This Is War—Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan Understood This, And Donald Trump Does Too

9 10 2019

  By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

God love him, Ronald Reagan destroyed the Soviet Union’s Evil Empire, and brought down Communism, and made the world safer for democracy—and the United States into the world’s preeminent and only superpower that it is today, with no peers.  Yet, he was maligned and hated from Day One; and the same forces that are seeking to destroy Donald Trump tried desperately to destroy Reagan’s presidency too.  Their appetites, and perpetual and insatiable thirst for blood, were whetted by having destroyed one conservative president, Richard Nixon.  Reagan was their next target; and Iran Contra was their preferred means of taking him down.  However, they failed.  Much to their everlasting contempt, disgust and dismay, Reagan is lionized today.

The script is repeating itself with Trump.  And there are RINOs in the GOP (or Republicans In Name Only), such as the despicable Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan—two losers, with respect to whom lots of us are ashamed of having voted for them—who are aligned with the Democrats’ efforts, and with those of other radical far-Leftists and their “fellow travelers” in the media.[2]  Clearly, this is a war, every bit as sinister as the prospects for war that Abraham Lincoln faced.  Yet he stood tall and faced down our enemies, foreign[3] and domestic[4], and it changed the course of America forever.[5]

There are reasons to believe that Donald Trump will follow Lincoln’s path, and prevail.  The “Pigs” of George Orwell’s Animal Farm are trying to take over, and subjugate all of the others animals—which are us—and they must be stopped . . . and yes, destroyed.[6]  They are a threat to our great Republic, and to our way of life.  Gregg Re and John Roberts have written at Fox News:

The White House outlined in a defiant eight-page letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and top Democrats on Tuesday why it will not participate in their “illegitimate and unconstitutional” impeachment inquiry, charging that the proceedings have run roughshod over congressional norms and the president’s due-process rights.

Trump administration officials called the letter, which was written by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and obtained by Fox News, perhaps the most historic letter the White House has sent. The document tees up a head-on collision with Democrats in Congress, who have fired off a slew of subpoenas in recent days concerning the president’s alleged effort to get Ukraine to investigate political foe Joe Biden during a July phone call with Ukraine’s leader.

“President Trump and his administration reject your baseless, unconstitutional efforts to overturn the democratic process,” the letter stated. “Your unprecedented actions have left the president with no choice. In order to fulfill his duties to the American people, the Constitution, the Executive Branch, and all future occupants of the Office of the Presidency, President Trump and his administration cannot participate in your partisan and unconstitutional inquiry under these circumstances.”

The document concluded: “The president has a country to lead. The American people elected him to do this job, and he remains focused on fulfilling his promises to the American people.”

Responding to the letter, Pelosi accused Trump of “trying to make lawlessness a virtue” and added, “The American people have already heard the President’s own words – ‘do us a favor, though.’” (That line, from a transcript of Trump’s call with Ukraine’s leader, in reality referred to Trump’s request for Ukraine to assist in an investigation into 2016 election interference, and did not relate to Biden.)

Pelosi continued: “This letter is manifestly wrong, and is simply another unlawful attempt to hide the facts of the Trump Administration’s brazen efforts to pressure foreign powers to intervene in the 2020 elections. … The White House should be warned that continued efforts to hide the truth of the President’s abuse of power from the American people will be regarded as further evidence of obstruction. Mr. President, you are not above the law. You will be held accountable.”

Substantively, the White House first noted in its letter that there has not been a formal vote in the House to open an impeachment inquiry — and that the news conference held by Pelosi last month was insufficient to commence the proceedings.

“In the history of our nation, the House of Representatives has never attempted to launch an impeachment inquiry against the president without a majority of the House taking political accountability for that decision by voting to authorize such a dramatic constitutional step,” the letter stated.

It continued: “Without waiting to see what was actually said on the call, a press conference was held announcing an ‘impeachment inquiry’ based on falsehoods and misinformation about the call.”

Despite Pelosi’s claim that there was no “House precedent that the whole House vote before proceeding with an impeachment inquiry,” several previous impeachment inquiries have been launched only by a full vote of the House — including the impeachment proceedings concerning former Presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.

White House officials told Fox News the vote opening the proceedings was a small ask, considering the implications of potentially overturning a national election.

The letter went on to note that “information has recently come to light that the whistleblower” who first flagged Trump’s call with Ukraine’s president “had contact with [House Intelligence Committee] Chairman [Adam] Schiff’s office before filing the complaint.”

And Schiff’s “initial denial of such contact caused The Washington Post to conclude that Chairman Schiff “clearly made a statement that was false,” the letter observed.

