Tag: State Soverignty

A Message to Republicans: Democrats and Whores are basically the same thing, they both are willing to fake anything

I would have been comfortable saying it previously, but especially now, with the Brett Kavanaugh controversy in Washington D.C. by radical leftists’ groups, but Democrats are evil, vile, despicable human beings. Their foundation beliefs are the root of the problem, they are collective based idealists who do not acknowledge individual rights—so therefor lying has no relevancy to them because their individual word has no personal value. They only see value in collective hive support, so they will do whatever must be done to preserve group associations. This makes them evil because they do not function from any individual responsibility, which therefore makes them a menace to society because all actions are individually based, even if actions are decided to be group affiliated. The decision comes from an individual decision. So do I believe that Dr. Ford would lie about an alleged rape attempt against her from Brett Kavanaugh—absolutely. Just because she’s a woman doesn’t make her a truth teller. Think of all the women who fake orgasms just to make the men in their lives feel useful, and you could build a case for women as a part of the human species with a tendency to bend the truth for the “greater good.”

And this leads us to the midterms. I do not believe that there are Democrats out there ready to take power from Republicans. I think Democrats are an extreme minority and the press is attempting to make everything look like a close race leading up to the election. I don’t believe the polls. I don’t believe the news reports. People just aren’t that liberal in the United States, and Democrats do not represent American ideas—so I don’t see a massive blue wave in the upcoming elections. But I do see a full-on military style assault that Democrats are using to take power from Republicans and in general, Americans of all political persuasions—as a collective, hive-like entity. As individuals Democrats are not very dangerous, no more so than an irritating mosquito. But in the swarms that they attack with, they can suck enough blood from an individual to kill them, which is what they are trying to do to Brett Kavanaugh. We are supposed to forget that not a single Democrat could live up to the standard they are creating for Kavanaugh, going back to a single high school party 36 years ago to disqualify a Supreme Court Justice from nomination. Just think if Republicans held Democrats to the same standard. It wasn’t that long ago when Republican senators like Lindsey Graham voted Obama nominees like Elana Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court even though they were radical leftists. Republicans did the right thing and voted for their character and serving the president whom they disagreed with. But they stuck to the rule of law and did the right thing by the people’s will. That is not what Democrats ever intended to do when the shoe was on the other foot.

I remember when my son-in-law became a U.S. Citizen and had to recite an oath to protect the Constitution when the words, “against enemies both foreign and domestic.” I couldn’t help but at that time to attribute that the Democrats were domestic enemies, they stood against the basic ideas of what America is and ever was and they wanted to overthrow it. To understand what they are against, I would suggest watching just about any American western from 1940 to 1990 and over that fifty-year period, the idea of what the dreams of America was are explored intellectually. Democrats openly stand against those ideas to put it simply and I’m personally not OK with that. Its one thing to live and let live, to be accommodating to other people’s ideas which are different from your own. I would hardly say that I’m an intolerant conservative—it was only a year ago that I had lunch with Stephen Samaniego from CNN and we had a nice talk about regional politics and various bubbles of thought that exists around the nation. Even with all that CNN has done to advance destruction of Trump’s presidency I can talk to just about anybody without being angry. I don’t look for ways to not get along with people. In fact, I would say I am extremely accommodating—I’m far from a radical ideologue. But to speak honestly of my opinions on these matters, I would also say that it is impossible to be friends with a Democrat, because their ideology is not individually based. It’s like marrying a whore, they may tell you they love you, but they make their living sleeping around with anybody with money in their pocket. For the whore, sex is not a value judgment, its collective based—anybody is alright so long as they pay. With a Democrat anything goes so long as the ends justify the means. It is impossible to have a real friendship with such a person, so when Republicans say that “our friends from the other side” they are creating for themselves a weak position. Democrats don’t want to be your friend. They want to destroy you. It really is that simple. If you are a conservative, no liberal wants to be friends. They simply want to use that leverage to undermine your belief system so they can bend it to their will.

With all that said voter turnout for Republicans will have to be massive in these midterms because Democrats do plan to cheat. I think there will be massive voter manipulation and we’ve seen that our own F.B.I. will play their part in making it happen. I remember well how there was not a single Republican voter in Philadelphia in 2012. How does that happen? The same statistics will erupt all across the country during the midterm election of 2018 especially in urban areas. The only way to really defeat those attempts is the way Trump did it in 2016, where the voter turnout was so high that even the attempts at cheating will leave the Democrats short. So take nothing for granted because Democrats have no problem with cheating and then lying about it. Because they do not value themselves as individuals, so they don’t care about lying, about eternal damnation in Hell, or any of the normal characteristics for holding people to the truth. They certainly have no problem lying under oath because many of them don’t believe in God, so to what value does swearing on a Bible hold them to? Nothing.

I’ve said it before and its worth saying now, we are at war with these Democrats. We are in a Civil War. They do not want to assimilate intellectually in the affairs of our nation, they simply want to destroy it. They don’t care what they have to do, they only care to do it. Nothing is too low for them, which is quite evident in the Kavanaugh hearings. If there was ever a cleaner nominee than Brett Kavanaugh, who would it be? My comment to Republicans is what it has been for many years now, you better know what kind of fight you are fighting. Do not think that by playing nice with Democrats that you will appease them and voters. The only thing that we can do with them is to destroy them. Destroy them as a party. They intend the destruction of everything we think of as America, so if Republicans don’t defend it, everything we know will be destroyed. And playing nice with the enemy will not provide a victory, not in the midterms, or in anything—ever.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Vote HELL No on the Butler County Safety Levy: It’s a money grab for ineffective school board members afraid to make hard decisions

Essentially if the school safety levy fails for the combined efforts of Fairfield schools, Hamilton, New Miami, Edgewood, and Monroe—Hamilton will vote to allow teachers to arm themselves. And the other school boards will have to follow because doing nothing simply isn’t an option. Out of Butler County, Ohio’s 10 school districts five of them are looking for this safety levy to hire more employees to keep the school boards from having to make a hard decision on how best to protect schools. At the core of the argument especially among young and inexperienced parents who have been taught all their lives that guns are bad, school boards are trying to appease them with a more centralized process. This involves spending millions of dollars on additional resource officers, mental health assessments and similar employee staffing increases which of course cost more money. Yet we know now from experience that the real solution is a more decentralized process where teachers can act as first responders the moment a crisis breaks out. And the good thing about that approach is that it doesn’t cost more money.

At the heart of the problem is that the basic assumption about public education is that it should not involve guns—because the aim of the progressive education philosophy is to live in a world where guns aren’t needed, value judgments are surrendered to equal rights and the people being educated are subjects of the state. Guns do not fit that view of the world. But in no way is that vision aligned with life in the real world, it’s an idea that mostly people who think politically left of center strive for. Most parents enroll their children in a school without thinking about politics or danger, because their primary concern is that their child is safe, and they want to believe that the schools themselves are free of any turmoil. School boards love to spend money, because its easy and when collections of people are in charge of administering finances, spending money is the only real way to get along because everyone loves to spend money, especially if it is other people’s money. So this issue is particularly challenging for school board members. The only way to make panicky parents happy is to give them more safety personnel, mental health specialists, social workers and counselors—because buying those types of employees give people the illusion of safety. It gives parents the feeling that the institution itself can keep their children safe, and as school board members yielding to that fantasy is safe in itself, until there is a real problem and a deranged shooter comes into the hallways that none of the new government employees could see coming.

