. All the Drudge Report does is re-package stories written entirely from external sources. His source material is frequently the New York Times, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, Reuters, the AP, Slate, the Huffington Post, NPR, The Guardian — all bastions of Left-leaning journalism.

No matter; never allow facts, history, logic, rationality, proportion or common sense get in the way of a good fucked-up Leftist inclination, decision or bill. Not surprisingly, it’s a push from the FEC once again.

From the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Drudge, Facebook, NYT readers could face libel suits for sharing ‘fake news’

by Paul Bedard

Political content on the internet, paid or not, should face substantial federal regulation to eliminate undefined “disinformation,” and users of platforms and news feeds, from Facebook, to Twitter, to the Drudge Report and even New York Times, could be punished for sharing “fake news” from those sites, the former Democratic chair of the FEC is urging.

In a broad proposal that adds threatening libel suits to regulatory plans already pushed by Democrats on the Federal Election Commission, ex-chair Ann Ravel believes that there is support for expanded regulation in the wake of reports foreign governments spent $100,000 on 2016 political ads on Facebook.

At whom, potentially, is this proposal aimed? Correct: you and me. People interested in politics and have sites on the internet as well as a social media presence. People who conduct internet radio shows. Like me. That’s next. Make no mistake.

She would include “fake news,” not just paid ads, to be regulated, though it’s never defined other than the Democrat’s description of “disinformation.” And anybody who shares or retweets it could face a libel suit.

Friends, this is a page ripped from the former Soviet Union. Your gulag awaits you!

She would also use regulation to “improve voter competence,” according to the new proposal titled Fool Me Once: The Case for Government Regulation of ‘Fake News.’ Ravel, who now lectures at Berkeley Law, still has allies on the FEC who support internet regulation.

Berkeley, of course — the locus of free speech in America.

The proposal immediately came under fire from from the Republican FEC commissioner who for years has been warning of the left’s effort to regulate political talk they don’t like, especially on conservative newsfeeds like Drudge.

Lee Goodman told Secrets, “Ann’s proposal is full blown regulation of all political content, even discussion of issues, posted at any time, for free or for a fee, on any online platform, from Facebook to the NewYorkTimes.com.”

He was especially critical of the undefined nature of “disinformation” to be regulated and the first-ever call for libel suits to snuff out talk Ravel doesn’t like.

And just whom determines “disinformation”? Kompromat or disinformatzia, tovarisch? A panel of Conservatives or a panel of Leftists? Correct. Leftists. Conservatives won’t be allowed within ten miles of a determination.

In their proposal, the trio wrote, “after a social media user clicks ‘share’ on a disputed item (if the platforms do not remove them and only label them as disputed), government can require that the user be reminded of the definition of libel against a public figure. Libel of public figures requires ‘actual malice,’ defined as knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. Sharing an item that has been flagged as untrue might trigger liability under libel laws.”

We already have Speech Crimes in LeftistLand. There may be ClickCrimes. MindCrimes are, of course, next.

Here is the full Ravel article for reference.

Then there is this from YahooNews.com, with John McCain in apparent agreement.

U.S. bill to regulate internet ads gains bipartisan support with McCain

by David Ingram

(Reuters) – U.S. legislation that would impose new disclosure requirements on political ads that run on Facebook and other websites received support on Wednesday from Senator John McCain, giving a bipartisan boost to a bill already popular among Democrats.

McCain, a longtime supporter of regulating campaign finances, and two Democratic senators, Amy Klobuchar and Mark Warner, plan to introduce the legislation on Thursday, according to a statement from their offices on Wednesday.

Good old John McCain. You can generally count on him to put his thumb in the eyes of freedom of speech any more. Or anything that he perceives President Trump might possibly support.

Online political ads are much more loosely regulated in the United States than political ads on television, radio and satellite services.

The lack of regulation was highlighted last month when Facebook Inc, Alphabet Inc’s Google and Twitter Inc said that they had found election-related ad buys on their services made by people in Russia in the run-up to last year’s U.S. presidential election. Non-Americans are generally not allowed to spend money to influence U.S. elections.

How about, instead of law after law, we just ask the social media to be more wary? Anyone think of that?