Multiple reports surfaced this week that the whistleblower had a prior “professional relationship” with one of the 2020 Democratic candidates for president. On Friday, lawyers for the whistleblower did not respond to questions from Fox News about the whistleblower’s possible previous relationship with any currently prominent Democrat.

The letter added: “In any event, the American people understand that Chairman Schiff cannot covertly assist with the submission of a complaint, mislead the public about his involvement, read a counterfeit version of the call to the American people, and then pretend to sit in judgment as a neutral ‘investigator.'”

The White House was dinging Schiff for reciting a fictional version of Trump’s call with Ukraine’s leader during a congressional hearing. Schiff later called his statements a “parody.”

“Perhaps the best evidence that there was no wrongdoing on the call is the fact that, after the actual record of the call was released, Chairman Schiff chose to concoct a false version of the call and to read his made-up transcript to the American people at a public hearing,” the letter stated. “The chairman’s action only further undermines the public’s confidence in the fairness of any inquiry before his committee.”

Ukraine’s president has said he felt Trump did nothing improper in their July call, and DOJ lawyers who reviewed the call said they found no laws had been broken. The White House released a transcript of the conversation last month, as well as the whistleblower’s complaint, which seemingly relied entirely on second-hand information.

Separately, the letter asserted multiple alleged violations of the president’s due-process rights. It noted that under current impeachment inquiry proceedings, Democrats were not allowing presidential or State Department counsel to be present.

Democrats’ procedures did not provide for the “disclosure of all evidence favorable to the president and all evidence bearing on the credibility of witnesses called to testify in the inquiry,” the letter noted, nor did the procedures afford the president “the right to see all evidence, to present evidence, to call witnesses, to have counsel present at all hearings, to cross-examine all witnesses, to make objections relating to the examination of witnesses or the admissibility of testimony and evidence, and to respond to evidence and testimony.”

Democrats also have not permitted Republicans in the minority to issue subpoenas, contradicting the “standard, bipartisan practice in all recent resolutions authorizing presidential impeachment inquiries.”

The letter claimed that House committees have “resorted to threats and intimidation against potential Executive Branch witnesses,” by raising the specter of obstruction of justice when administration employees seek to assert “long-established Executive Branch confidentiality interests and privileges in response to a request for a deposition.”

“Current and former State Department officials are duty bound to protect the confidentiality interests of the Executive Branch, and the Office of Legal Counsel has also recognized that it is unconstitutional to exclude agency counsel from participating in congressional depositions,” the letter stated.

Additionally, the letter noted that Democrats reportedly were planning to interview the whistleblower at the center of the impeachment inquiry at an undisclosed location — contrary, the White House said, to the constitutional notion of being able to confront one’s accuser.

According to a White House official, the bottom line was: “We are not participating in your illegitimate exercise. … If you are legitimately conducting oversight, let us know. But all indications are this is about impeachment.”

The document came as the White House aggressively has parried Democrats’ inquiry efforts. One of the administration’s first moves: the State Department on Tuesday barred Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, from appearing before a House panel conducting the probe into Trump.

“I would love to send Ambassador Sondland, a really good man and great American, to testify, but unfortunately he would be testifying before a totally compromised kangaroo court, where Republican’s rights have been taken away, and true facts are not allowed out for the public to see,” Trump tweeted.

The strategy risked further provoking Democrats in the impeachment probe, setting up court challenges and the potential for lawmakers to draw up an article of impeachment accusing Trump of obstructing their investigations. Schiff said Sondland’s no-show would be grounds for obstruction of justice and could give a preview of what some of the articles of impeachment against Trump would entail.

But, as lawmakers sought to amass ammunition to be used in an impeachment trial, the White House increasingly has signaled that all-out warfare was its best course of action.

“What they did to this country is unthinkable. It’s lucky that I’m the president. A lot of people said very few people could handle it. I sort of thrive on it,” Trump said Monday at the White House. “You can’t impeach a president for doing a great job. This is a scam.”

House Democrats, for their part, issued a new round of subpoenas on Monday, this time to Defense Secretary Mark Esper and acting White House budget director Russell Vought. Pelosi’s office also released an open letter signed by 90 former national security officials who served in administrations from both parties, voicing support for the whistleblower who raised concerns about Trump’s efforts to get Ukraine to look into Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine.

“A responsible whistleblower makes all Americans safer by ensuring that serious wrongdoing can be investigated and addressed, thus advancing the cause of national security to which we have devoted our careers,” they wrote. “Whatever one’s view of the matters discussed in the whistleblower’s complaint, all Americans should be united in demanding that all branches of our government and all outlets of our media protect this whistleblower and his or her identity. Simply put, he or she has done what our law demands; now he or she deserves our protection.”

