Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Will Democrats End Up Agreeing It Was a Lynch Mob?

 

RatsPresident Trump used a perfectly good term, with a long non-racial history, despite the fraudulent posturing of Democrats (quickly exposed in their hypocrisy with an avalanche of examples) and TruCon lapdogs who took a break from potty-mouth tweets to posture against the Great Big Ugly Man and all of us who dare support him. At the same time, the deep state coup, now acknowledged and praised by the New York Times, beclowned itself as one of the chief rats started running. Attorney General Barr and his man on the case, DAG Durham, look like they will not pull punches, going for sunshine disinfectant instead of a cloud of stench-masking air fresheners to get the greasy, stale smoke odor out of the FBI, DOJ and intelligence agencies fleet. But, if you think that the end game is everyone rolling, or the buck stopping at President Obama’s desk, you would be wrong. In the end, the most we will get is “fact checkers” “proving” President Trump’s grammar was wrong.

As loudly as the Democrats and their media organs are playing fake Ukrainian folk music, they are trying to cover the discord of the real baseline, and no, it isn’t a symphony warming up. The intelligence community can hear Barr and the band running through “For Whom the Bells Toll” and “Thunderstruck” backstage.

Representatives Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) are still singing their impeachment cantata. But a huge orchestra, with plenty of brass (not to mention subpoena and prosecutorial power) has assembled and is tuning up. We’re told that Michael Horowitz’s much-anticipated inspector general’s report on the origins of the FISA warrants against American citizens, after numerous delays, will be released imminently, perhaps as soon as next week. Horowitz was quoted as saying it will be “very detailed” and feature “limited redactions.”

You can see why James Clapper objects that he was just following orders. Expect the same song from John Brennan, James Comey, the disgraced former director of the FBI, and other anti-Trump activists in the “intelligence community.”

Not to contradict the music critic at American Greatness, but the “just following orders” chorus is surely under hasty revision, and if it comes to that, the players will all be singing off a new sheet. Of course, they are going to have to learn their lines and get some help with elocution in their recitative, if the former Director of National Intelligence* (a retired Air Force three-star general, don’t you know**), James Clapper is representative:

James Clapper is never the smartest man in the room, even when he’s all alone, by himself, in solitary confinement, which he may very well soon be.

But Thursday night, after the corrupt, lying former director of national intelligence got the word on live television that the feds have opened a criminal probe into the Russian collusion hoax, the co-conspirator suffered a meltdown for the ages.

All dialogue guaranteed verbatim:

“Well, I should … you know be very curious since presumably … I uh I guess uh I’m one of those under investigation and … I uh don’t know — ”

The host cut in: “And you just heard about this?”

“Yes,” the below-average tongue-tied thug stuttered, beads of flop sweat forming on his pasty brow, “I just uh uh, you know, read the clip, um, about 20 minutes ago, um, I found the timing interesting given, uh the uh, increasing heat around the impeachment inquiry and so, uh it it uh, the timing’s interesting, I’ll just let it go at that.”

The fearsome chords clouding men’s’ minds are driving the Congressional Democrats, raving leftist base, and their media organs to act “like they have something to hide.”

Responding to reports that Attorney General William Barr’s investigation into the 2016 spying on Donald Trump’s campaign is now a criminal probe, Schiff and Nad­ler laid down their thumbscrews and emerged from their impeachment dungeon to express outrage. In unison, the twin Trump tormentors declared that partisanship has infected the Justice Department and “the rule of law will suffer new and irreparable damage.”

Meanwhile, an actual American hero and true patriot, Rep. Dan Crenshaw, called foul on the Corrupt Clown Show:

The man sees more clearly with one eye than most of his fellow politicians, let alone the commentariat. See him open the actual rule book, voted into effect by Pelosi’s party, now being broken with her complicity. Understand, Speaker Pelosi and the House Democrats have the power to change the rule book. They just have to vote to change the rules, just as they just have to vote on the floor, before the American people, to make the whole “impeachment” thing completely legal. They actually want nothing of the sort, and neither do the TruCons.