Speaking of Loving John, here is a bit of witty repartee between McCain and Fox’s Peter Doocey.

The question by Doocy was “has your relationship with the president frayed to the point where you’re not going to support anything that he comes to you and asks support for?”

McCain replies: “why would you ask anything that stupid? Why would you ask something that dumb? Huh? My job as a United States senator, as a senator from Arizona which I was just re-elected to, you mean that I’m somehow going to behave in a way that I’m going to block everything because of some personal disagreement? That’s a dumb question.”

Let’s see, John. Would that possibly be because you are in fact so vehemently opposed to most anything that President Trump has proposed, that you’ve worked hand-in-hand with the Demorats to slaughter the repeal of the ACA much less any replacement — you know, the very thing you ran on for eight years — as well as the slaughter of tax cuts? With regularity and consistency? John? Perhaps those things?

And John, while we’re at it, have you forgotten what you said in Philadelphia this Monday, October 16th?

PHILADELPHIA — An emotional Sen. John McCain on Monday leveled a blistering attack on what he called the “half-baked, spurious nationalism” that seems to have inspired President Trump’s administration to retreat from the world stage.

In a speech to accept the National Constitution Center’s Liberty Medal, McCain, R-Ariz., emphasized that the United States is “a land made of ideals, not blood and soil,” a rebuke to the Nazi slogan about bloodlines and territory chanted in August by White supremacists demonstrating in Charlottesville, Va.

An at-times raspy-sounding McCain drew applause and cheers at the Philadelphia event when he said:

“To fear the world we have organized and led for three-quarters of a century, to abandon the ideals we have advanced around the globe, to refuse the obligations of international leadership and our duty to remain ‘the last, best hope of earth’ for the sake of some half-baked, spurious nationalism cooked up by people who would rather find scapegoats than solve problems is as unpatriotic as an attachment to any other tired dogma of the past that Americans consigned to the ash heap of history.”

A reminder:

I value two things primarily: honesty and clarity. So let’s be clear: the only reason the FEC or the FCC wish to limit and regulate speech under the guise of “fairness” or “equanimity” is to limit the speech of only one side: the conservative side. To limit the dissemination of information which thusly informs voters and allows Conservatives to acquire facts, data and particulars on political issues.

Because, after all, everything is political now.

Finally: where are the Republicans on this? Why no public GOP umbrage over the issue? Statements? Decisions to oppose? Republicans taking a stand against this?

Another reason Conservative trust in the GOP has almost vanished. Another reason that Republican fundraising is down this quarter. Consequences for inaction? Gridlock? Failure to keep election promises? Failure to coalesce and utilize power the GOP possesses presently?

Not difficult to figure out.

P.S.

Great article on the Fairness Doctrine from 1993 is here.

One new win for the 2nd Amendment

Posted on Thursday, July 27, 2017 by BZ

At a time when we in the United States find the Second Amendment challenged on any number of levels, most certainly in blue states like Fornicalia, and when any number of citizens in Europe wish they had their own version of the Second Amendment, there comes the occasional federal ruling chalked up into the “win” column.

Such was a recent opinion this past week.

From TheHill.com:

Federal court strikes down DC anti-concealed carry law

by Josh Delk

A federal appeals court reportedly ruled on Tuesday that a Washington, D.C., law requiring people to prove they have “proper reason” for a concealed-carry gun permit is unconstitutional.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the law, which requires people to show “proper reason to fear injury” in order to carry a firearm, is unconstitutional and a violation of D.C. residents’ Second Amendment rights.

Let’s remember this, shall we? The DC Court of Appeals is the second most powerful court in the nation, directly behind SCOTUS.

According to the law, acceptable reasons to get a permit included jobs that required employees to protect valuables or if an individual had been threatened.

Hello? Earth to Common Sense? For once we appear to be communicating.

Nothing succeeds like success.

Knife control: Japanese man kills 19, injures 26

Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 by BZ

When-Rocks-Are-Outlawed Had that occurred here in America, Barack Hussein Obaka and Loretta Lynch and Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom and all the rest of the Leftists would still be bleating about gun control.