Many of the gun rampages we have seen just this year, not to mention year’s past involved people who were considered mentally deranged in some form or another and the institutions of our society proved they were completely ineffective to stop such people from acting in a deadly way. To stop such a deranged mass murderer before the act occurs requires a decision based on judgments, and this is something that our modern institutions just don’t do, because they are so politically charged. Our modern institutions for which public schools are a part are more prone to trying to make a deranged lunatic feel more at home by attacking the normal kids into unnatural acts of compassion than in removing the threat from society by implementing a judgment that might seem unfair. So public schools are powerless to protect children from those who decide life isn’t worth living and they take to becoming mass murderers. By their reasoning, if they are going to kill themselves anyway, why not take a few people who made them feel terrible along the way pay too.

All the methods of implementing school safety as proposed by the Butler County safety levy is to deal with the aftermath of a mass shooting, not to prevent it from happening, and that is what needs to be clear about what people are voting for. There is only one way to ensure that a mass killer doesn’t gain an advantage over a student population of unarmed kids is to have teachers be the first responders to end the threat seconds after it has started, instead of minutes. That is the only way to properly protect students in a school from deranged killers which are becoming more common place these days from many influences. This idea that guns will be legislated out of existence is simply another liberal fantasy that they haven’t come to terms with yet. Guns are part of American life and children should learn to live with them, how to properly use them and what function they serve in the context of society. For instance, a serious course of study could be made of how the invention of gunpowder has changed the nature of human existence politically. Americans are living proof of that evolution, but the path to the political philosophy which created that American experiment is confirmation that no human society will retreat back into the compliance of a communist state, which as China is now and the Soviet Union used to be. Once people have tasted personal freedom, there is no way to erase it from their minds and over the last thousand years mankind has marched toward more personal freedom and much less aristocracy. Yet that is not what schools are teaching and that is also what makes them dangerous—because they are not aligned with the world around them.

For many the history of firearms and the nature of why people love them isn’t relevant to this discussion of school safety, but unfortunately for those utopian minded liberals, such an understanding is mandated for resolution on the safety issue. Is the security of a school more effective if it is more centrally controlled, or is it more effective if it is decentralized? The obvious answer of course is decentralization, we know that from lots of experience as a society. Guns are a part of world culture, they were invented out of human necessity to protect individual rights and that is why history says they are here to stay. We aren’t going to “uninvent” them. Therefore, to have a safe society we have to have a means to defend ourselves from people who may use them for malice and especially in education institutions, such instruction and awareness is paramount for tomorrow’s next generations. To defend them from harm, guns must be part of the solution, not mental health specialists, social workers, and counselors. Those are investments into what happens after a tragedy. We want to solve such problems before they become deadly.

Parents and teachers who are not comfortable with guns are going to have to adapt. Their sensitivities cannot be the contributing factors to making schools less safe due to their emotional condition toward guns. For those people I would suggest some classes on firearms, and to learn more about them aside from what they have seen in Hollywood productions over the last twenty years. Guns themselves are not dangerous, they are precision instruments which defend individual rights. If a teacher is responsible for the safety of a classroom and a crazed gunman is outside their door looking to commit mass murder against harmless, innocent people, that teacher should have the ability to end the threat right then and there. There won’t be time to call the police. A counselor or mental health specialist won’t stop a killer in the hall and talk them out of committing violence, only equal or superior firepower can do that. And that is the way of things in a free society—decentralized first responders who can slow down or stop a threat until the professionals arrive, just like in CPR. The only thing stopping this safety measure from being implemented for the good of everyone is the sensitivities of those who insist that guns not be part of a solution that only guns can solve. And not just guns, but guns in the hands of everyday people who are on the front lines and most prepared to take action when threats arise.

For many, obviously the case with the school boards of the participating schools, the responsibility for such security in their minds fall on the professionals we hire in society to deal with these kinds of things. But it is that over-reliance on institutional safety that many of these mass killers exploit to instigate their wrath. Guns are not a particularly American idea, but the personal use of them is, which means that in order to have a properly safe society that is living in harmony with the invention of guns, that personal participation of guns is something we should use to solve the gun violence problem. The solution is in decentralization within our institutions so to make them safer. More centralization will give us the opposite, the likelihood of more violence. If we really want to solve the problem of mass shootings, especially in public schools, and especially in Butler County which is the focus of this unique tax increase for the five-schools mentioned, then we need to allow teachers to be that layer of security. Throwing more money at more centralized control will do nothing but waste money, which the school boards participating in this horrendous tax and spend approach should have already had in their budgets to begin with. Ultimately what the school boards are asking for in this levy request is for Butler County voters to bail them out of having to make a hard decision—whether or not to cut some expenses out of their budget to hire more safety personnel, which is what they should be doing. Or in having to make a decision in arming teachers which would hurt the sensibilities of some neurotic parents who need an education of their own to get up to speed with the modern world. But nothing about the Butler County safety levy will make schools safer from a potential shooter who might want to attack schools and the children within it.

If I had loved ones in these schools, which I personally do, and a lunatic comes to that school with a gun to shoot up the innocent, I expect a teacher or administrator to be carrying a gun and to stop that situation before mass carnage occurs. There isn’t time to call for help when something like that happens. The situation must be dealt with right then and there. I don’t need a counselor to talk me through the grieving process after a bunch of kids have been killed. I don’t need a mental health professional to rationalize the mind of the killer before the smoke has left the scene of the crime. I just need the threat neutralized and that loved one home safe every day. And just having teachers carrying guns concealed during their professional business makes the chances of a safe day at school much more of a reality.
Vote not only NO on the Butler County Safety Levy, but………………………….HELL NO!

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

How Alex Jones and David Icke Contribute to a First-Rate Mind: Just because things are considered conspiracies, doesn’t mean they are false

When critics of mine say that you can’t listen to my topics on politics or other serious matters because I also cover topics of conspiracy and pseudoscience, they are speaking of their own limitations, not the actual way that information is obtained. And to that aspect I do find that people like Alex Jones and England’s David Icke contribute to the advancement of understanding by simply asking outlandish questions then seeking evidence to support it. What critics are saying about themselves when they insist that only certain types of information are relevant to any discussion, such as those endorsed by institutional behavior, but not information accepted by institutional understanding they are actually pointing out how misunderstandings are perpetuated in civilization. My method of obtaining truth to anything is to take in information wherever it comes from then using deductive reasoning to chip away at the truth. It’s what I consider a first-rate mind who can take all the puzzle pieces wherever they come from and assemble them into the facts we must all work with. It’s a method I use professionally which is far superior to my peers in industry. When I’m trying to solve a problem, I don’t just look at the accepted institutional evidence because honestly, if someone wants to hide something, the way to do it is to hide it behind institutional trust. And this is becoming increasingly difficult to hide from people these days because information has become so decentralized, and that is why conspiracy theorists such as Alex Jones and David Icke are so popular today. They ask lots of outlandish questions and make proposals that sound crazy to the typical institutionalists. But if taken as just part of a pile of evidence, there are useful concepts introduced that advance thought, which is why I never disregard anything until truth proves something false.

I’m a big believer of brainstorming and I can say from firsthand experience that my methods really piss people off. Such as in business, if I am trying to solve a really complicated problem I invite everyone I can think of to a 15 to 30-minute meeting, from the highest in a company to what might be considered the lowest according to an organizational chart. I ignore the organizational chart because my goal is not to appease the people who are high up on the chart, but to get to the truth, so I bring in everyone, treat them with equal respect and pick their brains and see what they can throw up on one of my “white board meetings,” where anything and everything is considered. I often get a mess of crazy ideas but mixed into them all is some grain of the truth that if you sift through it leads to the answer you are seeking. I look at it like mining for gold. Gold never comes out looking wonderful, you have to dig for it and clean it up before its ready to use. And that is my method for obtaining obscure answers to complicated problems. It is the method of the way any first-rate mind would proceed, and I can say that over the years the people who most hate it are those who are high up on an organizational chart, because they either want to believe that the common people under them are stupid, or that they (as higher ups) have something to hide that they want to keep concealed from the people lower on the organizational chart. And that is exactly what is going on within our own Federal government presently, and why Donald Trump is so hated, because he has a similar method of obtaining information. Its quite a common thing among successful business people to have a decentralized flow of information flowing to them as an executive. Even the guy who pushes brooms all day long has valuable things to say about their observations, so nothing should be left off the table.