The frantic flailing of the deep state coup members and the TruCon dinghy crews is supposed to create such splashes as will somehow distract the electorate from that line on the horizon, a wave gathering size as it approaches shore. When their rotten-timbered vessels are swept under, will the rats clutch to a raft of memorandums-to-the-file claiming they were just following orders? Perhaps, but the last target named will not be an Obama.

Sure, President Obama did worse than the wildest things the 1972-4 coup plotters attributed to Nixon. But the senior plotters can’t all say they were just following orders if their statements point to the Oval Office. No, we will not hear Clapper, Comey, Brennan, and Rosenstein say they were all just following orders … unless they are directed to lay it all on their Attorney General, the first African-American woman to hold that office. What they cannot do is let The One be touched, so, if they need to plead temporary insanity, that is what they must do. If mass hysteria doesn’t pass legal muster, we may find them standing together with the former Attorney General, forming a firewall for the Obama faction and the leftists controlling the national Democratic party.

We will end up being told that President Trump got the grammar all wrong: it was really Lynch’s mob. The Obama faction must be protected at all costs, protecting her path to power in 2024 as transformational leader of the revolution at the end of the long march through the American institutions.


* While we are disinfecting our republic, the entire layer of bureaucrats, whose idle hands are sure to be the devil’s playground, in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence needs to be wiped off the Executive Branch organizational chart.

** Exhibit AA in why we should never uncritically credit political/executive level military service as a shield or sword for the bearer.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 14 comments.

  1. DonG (skeptic) Coolidge

    No. Changing language to act offended is their primary weapon these days.

    • #1
    • October 27, 2019, at 8:46 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  2. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown Post author

    DonG (View Comment):
    No. Changing language to act offended is their primary weapon these days.

    Elaborate a bit. I’m not quite tracking the negation. If it comes down to court cases, real evidence, possible jail time, what do you believe Obama’s senior officials will do? Take their lumps for the family, point to someone short of the Obamas, or say they were following the president’s orders, with his full knowledge?

     

    • #2
    • October 27, 2019, at 9:38 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  3. The Reticulator Member

    Clifford A. Brown: We will end up being told that President Trump got the syntax all wrong: it was really Lynch’s mob.

    I’ve sometimes said our biggest political problems are problems of grammar. So you’re saying this one is not a matter of grammar, but syntax?

    • #3
    • October 27, 2019, at 10:11 PM PST
    • 1 like
  4. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown Post author

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown: We will end up being told that President Trump got the syntax all wrong: it was really Lynch’s mob.

    I’ve sometimes said our biggest political problems are problems of grammar. So you’re saying this one is not a matter of grammar, but syntax?

    Good eye! I thought I had saved the chance from “syntax” to “grammar.” Fixed it.

    • #4
    • October 27, 2019, at 10:46 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  5. Jon1979 Lincoln

    There is a rush to outrage, where any subject is grabbed and milked for whatever it’s worth, until countervailing evidence comes out. Then it’s dropped and on to the new outrage.

    With the lynching line, it took a couple of days to come up with all the Democrats who had used the term in the past, including Joe Biden when talking about the Clinton impeachment, but the message was out there. Over the weekend, you had a more short-term version of that with Obama photographer Peter Souza, who though he had caught Trump faking the Situation Room photo on watching the assault on al-Baghddadi. Souza tweeted out that the raid took place while Trump was golfing, which sparked tens of thousands of re-tweets; but he had to correct himself when The New York Times posted information that the raid didn’t start until after 6 p.m. EDT.

    That one got far fewer re-tweets, and its safe to assume the idea that Trump faked the photo is now locked in as reality among the hard-core Trump hating crowd, just as his use of the word lynching is beyond the pale, no matter how many examples of Democrats using it show up. It’s simply a desire to maintain an outrage per day among the permanently angry crowd.

    • #5
    • October 28, 2019, at 6:31 AM PST
    • 5 likes
  6. DrewInWisconsin, Type Monkey Member

    Will Democrats End Up Agreeing It Was a Lynch Mob?

    Betteridges Law of Headlines says “no.”