From CNN.com:

Japan knife attack: At least 19 dead

by Euan McKirdy and Emanuella Grinberg

(CNN) At least 19 people were killed and 26 injured in a stabbing spree at a facility for disabled people west of Tokyo, making it one of Japan’s deadliest mass killings since World War II. Nine men and 10 women, ranging in age from 18 to 70, were killed in the attack.

Officer Satomi Kurihara of the Sagamihara Fire Department confirmed the death toll at the Tsukui Yamayuri-en facility in Sagamihara, a residential area approximately 40 kilometers (25 miles) west of the capital.

Satoshi Uematsu, a 26-year-old who worked at the facility until February, broke in through a window about 2 a.m. Tuesday (1 p.m. ET Monday), Kanagawa Prefecture officials said at a news conference.

Because, as we all know — and Leftists know this best of all — if we eliminate firearms wholesale, then violence will simply plummet and go away. All will be well with the world, birds will sing, clouds will part and the sun will shine.

Gun-Control-at-the-Bar

“What’s the frequency, Kenneth?” Dan Rather knows.

Yes, Leftists are in fact that naive. Logic and the nature of humanity, as I’ve written before, eludes the deluded.

When firearms are eradicated, violence will cease. Right? But wait; what about Australia, where gun deaths are down but knife deaths are climbing. Why might that be? Let’s glance at China, where a knife is the weapon of choice and 130 persons were stabbed at random. 36 persons were stabbed and killed at a Chinese police station in 2013. Eight children were killed by a knife-wielder in Japan. Eight people killed in South Korea. 41 people were stabbed by a 16-year-old in Berlin. A 13-year-old girl was stabbed to death in the UK. The knife is the UK “weapon of choice” for violence, as it is in Israel with Palestinians stabbing and killing Israeli citizens. FBI data indicates you are more likely to be beaten, clubbed or stabbed to death than to be murdered using an AR-15 or any other rifle in the United States.

In Europe, guns are involved in 36 percent of murders and knives are involved in 43 percent. Where is the cry for “knife control”?

Locally, there were a number of knife attacks last year.

Some other interesting statistics.

Murder Victims, by Weapons Used

The following table shows the number and percent of murder victims in the United States by the cause of death. Weapons used or cause of death include guns, stabbing, blunt objects, strangulation, arson, and more.

		Weapons used or cause of death
Year	Murder victims, total	Guns		Cutting or stabbing	Blunt object¹	Strangulation, hands, fists, feet, or pushing	Arson²	All other³
Year	Murder victims, total	Total	Percent	Cutting or stabbing	Blunt object¹	Strangulation, hands, fists, feet, or pushing	Arson²	All other³
1965	8,773	5,015	57.2%	2,021	505	894	226	112
1970	13,649	9,039	66.2	2,424	604	1,031	353	198
1975	18,642	12,061	64.7	3,245	1,001	1,646	193	496
1980	21,860	13,650	62.0	4,212	1,094	1,666	291	947
1985	17,545	10,296	58.7	3,694	972	1,491	243	849
1990	20,045	12,847	64.1	3,503	1,075	1,424	287	909
1991	21,676	14,373	66.3	3,430	1,099	1,529	195	847
1992	22,716	15,489	68.2	3,296	1,040	1,445	203	1,043
1993	23,180	16,136	69.6	2,967	1,022	1,482	217	1,168
1994	22,084	15,463	70.0	2,802	912	1,452	196	1,079
1995	20,232	13,790	68.2	2,557	918	1,438	166	968
1996	15,848	10,744	67.8	2,142	733	1,182	151	726
1997	15,289	10,369	67.8	1,963	702	1,187	134	934
2002	14,263	9,528	66.7	1,776	681	954	103	874
2006	14,990	10,177	67.9	1,822	607	833	115	1,128
2007	14,831	10,086	68.0	1,796	647	854	130	1,016
2008	14,224	9,528	66.9	1,888	603	964	85	1,156
2011	12,795	8,653	67.6	1,716	502	751	76	1,009
2012	12,765	8,855	69.4	1,589	518	767	85	951

1. Refers to club, hammer, etc.

2. Before 1973, includes drowning.

3. Includes poison, explosives, unknown, drowning, asphyxiation, narcotics, other means, and weapons not stated.

Source: Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports for the United States, 1997, 2007 and 2008; Crime in the United States 2011, 2012.