When David Icke puts forth that a reptilian race is controlling a few families on planet earth and is trying to flow all politics through them there is some interesting things to sift through. Humans certainly do behave in a strangely maniacal way toward ritual and superstition. Even so-called wise people do believe that spiritual aide can help them overcome earthly challenges over their rivals so that belief comes from somewhere. Until we know where, we have to consider the possibilities. Is it an alien group of reptile people? Who knows. What matters is that some people believe them to be a factor so we have to consider the who, what, why, when and where as to how. Are the villains actually reptilian people? I say it doesn’t matter, but what does is the propensity of some to cleave to a social elite status that then interrupts proper management of our civilization. And of that observation, David Icke has done some fantastic work—it doesn’t matter if its aliens or a bunch of people who went to Yale and wish to protect that institutions reputation with skewed social data. The impact on the world is the same.

When I started years ago my public education crusade my assertion was that public schools were focused on one primary thing, brainwashing children into liberalism and they gained permission from the parents by offering free babysitting services making it all too easy for the programing to take effect. When I said such a thing, critics called it a tin hatted conspiracy on the level of David Icke or Alex Jones. But reality has shown me to be completely correct and it doesn’t sound so crazy these days, because the evidence has been quite apparent. The reason is that information has been decentralized and the state no longer can suppress the data from voters. For instance, my home district of Lakota schools has thrown many millions of dollars of payroll at teachers yet the performance of the students has gone down instead of up. Paying teachers more money has never been a direct contributor to the quality of the public-school system because the schools were never really about education. Past the fifth grade the emphasis of public education has been to fit children into some social demographic and process them into institutional controls, so test scores are not reflective of the reality because the goal was always assimilation, not education. When I said it, it scared people, but these days more people are ready to admit the mess that public education has become. Even though people didn’t want to admit it, when I said the things I did about public education the institutionalists wanted to believe it was all a conspiracy theory, but as it turned out, I was more than correct, even in the early days of speculation.

The controversy of Alex Jones going to Washington D.C. and all the trouble he brought with him is just another example. I thought Alex Jones was baiting Marco Rubio with the whole hand on the shoulder thing. There wasn’t much that Rubio could do to fight a guy like Jones, there was no way to win without being willing to slug it out with Jones. That is why Alex Jones has been taken down from all social media platforms, because the belief is from the institutionalists, for which Marco Rubio is certainly one of them, is that they make the world. Jones was a reminder that there were forces shaping the present world that were outside of those institutional limits, and that’s why Rubio went to the default defense of trying to pretend he didn’t know who Alex Jones was. It was Rubio’s way of saying that if the institutions don’t recognize you, that you have nothing the world wants; therefore, I don’t know you. But when Alex Jones called Rubio a bathhouse frat boy, there was an accuracy to that statement that cuts across all party politics, and ultimately points to the reason that Marco lost the primary election to Trump.

Information, wherever it comes from is not dirty or even crazy. I have found that even the most disjointed mind sometimes produces great intelligence even if the reality of possessing that knowledge does make them a little eccentric and off the wall. It takes a first-rate mind to take all that information in and to put it to good use, and those that can are wonderful problem solvers. Those who are afraid of that truth call information they don’t like conspiracies, as if to marginalizing it out of usefulness. But the evidence says that you can never give institutional knowledge a monopoly on results. Even if the information comes from someone who believes that a reptile species is controlling us all, or that ancient aliens once settled the planet, or that the Illuminati is asking for blood sacrifices in modern politics to skew election results in their favor, there are aspects in truth to everything, even the most outlandish story. But it takes a good mind to extract that value. And just because a majority of people do not possess such skills does not make the usefulness of those skills less valid. Only more so.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Resistance is Futile: Starting at the office of John Kelly–they don’t know they are already dead

I sent Rudi Giuliani a Tweet letting him know what I thought about who the radical was within the Trump administration, at least the place to start. Let me explain to that mole and all the others, and Obama and his lectures, “resistance is futile.” What’s going to happen, what is happening is going to happen. Even in their wildest fantasies if this so-called resistance were to push Donald Trump out of the White House, things would not go back to how they were before. That world that The New York Times think its readers wants does not exist. They are writing stories for ghosts who aren’t here in the world anymore. For them they have a kind of revelation coming that is a lot like the movie The Sixth Sense. At the end of the film, they are going to find out that they were dead all along, that it wasn’t the world that was having a hard time living, it was them because they were already dead. And just some friendly advice for President Trump, the answer to his question as to who on his staff is trying to lead a resistance against him, he should seek that answer in John Kelly’s office.

Looking over the Bob Woodward book, Fear, and the combination of Obama’s speech this past week attacking Trump, and the dissident within the Trump administration that supposedly wrote The New York Times “resistance” piece and what it all adds up to is sheer desperation, and a lack of understanding as to what is going on. In a lot of ways these people in what they call the “resistance” are like millennials who have been coddled all their lives by their mothers and told that they are the best little kids in the world only to come into the real world as adults and find conflict with everyone because the world certainly doesn’t see them that way. At the most basic ways of their thinking they just can’t see the forest for the trees. I managed to get my hands on Woodward’s book prior to the release and I have to say it was very disappointing. I had never read any of Woodward’s books but thought of him as a good journalist because of his work in Watergate. But that appears to be a fluke for him, because Fear is the work of a hack who is agenda driven toward some liberal version of the world that is the drug induced haze of his pot smoking generation. I was let down to find out that Bob Woodward wasn’t very good at all, even as just a writer. He is simply a marionette for the Democratic Party, which is why they think he did so well with Watergate—because it fit an agenda for them, not actually the realm of reality. If the same standards that were given to Watergate and were applied to the Trump administration, Woodward and the rest would be on the president’s side. But what they are really angry at toward Trump is something much deeper and more sinister for them.

Obama’s speech was baffling because it was like that of a kid who got caught steeling bubble gum from a local store and knowing he did it, but was attempting to con everyone that the crime had actually been conducted by an alley cat who actually stole a car leaving everyone scratching their heads. Yet Obama’s coming out party to help Democrats try to win a few seats in the midterms isn’t just an attempt to help his party, its to save himself. His fingerprints are all over this massive abuse that the government had used to spy on Trump, go after conservative journalists, and use the powers of government to keep his political party in power no matter how many laws they had to break. Obama isn’t just trying to win elections, he’s trying to stay out of jail. And I was surprised that the Woodward book had no interest in this modern Watergate story at all, but to take the eyes of the law away from Obama’s responsibilities in those crimes, but to suppress it with this odd insistence that the institution of the presidency was more important than the will of the people who elected Trump into it to change the direction of the country away from what Obama had offered.

The summation of these events are that Trump represents this new age that we are in quite well, a decentralized emphasis on personal independence where everyone who votes now has a personal computer called a phone that travels around with them everywhere. Information has been decentralized, entertainment has been decentralized and ultimately so has transportation, food acquisition, and even shopping. We are living in the age of decentralization while the liberals are obsessed with centralization. For instance, if you consider just the impact of Microsoft’s Office software, everything that it provides for its users is about decentralizing the process of intellectual content production. Cody Wilson’s Ghost Gunner milling machines have decentralized the production of firearms. It is now possible to have a portable machine shop in your house that makes guns just a bit bigger than a toaster oven, and nearly as easy.