    • #6
    • October 28, 2019, at 4:24 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  7. DrewInWisconsin, Type Monkey Member

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):
    If it comes down to court cases, real evidence, possible jail time, what do you believe Obama’s senior officials will do?

    They have the press on their side. The press will start telling the gullible public that the President is unjustly jailing his political enemies (essentially doing to them what they’ve been attempting to do to the President and his allies) (because it’s always about projection with these people), and the gullible public which only gets its news from mainstream sources will believe it.

    • #7
    • October 28, 2019, at 4:30 PM PST
    • Like
  8. Percival Thatcher

    From etymologyonline.com:

    lynch (v.)

    1835, “inflict severe (but not deliberately fatal) bodily punishment (on someone) without legal sanction,” from earlier Lynch law (1811), in reference to such activity, which was likely named after William Lynch (1742-1820) of Pittsylvania, Virginia, who c. 1780 led a vigilance committee to keep order there during the Revolution. Other sources trace the name to Charles Lynch (1736-1796) a Virginia magistrate who fined and imprisoned Tories in his district c. 1782, but the connection to him is less likely. The surname is perhaps from Irish Loingseach “sailor.”

    It implies lawless concert or action among a number of members of the community, to supply the want of criminal justice or to anticipate its delays, or to inflict a penalty demanded by public opinion, though in defiance of the laws. [Century Dictionary, 1895]

    Originally any sort of summary justice, done without authority of law, for a crime or public offense; it especially referred to flogging or tarring-and-feathering. At first the act was associated with frontier regions (as in the above citation), though from c. 1835 to the U.S. Civil War it also often was directed against abolitionists. The narrowing of the meaning to “extra-legal execution by hanging” is evident by the 1880s, and after c. 1893 lynching mostly meant killings of blacks by white mobs (especially in retaliation for alleged sexual assaults of white women). This shift in use seems due in part to the work of African-American journalist and activist Ida B. Wells. [emphasis mine]

    I was unaware of the race-specific nature of the term. I’ve heard the term used in Westerns where there were no racial factors whatsoever. And in my favorite book, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, the term is sprinkled throughout the passage where a mob threatens Col. Sherburn.

    Sherburn never said a word—just stood there, looking down. The stillness was awful creepy and uncomfortable. Sherburn run his eye slow along the crowd; and wherever it struck the people tried a little to out-gaze him, but they couldn’t; they dropped their eyes and looked sneaky. Then pretty soon Sherburn sort of laughed; not the pleasant kind, but the kind that makes you feel like when you are eating bread that’s got sand in it.

    Then he says, slow and scornful:

    “The idea of you lynching anybody! It’s amusing. The idea of you thinking you had pluck enough to lynch a man! Because you’re brave enough to tar and feather poor friendless cast-out women that come along here, did that make you think you had grit enough to lay your hands on a man? Why, a man’s safe in the hands of ten thousand of your kind—as long as it’s daytime and you’re not behind him.”

    So the outrage over Trump’s word choice is manufactured, and poorly at that. He should have compared it to the Star Chamber anyway.

    • #8
    • October 28, 2019, at 5:26 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  9. Percival Thatcher

    And as far as the investigations go — indict them, expose them, try them, convict them, then it is durance vile for the lot. I want our future employees to get weak in the knees at the very thought of what awaits them when their malfeasance is uncovered. Not here. Not in this country. Not under our laws. Don’t even think about it.

    • #9
    • October 28, 2019, at 5:35 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  10. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown Post author

    DrewInWisconsin, Type Monkey (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):
    If it comes down to court cases, real evidence, possible jail time, what do you believe Obama’s senior officials will do?

    They have the press on their side. The press will start telling the gullible public that the President is unjustly jailing his political enemies (essentially doing to them what they’ve been attempting to do to the President and his allies) (because it’s always about projection with these people), and the gullible public which only gets its news from mainstream sources will believe it.

    Except that this should mean no Republican got elected President since Eisenhower. I trust my fellow Americans more than that.

    • #10
    • October 28, 2019, at 8:34 PM PST
    • 1 like
  11. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown Post author

    Percival (View Comment):

    From etymologyonline.com:

    lynch (v.)

