It is entirely disingenuous to suggest the "Stop The Steal" march on the Capitol was in any way different than the Civil Rights March in Selma Alabama, and Watts Rebellion in 1965, the Los Angeles Riots in 1992, or the George Floyd riots in Minneapolis last Summer. In fact, all of them have much in common: They were instigated, not by political speeches or YouTube videos, but by what citizens believed to be "institutional injustices". They were all expressions of mass frustration, anger and helplessness. None of them were designed to destroy the union! They were all inspired by a desire to fix the union!
Americans have a patent on civil disobedience and violent protests. Why? Because we can! Because our system of limited government and the rights of its citizens to gather, express, and defy our rulers is the very essence of Americanism. Nowhere else on this planet is the sovereignty of its citizens exalted like it is in our country. How is objecting to election corruption any less moral than protesting racial injustice? For 245 years Americans have taken to the streets to protest injustice. Until now, we never called them traitors.
The protest in Washington was a culmination of four years of political abuse. Washington insiders fought Trump using every tool in their warchest to undermine his agenda. They attacked his family, his friends, his business and his character. They ignored or dismissed his amazing successes, and publicly announced they would "do anything" to remove him from office. They were in effect doing everything in their power to disenfranchise anyone that supported the Trump 'America First' agenda.
When Trump supporters asked for an election investigation, they were marginalized and characterized as "right wing crazies" or sore losers. No matter what evidence was presented, it was dismissed as "baseless". Imagine telling Black people that their perception of racism was "baseless". Do you think that might stoke some violence?
So the marchers went to Washington to demand an investigation before the electoral college vote was certified. They wanted it delayed for ten days. We can argue till the cows come home about the "truth" behind their motivations, but nobody has a monopoly on the truth.
When folks take to the streets to protest racial injustice, few challenge the assumption that injustice exists. But raise the issue of election injustice and suddenly you are a traitor. The most recent Rasmussen poll shows that 47% of voters polled think there was election fraud and nearly 30% of Democrats agree! That is not an insignificant number!
Everyone knew going into this election that much of our conventional voting process was being changed. Democrats have been pushing for unimpeded voting, any time, anywhere, without ID and even after the polls close. They have effectively legalized ballot harvesting and made after election audits nearly impossible. Democrat campaign officials didn't help when they tweeted Biden supporters, "Don't be concerned early on election night. It will look like Trump is winning. Just be patient."
And we all know how serious cyber warfare has become. You would have to be naive to think major corporations like Facebook, Yahoo, Sony and First American Financial can be hacked, but voting machines connected to the worldwide web cannot? Come on, man!
If election fraud does exist, wouldn't it be more egregious than systemic racism and police brutality? As unfair as an involuntary draft to fight in an unjust war? As repugnant as the trafficking of women and children? Wouldn't it be equivalent to poisoning our water supply or destroying our electrical grid?
Listening to some of the Democrats conducting the impeachment carnival in Congress, you would think the assailants on Capitol Hill were carrying AK47s instead of American flags. Case Managers made it sound like the Capitol Police were defending Hamburger Hill, and that Trump was leading the charge. They doctored evidence and violated the principle of presumed innocence. They tried to weaponize our judicial system.
Don't get me wrong, I am not justifying violence, but I am trying to illustrate how emotions can get out of hand. Using violence may make a protester a criminal, but it doesn't make them traitors.
I don't know what was more disgusting: Watching some of my fellow American patriots riot or watching Congress conduct a Kangaroo Court. They're both mocking Americanism.
People on the left are passionate about their causes. As are people on the right. Both sides see themselves as patriots trying to make our world better. I hope we can still agree on that...
I would characterize people who cannot empathize with differing perspectives as bullies. They are dangerous and society has a right to keep a suspicious eye on them because they typically resort to intimidation and violence to get their way. Ideological warriors don't play by the rules and disrespect those that do.
Now that they have assumed the majority some Democrats have suggested that those that worked for, or voted with or for Donald Trump are "domestic terrorists". To refer to any politically engaged American that is not violent as a terrorist is dangerous and condescending.
Trump was in office for four years, and you can count on one hand the number of his supporters that were involved in violence. To say his supporters are terrorists is worse than guilt by association, it is a form of terror in itself. We have to recognize the vast middle ground of non-violent disagreement as indigenous to our unique American form of government.
Casting aspersions on 75 million Americans because of the actions of a few is unacceptable bigotry.
Humans do let their emotions overcome their better judgement. It is not unusual for fans to scream at each other at a sports event, but that is different than conducting a reign of terror on someone that you disagree with. It is different than using the force of a majority or authority to dictate outcomes. That is why we have a judicial process for helping society to sort out it's differences and to separate the bullies from the law-abiding citizenry.
As for determining who makes the trains run on time, we follow the Constitution. It is far from perfect, but it beats the alternative, which is every other form of government ever devised. It calls for a binary election process that runs in a cycle. That way, no one group dominates the other. It calls for due process and the presumption of innocence. How can President Trump receive a fair impeachment trial when many members of Congress have already convicted him in the press?
But those issues are irrelevant because conducting a trial to impeach someone already out of office is unconstitutional. The whole thing is a media circus and is an embarrassment to our Republic.
For 245 years Americans have argued with each other over religion, education, voting rights, racial equality, sexual identity, working conditions, marriage and dozens of other social conflicts. The way we do that is through a court system, legislation and voting.
The Constitution is the backbone of it all: It is what protects the integrity of our system of self-government. We have a system of checks and balances that are designed to protect the minority from domination by the majority. There have been many elections won by a landslide, but such a mandate is not a license to abuse the opposition. America has been divided since its inception. And along the way, each side has taken shots at dominating the other, so we shouldn't be surprised that that opportunity has presented itself again.
In Washington, there are some who are determined to prohibit a popular political leader from running for or ever occupying elective office. It is astonishing that any intellectually honest American would even consider such a draconian notion! Authoritarian regimes routinely conduct Kangaroo Courts to criminalize dissent. That kind of totalitarian contempt for due process should never happen in America.
Let the people decide who can best represent them! Tell your elected representatives to stop this ugly abuse of power.