I used to have massive arguments with people who insisted that a college education was the way of the future. I’d say that it certainly wasn’t worth six figures for a kid to be converted from a free-thinking person to a stuffy institutionalist just so that the degree could get them in the door of the human resource department of a major company. That was the world of America from 1950 to 1980. That is not the way of the world from 1990 to 2020. Employers just want someone who can pass the background test, hell with the degree. But in a liberal society, they want to teach people dependence, but the trend of our culture is decentralization even to the point where you can order your groceries from a food app and have them delivered directly to your home. College isn’t offering people anything they can’t get for themselves and that realization has put major holes in the basic premise of liberalism.

If you plot these changes in attitudes to their natural conclusions, it should become very obvious that Trump is more than just the symptom that Obama was referring to in his recent speech, he is the antithesis to all institutions and their inability to be useful to modern human beings. What Bob Woodward and The New York Times can’t stand about Trump, and this goes for everyone who works within the Washington D.C. culture is, Trump is the president who doesn’t need pollsters, advisors, or even a Chief of Staff. Trump does what he wants when he wants to do it, and that is exactly why he won his election fair and square in this new age of decentralization, where people can function without associations to massive groups. This revelation has proven too dangerous to those who have committed their entire lives to institutional thinking and are now facing their own extinction.

If Bob Woodward would put out a book like Fear, written obviously from a vantage point of a man obsessed with institutional valor and is appalled that it doesn’t match reality and is therefore angry at Trump for providing that evidence contrary to the sentiment, then it isn’t hard to conclude who the moles are in the White House that Trump put in place to appease the institutionalists as a negotiating tool to put them at ease that he wasn’t planning to be a crazy man in the White House. But Trump’s olive branch to the institutionalists was ignored and now the president has to fire all of them, and now he has to declassify information that will bring great harm to the Obama White House. And he will continue to protect his House and Senate seats ahead of the midterms and not be distracted by Woodward and his liberal friends when it counts the most. Resistance is futile because the intent of this new resistance is to steer American civilization back toward more institutionalism, which runs counter to everything that our society has become, magnificently decentralized. Trump is the creation of that decentralization, he is not the cause. And that is why resistance is futile. No matter what they do, they are going to lose even if their number is thousands to one. Trump is the first decentralized president in history but he won’t be the last, and in all the words that Woodward wrote in his new book, it is that aspect for which he missed completely, and why Obama is now terrified of what comes next—which he well should.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Ancient Advanced Civilization Discovered in South America: Breaking free of institutionalized control of information and discovering a whole new world

One of the really great things about deforestation is that the covers are being ripped off the earth and we are discovering things we should have always known, such as the very interesting finds discovered along the Amazon River. The same types of earth works, largely in the form of ditches now, have been discovered all along the Amazon River dating back to at least 6000 years BC, well before any previous thoughts about human civilization have been applied to the area. Generally, it is accepted that the Incan people rose out of somewhere, had an empire, and were conquered by the Spanish essentially and that all human history flowed out of those events. However, that simply was not the case. We are discovering, all over the world the same type of earth works that were essentially part of the culture at Stonehenge, which means that these cultures were interacting with one another somehow. It is highly unlikely that there was a natural predilection for all human beings to be driven toward the same compulsion to build the same kind of structures just a few thousand years out of the last Ice Age.

On my phone I have a picture for my background of the crystal skull from the British Museum. I get questioned about it all the time because at first glance it looks like I have a strange fascination with skulls, but that’s certainly not the case. That crystal skull at the British Museum is an item of fascination for me. It was one of the reasons that I traveled to that museum, just to see that small exhibit. It for me is one of those obscurities that doesn’t fit the assumptions made by institutional archaeology. In my hometown museum in at the Cincinnati Museum Center they have a display of what they call The Cincinnati Tablet which was found in a very large burial mound under what is now Fountain Square. Like the crystal skull, the tablet is far more advanced than what we assume nomadic cultures that were associated with Indian societies could have, or would have produced. I had a pretty good discussion with a member of management at the British Museum where they became pretty frustrated with me for even asking the question. They insisted that the skull was a fake because the methods for cutting the artifact out of a block of quartz wouldn’t be invented by Spain until the very recent past. So, there is no way it was buried for thousands of years in Central America. Of course, I think that guy is wrong and the general assumptions of the British Museum are inaccurate. History likely has followed more of a Vico Cycle than a liner evolution.

Within days of my visit to the British Museum I was at Stonehenge and at Old Sarum—even at the castle at Dover and I continued to be amazed at the earthworks which were in some cases being exhibited as works of the Normans and Romans who came before them. But obviously many of these vast structures of earth moving were already in place before the Romans arrived. Even in Canterbury the archaeology that had been conducted there before the heavily Catholic influence of the cathedrals arrived, ancient earthworks were a large part of the motivations of that very old city. My experiences in England put a whole new light on the earthworks of my home region of Ohio where the mound builders had been thought to have been derived from some Indian culture, but that clearly wasn’t the case. Institutionalized archaeologists may have wanted that to be the situation, but the evidence against those assumptions is just too obvious. We are learning that very large people were associated with the Ohio earthworks and that they likely came from the part of the world, and culture that built Stonehenge and Avebury. The tendency toward ritual landscapes and moving large amounts of earth for rather complex mathematical motivations are abundant in North America as they are in England.

One thing that England has going on in a very positive way is that they have vastly deregulated the field of archaeology. What they are doing with the English Heritage group is vastly unlocking their own past and letting the arrows of history point to regions all over the world coming from that very old part of the human continental development history. We are talking about a period of time when humans were building massive monuments in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Indus Valley. And it’s entirely possible that under the Persian Gulf,

Mediterranean Sea and the English Channel are the remains of vast civilizations long gone because they built their villages and cities right after the Ice Age where sea levels were many hundreds of feet lower completely changing the coastlines of ancient people. By the work these ancient people left behind they obviously knew the earth was round and they had no problem daring the oceans to travel to far away lands. They obviously new about North America, and now it is evident that they were communicating with South America and some people were even building empires of their own along the Amazon River well before any previous generation of scientists thought that people could rub sticks together to make a fire. I don’t think we are looking at a bunch of independent nomads doing the same thing by coincidence, but a complex global culture that was interacting and trading with one another well before any previous assumptions.

When it is asked why I write all these articles without being employed by some university or museum, the answer is that it is because of the age we currently live in. In politics things are being decentralized, the same is happening with information. My hope in writing these articles is to inspire more people in this time of “Wikileaks” where institutional control over scientific assumptions yield to wide-eyed wonder and we can really get to the bottom of our own history by examining the information wherever it takes us. With the advent of blogs, personal cell phones, and the internet in general the people who are most passionate about science don’t have to ride the rules and regulations of scientific institutions to make their own discovers. All they really have to do is look at the ground and report what they see instead of looking toward National Geographic to tell them what they see. And under that type of thinking we are now discovering that the Amazon River was producing cultures just as sophisticated as the earthwork builders of Stonehenge and the monuments of Egypt. They have just been covered for thousands of years by vegetation overgrowth of an unmanaged rain forest. The institutional gate keepers of course want to keep these things hidden by blaming deforestation on capitalism to keep smart minds from even asking the question as to why all those earthworks are even there in the Amazon. The institutionalists would rather not know, they’d rather keep us all looking to them for the answer as to why crystal skulls were made well before Spain invented a technique for making them, or there was trade between the continents before Europeans could build a boat to cross the Mediterranean, let alone the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans. Institutions want history to begin when they were formed and they hope to conceal any history before them like some second husband tries to pretend that his wife didn’t have lovers before he was even a consideration.