But let’s stop dancing around the issue of “gun control.” Let’s get down to brass tacks: Demorats and Leftists want out-and-out gun confiscation. Make no mistake about that. Hillary Clinton and all other power elites have their own private police forces. You don’t. They have “theirs” and that is all they care about.

When you get down to it, Leftists and Demorats will only be satisfied when there exists the complete removal of firearms from American citizens. The outright trampling of the Second Amendment. What’s left? Tire irons? Knives?

But here’s one thing you won’t be able to do with a knife or a rock or a lamp or a baseball bat or a torch or a pitchfork: defend yourself against a government. Oppose oppressive government regimes. Governments, all governments, our government, will always be armed with heavy, military grade weapons. Historically, our Second Amendment does not exist to allow Americans to hunt. That’s a ridiculous claim when made by anyone. The Second Amendment exists in America in order to resist tyranny in any form and that includes an over-reaching government, foreign or domestic.

Demorats and Leftists are not grounded in reality. They are only versed in power and money. The citizenry can be armed or it can be disarmed. Those who are disarmed are called Proles, Serfs, Groundlings, Commoners.

In the meantime, criminals will still commit crimes, the mentally unstable will still be unstable, and Leftists will still be unable to grasp these fundamental concepts.

Your government working AGAINST you

Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2016 by BZ

Founders_Finger_Gulag Under Barack Hussein Obama. With the overt and covert/tacit approval of Barack Hussein Obama.

First, from the UKDailyMail.com:

FBI tells teachers to inform on students who express ‘anti-government’ and ‘anarchist’ political beliefs as high schools are ‘ideal targets’ for extremist recruiters

by Wills Robinson

Document urges faculty members to assess behavior of students
They suggest to watch for certain signs, such as tendency toward violence
Bureau hopes indications could prevent future terrorist attacks
They believed it would help reduce the number of youngsters joining terrorist or anti-government groups

It would seem to me the real “extremist recruiters” could be some of the teachers already employed in public schools.

The FBI wants teachers to inform on ‘anti-government’ or ‘anarchist’ students.

In a document titled ‘Preventing Violence and Extremism in Schools’, the bureau urges faculty members to assess concerning behavior of schoolchildren as they may be ’embracing extremist ideologies’.

They also list a number of indications, such as violent tendencies, which may be a sign they are planning an attack or may want to join a terrorist group.

Officials then want staff to pass on information to authorities in a bid to prevent any actions which could put others in danger.

In other words, the United States government wants to make an enemy out of me once again — but oddly enough, only during Leftist administrations. The federal government wants to make an enemy of its soldiers, of those who believe in religion (excepting that of Islam) and those who believe in the Second Amendment.

Obama American CRAZIES Those who cling to their God and guns. Who believe in the US Constitution. Who believe in the Bill of Rights. Who believe in a religion other than Islam.

Second, the US Department of Justice was actually contemplating prosecution of those who deny climate change/global warming.

Seriously. The actual Obama-sanctioned Belief Police.

From TheBlaze.com:

AG Lynch Testifies: Justice Dept. Has ‘Discussed’ Civil Legal Action Against Climate Change Deniers

by Jon Street

Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified Wednesday that the Justice Department has “discussed” taking civil legal action against the fossil fuel industry for “denying” the “threat of carbon emissions” when it comes to climate change.

A Democrat asked and was answered:

“My question to you is, other than civil forfeitures and matters attendant to a criminal case, are there other circumstances in which a civil matter under the authority of the Department of Justice has been referred to the FBI?” he asked.

“This matter has been discussed. We have received information about it and have referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action on,” Lynch answered. “I’m not aware of a civil referral at this time.”

Corporations first. You and me next.

Finally: who else is an enemy of the federal government, according to official US government documents as per Michael Snyder?

1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”

2. Those that advocate for states’ rights

3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”

4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”

5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”

6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”

7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”

8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”

9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”

10. “Anti-Gay”