    1835, “inflict severe (but not deliberately fatal) bodily punishment (on someone) without legal sanction,” from earlier Lynch law (1811), in reference to such activity, which was likely named after William Lynch (1742-1820) of Pittsylvania, Virginia, who c. 1780 led a vigilance committee to keep order there during the Revolution. Other sources trace the name to Charles Lynch (1736-1796) a Virginia magistrate who fined and imprisoned Tories in his district c. 1782, but the connection to him is less likely. The surname is perhaps from Irish Loingseach “sailor.”

    It implies lawless concert or action among a number of members of the community, to supply the want of criminal justice or to anticipate its delays, or to inflict a penalty demanded by public opinion, though in defiance of the laws. [Century Dictionary, 1895]

    Originally any sort of summary justice, done without authority of law, for a crime or public offense; it especially referred to flogging or tarring-and-feathering. At first the act was associated with frontier regions (as in the above citation), though from c. 1835 to the U.S. Civil War it also often was directed against abolitionists. The narrowing of the meaning to “extra-legal execution by hanging” is evident by the 1880s, and after c. 1893 lynching mostly meant killings of blacks by white mobs (especially in retaliation for alleged sexual assaults of white women). This shift in use seems due in part to the work of African-American journalist and activist Ida B. Wells. [emphasis mine]

    I was unaware of the race-specific nature of the term. I’ve heard the term used in Westerns where there were no racial factors whatsoever. And in my favorite book, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, the term is sprinkled throughout the passage where a mob threatens Col. Sherburn.

    Sherburn never said a word—just stood there, looking down. The stillness was awful creepy and uncomfortable. Sherburn run his eye slow along the crowd; and wherever it struck the people tried a little to out-gaze him, but they couldn’t; they dropped their eyes and looked sneaky. Then pretty soon Sherburn sort of laughed; not the pleasant kind, but the kind that makes you feel like when you are eating bread that’s got sand in it.

    Then he says, slow and scornful:

    “The idea of you lynching anybody! It’s amusing. The idea of you thinking you had pluck enough to lynch a man! Because you’re brave enough to tar and feather poor friendless cast-out women that come along here, did that make you think you had grit enough to lay your hands on a man? Why, a man’s safe in the hands of ten thousand of your kind—as long as it’s daytime and you’re not behind him.”

    So the outrage over Trump’s word choice is manufactured, and poorly at that. He should have compared it to the Star Chamber anyway.

    Republicans were not putting up show votes, counting on the Senate to invoke the Sacred Filibuster, for anti-lynching bills at the height of white racial violence against blacks. Trying to define away public torture murder, dressed up as mere extra-legal violence, is a loser.

    AND.

    The frontier mob justice sense has always coexisted with this evil in our discourse. 

    Western mob:

    White racial ritual murder:

    • #11
    • October 28, 2019, at 8:56 PM PST
    • Like
  12. Percival Thatcher

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):
    Trying to define away public torture murder, dressed up as mere extra-legal violence, is a loser.

    I wasn’t doing that. I was pointing out that it wasn’t a trigger word until suddenly it was.

    • #12
    • October 28, 2019, at 9:11 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  13. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown Post author

    Percival (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):
    Trying to define away public torture murder, dressed up as mere extra-legal violence, is a loser.

    I wasn’t doing that. I was pointing out that it wasn’t a trigger word until suddenly it was.

    You are right about the entirely fake outrage. I just think completing the picture makes the case against fake outrage even stronger. As a bonus, these white on black torture murders were overwhelmingly Democrats committing actual domestic terrorism. 

    • #13
    • October 28, 2019, at 9:25 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  14. Marjorie Reynolds Lincoln

    Percival (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):
    Trying to define away public torture murder, dressed up as mere extra-legal violence, is a loser.

    I wasn’t doing that. I was pointing out that it wasn’t a trigger word until suddenly it was.

    Exactly. And anyway, as far as I ever knew, here’s its true origin. 

    https://www.libraryireland.com/articles/WardenGalwayDPJ1-29/index.php

    • #14
    • October 29, 2019, at 2:14 AM PST
    • 1 like