We are in the age of the Wiki–Wikileaks, Wikipedia, Wikiweapons—“Wiki” everything—we are in the age of open information exchanges that bypass the traditions of institutions and that is resulting in an explosion of archaeological understanding. And in that process, we are reexamining everything about our past, which is good. Its better to know than to not. Political assumptions in support of institutional control wants to dictate that the “Native Americans” were a nice docile group of communists living in peace with the earth until those mean Europeans arrived and wrecked their Utopia. But that’s not true, none of it was. Instead, people came and built cities from all over the world in places as remote as the Amazon River Valley and they were quite intelligent. Global trade is not a recent thing, but likely goes back to the last Ice Age—maybe before. And we are just now starting to see what has always been there, only we didn’t see it because we allowed institutions to define for us the world we lived in. For me, if you really want to understand science, the answers are in the Wiki movement. Not from the institutions of our traditions, but in the open asking of questions and the answers whatever they may be. And one of the most shocking of those answers is that there were an advanced people in South American thousands of years before we had previously thought, and that is a very exciting discovery.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

No Real Republican Can Ever Be a Racist: Exploring the history of Neo Nazis, Antifa and “Unite the Right”

We have to talk about the various protests on the one-year anniversary of Charlottesville, one of which took place right outside the White House over the weekend of August 12th 2018. About two dozen white supremacists had filed a petition for permit to have a rally called “Unite the Right” which inspired the aggressive leftist anarchists Antifa to the site to engage in hostilities. As far as political theater the media tried to paint the picture that it was right versus left in a prebattle for the midterms. But in reality it was like Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini arguing over who was more to the political right than the other—which would be odd since they are all extremist lefty groups. Communism is certainly a concept of the political left. Socialism for which Germany was driven by is another extreme leftists’ philosophy, and fascism which was the theme of Italy was somewhere in the middle of those two on the political spectrum as Mussolini operated. There is nothing even remotely conservative about any of those three things. There is nothing conservative about a “neo Nazi.” And I would propose that no real conservative could ever be considered a racist. It’s just not possible.

Conservatives believe in individual merit and rights. That makes any group associations a definition as to how conservative a person might be. If a person is white and is in a country club full of rich white people who are mostly male and have incomes over a million dollars a year, they are more liberal and less Republican than the auto mechanic down the road who minds his own business, votes in every election and teaches his family values diligently every day of their life. The country club people tend to think in group associations by their very nature which erodes their conservative foundations epistemologically.

One of the reasons that America is such a melting pot where people from all over the world have been able to successfully come and make good livings is because of Republican government and the concept of our Constitution, which enables individual rights as opposed to group associations. Any real conservative would never look a person and judge them by their skin color or their ancestry. No person on earth should be judged by the lives of their parents or grandparents. They should be judged based on what they do as individuals.

Following that logic, no race of people could be scrutinized if the individual merit of their actions is taken into account. The KKK was never a branch of Republican thinkers, they were all Democrats from the south. It was Republicans that ended slavery, they didn’t conduct it. And in modern times, it is Republicans who offer opportunities and prosperity through proper government, not Democrats who seek to exploit races of people for political gain. Nobody who looks at groups of people and tries to lump them together as one identity can properly call themselves a Republican because the philosophic meaning provides a quandary that is impossible to resolve through logic.

Ironically this problem was solved by Clint Eastwood in several of his movies during the 70s and 80s. The left leaning media often attacked Eastwood films as being right leaning and part of what’s wrong with America. So Eastwood tackled the situation directly in his comedies such as Every Which Way But Loose, Any Which Way You Can, the cop drama Magnum Force and the romantic comedy Pink Cadillac. In each of those movies Clint Eastwood showed the difference between the Neo Nazi and himself as represented by a kind of libertarian Reagan Republican. Eastwood was always the loner individual who had groups of neo Nazi’s always chasing after him. American audiences loved Eastwood and those films made a lot of money and are still very popular to this day because they represent how most Americans see themselves. The distinction Eastwood made in his movies was clear and that’s why even at age 88, he is still loved by much of the Trump political base.

Racism has never been a part of Republican ideas. There are of course various degrees of conservatism, there are the country club types and they consider themselves as a group superior to the mechanic because there are more of them present at the cigar bar on Tuesday nights, but we are talking about subtle differences. I call such people RINOs. John Kasich is certainly one of those types and the split in the Republican party presently is due to this philosophic distinction. Kasich expanded Medicaid in Ohio under Obamacare in an effort to exploit the poor. He says God made him do it, but even that concept of God is a kind of leftist notion because when you really pull back the layers of religion, any religion, you will find many of the same ideas that make communism, socialism and fascism so attractive to weak-minded people today. But Kasich as a left leaning Republican wanted to run for president so he expanded Medicaid to pull in middle ground voters. He didn’t deal with people on their own individual merit, he packaged the poor into a nice demographic group, threw some money at them to win their votes and called it compassion. I call it racism. Whether it was white poor, or black poor, it was still group assimilation for the benefit of political power.

There were no conservatives protesting in front of the White House at the “Unite the Right” protests. There was no “right.” There were only various degrees of left leaning radical’s hell bent to take society back to a theocracy and fulfil the requirements of the Vico cycle. Tattooed skin heads and KKK members with white masks are not members of the Republican party but by their own names. To hide their acts of left leaning sentiment they have attempted to duck behind the Republican party in the same way that some modern loser sitting in a Waffle House in the middle of the night reading the Bible and proclaiming that God tells them to hate black people using some long dead uncle who knew someone who married someone who had an affair with someone in a king’s court in France 400 years ago to justify their worth in life as an utmost failure because they can’t stand on their own merit.

Most Republicans don’t defend themselves from these accusations and the media knows they won’t, because most conservatives are so independent that they never make the connection that the people being called racists are them because they don’t see themselves as a group. That is why they seldom ever defend themselves from attack, because their minds just don’t think that way. However, that is exactly what the media is trying to portray, and they count on nobody hitting back from the conservative right. That’s how these vile people have gotten away with such things for so long. But that’s coming to a close now. People are learning. Trump has given people their own version of Clint Eastwood in real life to rally behind and that Genie is not going back into the bottle. The media has just made themselves less relevant in the process because there are options out there where smart conservatives can go and not be called a racist just because some liberal tried to connect the dots where no dots appeared. And that distinction will only grow in the future leaving all these radical leftists with no place to hide, which makes them violent at first, but heavily exposed to the realities of the world.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Red Dead Redemption 2: A Western for a new generation

One thing is quite clear, Hollywood as a culture doesn’t know how to make westerns any more, which is a shame. Westerns have always been about what makes American culture work, so losing that ability to communicate western values has been missed. Disney has been best positioned to make westerns and I thought their two best attempts were quite good, The Lone Ranger in 2013 and Solo: A Star Wars Story in 2018 which was essentially a western set in space, but the company obviously has more progressive concerns on their mind and didn’t understand how to market those efforts because they were torn as a company as to whether any western should even be made. Ending America is a primary concern of progressives, so making stories about the birth of America is something that modern film studios just don’t like to do unless they are making fun of westerns. But that’s alright, because movies are on their way out anyway. Video games are becoming the new narrative device of choice and Rockstar Games is about to reveal their newest western, Red Dead Redemption 2 which is featured in the video seen below, and is yet the latest benchmark in storytelling through a video game. I have said often that the first Red Dead Redemption was one of the greatest games I’ve ever played, and is certainly one of the best westerns produced. But nearly a decade after the release of the first Red Dead Redemption this second game looks to be essentially a West World type of experience that will be the next great western for which a new generation will gain exposure.

