I recently wrote about the anti-cop left using some diabolical calculus to get cops fired. First, take some, perhaps, “insensitive comments” directed at anti-cop rioters, most not held accountable for their crimes, and recast the comments as racially insensitive. Even if there’s no racial component to the comments, it’s only necessary the subject be framed as BIPOC to be then inferred as racist.

Then apply the “racially insensitive” comments to a law enforcement agency policy. Of course, being racially insensitive violates department policy because they’ll say it “threatens the public trust.” In this case, no doubt, “the public” is the anti-cop left I mentioned up top.

And then, to make sure the offense sticks, prosecutors contort the “insensitive comments” so they apply to a SCOTUS decision or two. Use the Brady ruling so the officer’s comments disqualify him or her as a witness, so they can’t testify in court. And you have the solution to the nasty calculus = cops fired.

The left deploys racially insensitive and extrapolate it to mean racist even though they don’t use the word racist because, when speaking about legal processes, they’d need racist comments or overt acts to prove it. They rarely have that. But who needs that when you rewrite the dictionary and control the conversation?

A similar poison is also being used to purge conservatives from society. You can see this happening with the great “insurrection” lie. Recently, I was reading a story in Business Insider where the writer casually used the term “insurrection” for what happened on Jan 6th, as if it’s a given that’s what happened.

There’s no consensus about an insurrection having occurred because what actually happened, though no one condones even the limited property damage and injuries (on the parts of the rioters) during those few hours, just doesn’t rise to an accurate definition of an insurrection. It just doesn’t.

The facts are still cloudy to this day due to the government’s failure/refusal to release evidence. And we’re still finding out so much about FBI instigators infiltrating the crowd. Ray Epps and others appear to have been active on the FBI’s behalf. In fact, according to Todd Starnes, Project Veritas published a video with comments about Jan. 6th from none other than The New York Times’ columnist Matthew Rosenberg.

Apparently, and in contradiction to his own previous denials the FBI was involved in Jan 6th, “there were a ton of FBI informants among the people who attacked the Capitol.” Really? “A ton?” That’s not what the NYT reported about what they call a Trump-inspired “insurrection.”

Another indicator is when Americans spent much of 2020 watching actual armed insurrections proliferate in cities across the U.S. Incidents that fit the definition of an insurrection that get ignored by those asserting Jan 6th was an insurrection. If they truly abhor insurrections, then why ignore actual insurrections that occurred in places like Portland, Seattle, and Minneapolis? That’s a dead giveaway it’s about politics, not about crime.

The radical left wants you to disregard what your eyes, ears, and intelligence are telling you and to believe the gaslighting they’ve been perpetrating. They want you to believe Jan 6th was a well-planned insurrection abetted by sitting members of Congress, according to Matthew Vadum at The Epoch Times, whom they have now targeted for ballot disqualification.

Who do you think would win the Presidency?

Disqualified for what reason? Well, they want a “pro-Trump senator and two pro-Trump congressmen barred from seeking office, for speaking out about 2020 election irregularities and allegedly attempting to manipulate the congressional certification of the presidential election results.”

Again, the NYT is making it difficult for their Democrat allies to push the insurrection fib. Now that the Times has also (finally) “authenticated” Hunter Biden’s laptop from hell (though they’re some 16 months late to the New York Post’s party), the election integrity is more in question than ever.

Forget about any of the other alleged, apparent, or obvious shenanigans that took place during the 2020 elections. Significant swaths of Democrat voters said the Hunter Biden laptop information about the Biden family’s alleged illegal influence-peddling would have made them change their votes. This calls into question both big tech’s censorship of the New York Post and other media and the CCP virus-influx of state “mail-in ballot” changes that proliferated. Some, apparently, are in violation of state law.

Nearly 60 million votes had been cast before the heavily censored Hunter Biden laptop scandal became public (or at least fought to become public).

Democrat operatives have targeted Republican Wisconsin U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson and U.S. Reps. Tom Tiffany and Scott Fitzgerald. They are all up for reelection in November. The Dems are repurposing a Civil war amendment, ironically used to keep southern Democrats who supported the Confederacy out of public office, to keep Republicans from office. They’re also using the statues in North Carolina in an attempt to declare U.S. Rep. Madison Cawthorn an “insurrectionist” to keep him out of office.

Whether it’s getting cops fired or preventing elected representatives from holding office, it seems the Democrats will do almost anything to achieve their political goals. But I suppose you don’t have much choice when your Party’s leaders’ performances have been so dismal and its leadership so pathetic.