The ambition of this game is incredible, and will go a long way to introducing the western back to audiences in a way that the genre has always deserved. In this age of Netflix and Amazon streaming a two-hour western just feels too short, people want and need at least 10 hours of content to really get into a story these days, so movies never really have time to get into a narrative experience. It’s just not the way that story telling is done any more. But even further than that, video games are the new dominate form of entertainment because it allows the consumer a chance to be a participant rather than just a consumer. And the problem with a real-life West World type of experience in an amusement park setting is the insurance liability of all the dangers you would encounter trying to duplicate something like that in real life. So a game like Red Dead Redemption 2 is the closest thing to a real experience that people can get, and it just so happens that Rockstar Games has picked a western for that platform.

Rockstar is the same company that makes the Grand Theft Auto games that I am not a fan of. But they do several things very well in them, and the best of what they do as a company ends up in their western games that come out every eight years or so. The amount of effort Rockstar has put into Red Dead Redemption 2 is just jaw dropping. When it is released it will set the new standard of what a video game should be. The previous benchmark holder was Zelda: Breath of the Wild, which came out last year for the Nintendo Switch and was an awesome experience. But it’s also in a fantasy setting whereas Red Dead Redemption 2 is all about the foundations of American society, which is actually very relevant to today.

The period of American history from the late 1870s to the late 1890s is one of my favorite periods. As we prepare as a civilization to enter the wild frontiers of space, there is a lot we can learn from this most open capitalist market that erupted during western expansion during this particular time. Western expansion happened so fast that governments hadn’t yet established themselves, and the race to acquire land away from the French, the British and the Spanish was incredible, so putting bodies on the frontier was the primary concern of government as opposed to ruling over their citizens. That left human need and desire open and raw leaving justice to be truly determined by the gun. It was during westward expansion that the Second Amendment was truly tested for the first time and it proved that people could govern themselves while cut off from Washington D.C. due to the vast distances involved only recently connected by railroads.

The gambling, the prostitutes and the gunslingers were obviously the default modes of human operation when given unlimited amounts of freedom to behave without the restrictions of too much law and regulation. As primal as those desires were they do provide an insight into the kind of world that humans make for themselves when government is so limited that it’s not a daily concern for the people. Modern day Las Vegas can be viewed as the most modern rendition of that early western idea of limited government and lots of personal freedom, but the tradition was started during the many frontier towns that rose up in that delicate period after the Civil War and disintegrated by the time the new century was ushered in.

Hollywood built itself on westerns taking this rough period of personal freedom and establishing values upon them for which to instruct our society what America was and strived to be. The westerns made by Hollywood may not have been very realistic, but they were about what we all wanted to be. The Disney Company made its bread and butter off westerns like Davy Crockett and Zorro, before they allowed themselves to fall into more of a progressive company trying to undo those values as opposed to learning about them and communicating to a new generation. What Rockstar Games has done with Red Dead Redemption 2 is settle for the more realistic version of life on the western frontiers. The focus is on personal choice, to be a villain or a hero, many of the decisions are driven by the human necessity for survival and that is an important distinction. If we are to understand ourselves today, as a species about to colonize space, then we need to understand ourselves as a society of people stripped of government rules and to witness how we behave when choices are truly free. Do you shoot someone in the head just because you can and steal all his possessions or do you make a friend out of them so that you can have an alley later on to draw from? These are the choices of a free society and are at the heart of our Bill of Rights, so actively participating in a world where those ideas are openly at play is very useful.

When talking about westerns we ultimately these days think about the plight of the Indians. As I have said often, Indians were part of declining cultures holding onto their past while the gunslingers and gold prospectors were part of a growing culture that was rapidly expanding. If it wasn’t the Americans who settled the west it would have been the Spanish or English who were racing against us to settle all that newly discovered land from a European perspective. It is popular progressively to think of the Indians as a superior culture only from the perspective of the progressive nature lovers. In reality, the Indians were part of cities that rose and fell in North America and throughout Mexico and had to resort back to the status of hunters and gatherers. To view the Indians as villains as they were often thought of in early Hollywood westerns is the subconscious reaction to this social failure on their part. While they were chucking rocks and shooting arrows while worshiping crazy nature gods the American frontiersmen were using guns, building wagons and using printed Bibles to advance their culture over the savages who were gross reminders of where humans came from—not the optimistic visions of where they were going.

For Red Dead Redemption 2 to pick this era as the backdrop of such a participatory environment it is exciting that so many people will gain exposure to such a great western as told by the fairly new venue of video game play. The ability to play in that world and learn about the era and the values is something that I think is truly beneficial to modern society. As Hollywood has lost its ability to tell a two-hour story that would entertain people with a mix of values and thrills, the video game industry has taken over and is now the king setting the benchmarks for the future. And nothing will have done that better up to this point than Red Dead Redemption 2. It is truly a modern miracle lovingly put together to capture a period of time that is very important to the human species and allow people to learn what it truly means to live free and how to make choices when the gun is all that stands between justice and villainy.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

What is Fake News, and Why its Bad: The lesson to learn from Urban Meyer and Ohio State

I’ll be happy to answer the question that Jim Acosta from CNN asked Sarah Sanders and Ivanka Trump, as to whether or not the media was the enemy within the United States, as he asked at the daily briefing this past week at the White House. Several years ago on a radio show I discussed in great detail the plans that the KGB had in 1947 through 1959 to infiltrate American society with communist propaganda and take over our education, media and entertainment enterprises. Largely we are now seeing the result of that effort—by not only Russia, but every communist leaning nation in the world. Of course, not everyone fell for it, but most did, which was consistent with Donald Trump’s answer on the matter. Fake news therefore is identified as the enemy because they tend to attempt to shape news stories to fit a political agenda rather than just reporting the facts of the matter. When a news organization is concerned with shaping the news to fit an agenda, they could and should be considered fake.

What Jim Acosta was doing in putting Sarah Sanders on the spot in front of everyone watching that news conference was a communist form of consensus building. I’ve covered that many times before as well from school board meetings to local trustee meetings, there are methods of facilitating public opinion in a democracy to urge weak people to follow a majority opinion and that was exactly what Acosta was attempting to do. By attempting to trick her into saying that the news present wasn’t the enemy, she would also be endorsing the CNN was not guilty of the type of propaganda news that they were actually engaging in. So even by advancing that question, Jim Acosta was attempting to shape the news in a fake way.

Of course, everyone in the news is not dirty, and a free press is vitally important in a free society. But much of the time these days, a news and opinion site like this one has more validity toward the news than the corporate media because much like the Koch Brothers who were previously thought to be very Republican corporate media often has complicated ownership overseas or their boards of directors are invested in the globalist aims of modern politics which was started a long time ago with the desire of communism to spread to all corners of the world. People don’t always know why they think the things they do. The same corporate owners may attend an NFL game and be brought to great emotion during the National Anthem and consider themselves very patriotic. Yet they tend to support shared wealth across the world propping up communist and socialist regimes all in the name of a unified world under collectivists values. They never of course see themselves as the enemy, just as they don’t see their media outlets as part of the problem. But nevertheless, that is precisely what they are. They put foreign interests over the interests of domestic America and within that decision is the mess of mixed economies, mixed ideologies, and cultural indifference which is then shaped by Fake News.

Let’s take the Urban Meyer story from Ohio State where the wife of his wide receiver’s coach was allegedly abused by her husband. The wife said something about the incident to Urban Meyer’s wife and everyone is to assume that the wife would then talk to the coach about it forcing him to report the incident. Because he didn’t report the incident he has now been put on leave from the University while an investigation is conducted, so the story as reported is that Urban Meyer has been suspended for some cover-up at Ohio State, which happens to be going on while one of the top college football programs in the country is in their pre-season. The Fake News of the story is to of course advance the #ME TOO movement, which is rooted in progressive politics. It is also to advance the communist notion of reporting to the “state” everything that goes on, and that no single individual is more powerful than the all mighty state. The real news is that Urban Meyer is one of the top football coaches in the country for a very rich university and that in all likelihood even if his wife told him about the abused woman’s story he might not have heard it because he was busy watching 90 hours a week of tape on the upcoming season’s rivals to prepare game plans to. Most people don’t want to get involved in other people’s business, so they tune out things to give privacy to their friends, neighbors and employees. But the implication here is that Urban Meyer had an obligation to rat out his direct employee based on what a couple of wives said to each other and because he didn’t he and the football program at the university are in big trouble. The story is no longer about minding your own business and letting people be people, it’s about reporting to the “state” anything that it might care to know.

The Ohio State story happened because the university has been sucked into the type of progressive politics that Jim Acosta was trying to pin down on Sarah Sanders. A failure to push back against the attempt leaves even giant, wealthy institutions like Ohio State groveling to the press so not to have negative stories that might have an impact on enrollment. The Trump administration understands better than other presidential occupants of the White House what the game is. Lucky for us Trump, who is a master at branding, was able to come up with a term to describe it, Fake News. Calling these kinds of media outlets “fake” pulls away the mask of their real intentions as propaganda arms for progressive politics. That of course is the new name for global communism, which is why there are so many stories about how great and wonderful the Chinese are these days, and why a trade war would be so devastating. It’s not that a trade war will be bad for the United States, but it is terrible for communist China. You might have noticed that even the almighty company of Google had to create a new search engine that complied with the “state” regulations of China’s censors. China for many years has been buying up investments in the United States that contribute to the corporate opinion in their favor, but ultimately, they are a communist country seeking to hide their intentions behind masks given to them by the mainstream media.

Fake News is the news that attempts to shape a story toward a political objective. Real news is that which takes a story to its logical conclusion regardless of who is exposed in the process. The Fake News that is out every day to attack Donald Trump has an agenda to destroy his administration to preserve the progressive gains made in the past, so every story they produce is created to shape the opinion of the event. Just as the Urban Meyer story is not about protecting a wife from an abusive husband, it’s about establishing in people who the “state” has power over even The Ohio State and that if you hear something or see something, you have an obligation to report it. Fake News is about establishing fake power for the objectives created long ago to preserve the need for communism to become mainstream. And what Jim Acosta was trying to do with Sarah Sanders was to get her to endorse their Fake News as a reality, and she denied them of it, which is why she’s so good.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Ghost Gunner 2: Everything you need to know about the moral, and legal need to manufacture guns in your home

The Ghost Gunner 2 is a wonderful mini milling machine that can produce gun parts without a lot of machining expertise. It is the device that senatorial candidate for the GOP Austin Peterson of Missouri is giving away to a lucky recipient to make a point on Second Amendment protections. Since gunpowder was first contemplated in around 142 AD in China society has evolved along its advancements. While many think of guns and gunpowder as a destructive device, its widespread use and development has greatly decentralized civilization allowing the concept of an “America” to evolve. Prior to the invention of gunpowder empires largely controlled the lives of mass civilizations through emperors and kings. It took about a thousand years but with the invention of gunpowder and guns slavery was ended in the civilized world, nations were born, and scientific development has flourished. So, guns are not bad, and neither is gunpowder. But to put it mildly to the lefty politicians who clamor for more gun control and stricter background checks, it is not the job of the federal government to regulate firearms. It is the mandate of private citizens to use firearms to keep government in check. So, it only makes sense to have the ability for every household to manufacture their own firearms any time they want and in whatever quantities they desire. The Ghost Gunner 2 makes that home manufacturing of firearms very practical.

In the United States I think the major gun companies are real treasures. I love Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Henry Repeating Arms, Magnum Research—I love every one of them. The people who work in these places are genuinely good people making a great American product and I personally think every American should add one gun to their collection every year to support these fine businesses. But we need to get something straight about all this sudden concern about “ghost guns,” firearms made off 3D printers from plans downloaded from the Internet, the Genie is not going back into the bottle. We can’t “uninvent” guns without destroying society itself. Because honestly, it is the gun and gun powder that has brought about our advanced society. Without the invention of firearms, common people would have never have gained the opportunity to overthrow their kings and emperors and our society would be a much different one today. It’s highly likely mankind would have never gone to space if not for the invention of the gun and the emergence of America as a direct result of personal firearm ownership.

The political concern isn’t so much over the 3D printed guns which produces a kind of hard plastic AR lower that isn’t very reliable, it’s the technical ability of something like the Ghost Gunner 2 that brings very advanced milling machine ability to private homes. That realization destroyed what many left leaning anti-gun advocates had long been fantasizing about. They thought that if they lobbied congress to change some gun laws, or put pressure on Dick’s Sporting Goods and Field & Stream to take guns out of their stores, or that liberal politicians might even shut down gun manufacturers by taxing them and regulating them out of existence, that they might rid the world of guns. What they learned is that as regulations and the threat of them have increased, the ability to manufacture guns at home which have also increased as a direct response and the threat of having millions and millions of guns in society that don’t even have traceable serial numbers on them is even scarier.

I personally have no problem with my guns being registered. But given what we’ve seen out of our own FBI during the Trump presidency and the massive laws that were broken in an attempt to overthrow him through impeachment, it doesn’t take much of an imagination to see why registering guns with the federal government would be problematic. If they were to ever gain the ability to confiscate guns through the legislature they would simply read off their directory and go home to home in a confiscation raid which gives an emerging enemy an unfair advantage. I say an emerging enemy because obviously if a government is seeking to protect its power and wishes to take more from the people who fuel it through taxation, then their ability to disarm the population to protect their advances gives them a terrible advantage. But for the gun owner, the power of their firearm ownership keeps such governments from gaining too much power. It’s not that we should go around shooting everyone, but the threat of having it keeps potential dictators from getting any crazy thoughts. Naturally, being part of a thoughtful civilization as the Obama years made the threat of gun confiscation a very real possibility, companies like those who manufacture Ghost Gunner 2 have found a way to overcome that threat. Personally, I think produced firearms that nobody needs to know that you have so that they aren’t on a target list from some future government is the key to a continued free society.

Of course, political lefty radicals want more laws to legislate these types of personal gun making machines but I’d say to them, who thinks anybody is going to follow the law? Laws will not put the Genie back in the bottle and I would say they will be vastly ignored if they do create such legislation. After all, marijuana is illegal and political leftists have been ignoring those laws for decades. Why should gun owners obey laws just because some politician makes them up to protect their own power? By following the Constitution of our nation, the Second Amendment, and the First Amendment which protects the ability to exchange the knowledge of gun building from one person to another are critical to the continued success of the United States of America. Having a gun that has a serial number on it that the federal government can trace is not important to the right to own a gun to protect civilization from an out of control government. In a gun free world, history shows that governments often spin out of control and we’ve seen it in American culture as well as anywhere, so taking guns out of society and legislating them out of existence just isn’t a possibility. The more laws there are, the more innovation will arise to step around those laws. If there are more gun control laws centered around serial number registration than naturally the human thing to do would be to invent some way to step around the law. It’s that simple.

All my guns are registered, and I don’t worry about any federal government trouble at this time. My kind of president is in the White House and I feel good about where the nation is going. But I personally do have the ability to build every part of a gun from the ammunition to the most complex part of a gun and if society fails for sustained periods of time, I can see a real need to be able to manufacture my own guns from my home. Liberals want the American population to trust their government completely, but Austin Peterson has the right idea, gun ownership is the heart of our Constitution, it is at the heart of all civilized society. Guns aren’t defined by whether or not they have a serial number that shows they are officially recognized by the federal government, they just need to shoot straight, and not blow up in our hands. They need to be reliable, and we need to have them, that is all that is required. That is why the Ghost Gunner 2 is a wonderful invention and I am very inclined to get one just in case someday I may need it.

One of the most satisfying things I’ve done in a while was purchase my new Desert Eagle from Magnum Research. The gun wasn’t in stock, I had to wait for them to make a run through their shop to get the style that I selected. And they were very good to let me know the status along the way which I appreciated. I personally know well over 100 people who could machine a gun from a block of aluminum without even breaking a sweat. That’s why I was able to appreciate all the fine craftsmanship that went into my Desert Eagle. But if Magnum Research were to be regulated out of existence by politicians hell-bent on power, I would still get my gun. No law from some modern politicians trying to manipulate the Constitution is going to stop me from that. They can’t have it both ways, they can’t advocate law breaking (marijuana, and illegal immigration) then expect gun owners to follow the laws liberals like. Respect for the law is just what it is, and liberals have shown that they don’t respect the law, and that is a situation they made for themselves. And that is why we will make guns in our homes whether or not it is legal. So long as the Constitution says we have the right to bear arms, we will have them whether or not there are serial numbers to go with them, because it is that very government that we have an obligation to keep in check. And that is the ultimate law of the land. Without that we have nothing anyway.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Weaponized FBI: Who cares about any tapes Michael Cohen recorded on Trump

It was about midafternoon when I was in an important meeting and my phone started going off in a frenzy of alerts. Immediately I thought something was wrong thinking that someone was trying to text me an emergency. But I was relieved to find that it was just a bunch of notifications from Fox News, CNN and ABC News informing me that Michael Cohen had apparently recorded tapes between he and Donald Trump about paying off a Playboy model during the campaign. I kept reading the stories to see what could have possibly have provoked such a news response, but there was nothing more serious than that. I had to laugh that some editor out there thought this was a big story. As I have said many times, Donald Trump was the very definition of a Playboy. In his Apprentice years on NBC it wouldn’t surprise me if he had Playboy playmates in every town in the country begging to sleep with him. I’m honestly surprised there aren’t more women coming forward than there are. As a 72-year-old man now and a long marriage to Melania who I think has been key to settling down Trump and making his mind ripe for the White House, I think he has other things to think about besides being a playboy, so he is turning out to be a great president. Maybe not so much ten years earlier, but certainly is now.

It’s about as much of a nothing story as you could get yet there it was breaking like the world was coming to an end. Reporters were absolutely salivating at the potential that Trump’s former lawyer might turn on the president and reveal salacious details about some sexual encounter. This baffled me because logic said otherwise. Nobody cared about such things anymore, Bill Clinton saw to that. If anything, it would probably make Trump more popular with men and their wives who might just vote for him to fuel sexual fantasies of their own. These reporters were clearly grasping at straws hoping something might come along and soak up the news away from the other very serious issues happening, especially in regard to the FBI case in becoming weaponized in favor of a political candidate during the 2016 election. They keep saying that it was the Russians who committed all the crimes during the election but as it turned out it was the FBI under the apparent orders of the Obama White House who did all the election meddling, and they were caught. Now Trump was threatening to bring Russian President Putin to Washington D.C. in the fall pushing the media and the Deep State toward near insanity. So they floated this story about Trump being compromised by his former lawyer hoping to do something to derail the popular president from exposing that the Russian stories were giant nothing burgers.

The real problem had nothing to do with whether or not Cohen had secretly recorded tapes of Trump about a Playboy model, it’s that the same FBI that had committed election fraud against the Republican Party with outrageous meddling for which Lisa Page and Peter Strzok as FBI agents on Capitol Hill had just testified, that had broken into Cohen office and confiscated its contents to acquire anything that the Trump lawyer might have had, including compromising tapes. For me it’s not that the tapes might exist, it’s that they were stolen by the criminals who had tampered with the election of 2016 and that they were still weaponized and abusing the law to defend their own reputation by destroying the lives of the people around Trump to force the president to yield to their authority—which ultimately, he controls under the Executive Branch.

Of course, Michael Cohen doesn’t want to become the next General Flynn or Paul Manafort. The reason for the FBI raiding his office was to show Trump that the people around him would be squeezed until they coughed up compromising material on the president. The not so subtle implication was that the FBI had the power to destroy lives if they needed to, and they were going to get Trump one way or another. That was the only way that such tapes would be brought to the surface and leaked to the media to stop the Donald Trump presidency. That was the entire purpose of the Cohen office raid and that should piss off every American. Where was all this toughness from the FBI when Loretta Lynch was meeting Bill Clinton in a plane to cut a deal to have that same FBI not move forward with charges against his wife, Hillary Clinton over the email scandal? Where was that toughness when they picked through the computer of Carlos Danger—I mean Anthony Weiner—which contained classified information from Hillary Clinton herself while she had been Secretary of State under President Obama? Or what about the DNC rigging the election to put Hillary Clinton in the nomination for the Democrats over Bernie Sanders which we only knew about from leaked documents stolen by hackers? Where was the tough FBI in all those situations? Yet they can kick down the door of Michael Cohen and take his stuff looking for evidence against Trump, and they can make plea deals with the Podesta brothers to try to squeeze even further Paul Manafort into revealing something salacious on President Trump. Give me a break! And all they could come up with out of all that is that Trump might have paid some hush money to a Playboy model to keep controversy out of his presidential campaign that he might avoid. That the FBI and the media would think the Playboy story even had legs shows they have no idea what they are doing even with all the power they have to prosecute.

Two can certainly play at that game, imagine the secrets that we are uncovering moment by moment in the Uranium One deal or all the cash payments that were revealed under the Clinton Foundation? Think of all the cover ups involved just in the Benghazi case when the Obama administration tried to cover Hillary Clinton’s screwups in that terrorist attack by blaming everything on a filmmaker. There are enough stories of corruption between the FBI and the Democrats to make our skin crawl for centuries and all these stories will leak out for decades. I remember when I first heard the controversy that Franklin Roosevelt might have known that the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor and that he wanted the attack to happen so all the ships were parked in such a way at the harbor to make inviting targets. No carriers were in the harbor, they were all out to sea. The controversy goes that Roosevelt wanted to get American buy-in to the war which fulfilled his aims at confiscating American industry under his socialist fantasies, which is precisely what happened the moment that Japan bombed the military base in Hawaii. Compared to all these modern FBI stories, the Pearl Harbor case is small potatoes, yet it has dominated thoughts for most of a century. These FBI foils that centered around the 2016 election are much more severe and people won’t forget them. They will be talked about for many years as speculation drives millions of private investigations into the matter. Nobody will care about a Playboy model and her relationship to Trump. But they will care as to why the FBI broke into Cohen’s office to apply pressure to a president who truly wanted to change things in Washington D.C.

The Cohen office raid has angered me from day one, because it could happen to any of us. It was clearly inspired as a witch hunt to destroy Donald Trump by attacking the people around him in a desperate search for compromising information. If the FBI will do that to the president who is supposed to be in charge of the entire department, they won’t hesitate to do it to any of us. They are a weaponized organization that are paid for by our tax dollars to work against us. They aren’t our friends. It would be nice if we could trust them, but obviously we can’t. And that is the danger always in giving the government too much power in trade for security. When they control the law, not even lawyers are safe, or presidents of the United States, and that is a big problem.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.