The House Intelligence, Oversight and Foreign Affairs Committees were investigating Trump’s actions alleging he pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden and his son, potentially interfering in the 2020 election. The former vice president, for his part, has accused Trump of “frantically pushing flat-out lies, debunked conspiracy theories and smears against me.” And, Biden’s campaign has sought to have Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, who has accused Biden of possible corruption, removed from the airwaves.

Biden has acknowledged on camera that in spring 2016, when he was vice president and spearheading the Obama administration’s Ukraine policy, he successfully pressured Ukraine to fire top prosecutor Viktor Shokin. At the time, Shokin was investigating Burisma Holdings — where Hunter had a lucrative role on the board despite limited relevant expertise. Critics have suggested Hunter Biden’s salary bought access to Biden.

The vice president threatened to withhold $1 billion in critical U.S. aid if Shokin, who was widely accused of corruption, was not fired.

“Well, son of a b—h, he got fired,” Biden joked at a panel two years after leaving office.[7]

Bravo.  Never has an American president stood taller, to fight off the efforts of barbarians and to protect our great Republic, for future generations of Americans.  Lincoln did this.  Reagan did too.  And now Trump.  All were besieged from almost every quarter; and ultimately the great Lincoln paid with his life.  But the United States survived; and it will this time too.  The barbarians at our gates must be spurned and, yes, destroyed.  They have not left any other choices.

And the instigator of all of this—the un-American traitor, racist and anti-Semite, Barack Obama—should pay with his life for his sedition.[8]



© 2019, Timothy D. Naegele

[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see and He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g.,, and can be contacted directly at

[2]  See, e.g., (“The Totally-Despicable Mitt Romney: Shame”)

[3]  See; see also (“EMP Attack: Only 30 Million Americans Survive”) (see also the extensive comments beneath the article)  

[4]  See, e.g., (“Trump Can Ignore America’s Courts”)

[5]  See, e.g., (“Washington Is One Of The Sickest Cities On Earth”) and (“When Will The Actual Shooting Begin In America’s Second Civil War?”) and (“America’s Left Is Vile And Evil”) and (“Barack Obama Is Responsible For America’s Tragic Racial Divide”) and (“Is Putin Right?”) and (“The U.S. Supreme Court Is A Tragic, Pathetic Joke”) and (“The Democrats Are Evil But Smart, While The Republicans Are Neanderthals And Dumb”) and (“The Mueller Report: A Monumental Travesty”) and (“The American Left’s Feeding Frenzy”) and (“Should Barack Obama Be Executed For Treason?”) and (“Robert Mueller Should Be Executed For Treason”) and (“The Real Russian Conspiracy: Barack Obama, The Clintons, And The Sale Of America’s Uranium To Russia’s Killer Putin”) and (“America’s Newest Civil War: 2017 And Beyond”) and (“Clinton Fatigue”)

[6]  See (“Animal Farm“)

[7]  See (“White House announces it will not comply with ‘illegitimate and unconstitutional’ impeachment inquiry”)

[8]  See, e.g., (“Impeachment May Become The Singular Obsession In Washington, And Dominate News Coverage”) and (“Should Barack Obama Be Executed For Treason?”)



7 responses

9 10 2019

The barbarians at our gates must be spurned and, yes, destroyed. They have not left any other choices.



10 10 2019
Al Shute

Outstanding and very thought provoking article that real patriots of any persuasion need to read. People everywhere are alarmed by a sense of foreboding that this “coup” against the president, in the last week or so, this crazy behavior in Congress, crossed over some line, that’s hard to describe but which tells us that there’s a better chance than not that there is going to be a civil war. They will start it partly by design, but mostly by their being inept. When they start that war, obviously patriots will be happy to oblige them. In this war of theirs, they’ll have their asses decisively and thoroughly kicked, is very short order.


10 10 2019
Timothy D. Naegele

Thank you, Al, for your comments.

Yes, the Left and its “fellow travelers” have no conception of what a real war would be like. They ride in their Teslas, banning plastic straws, and pontificating about an America (or world) in which there are no airplanes, etc.

Their power has been cut off by PG&E in Northern California; and they are even whining about Barack Obama’s handling of the takeover of General Motors—that he didn’t turn it into a socialist “grand experiment.”

See (“Another Solution For General Motors: Nationalize It?”)

They may be taught lessons that they will never forget.



17 10 2019
Timothy D. Naegele

Woodward And Bernstein Are Dead, But Their Watergate Legacy Lives On [UPDATED]

Yes, they have not left this earthly realm yet, but what they did to our great nation and the presidency of Richard Nixon remains—and is deadly to our body politic. It surfaced during the Democrats’ efforts to destroy the presidency of Ronald Reagan, and it is resurfacing now with respect to the presidency of Donald Trump.

Woodward and Bernstein created a “gotcha” climate in American journalism, which destroyed any notions of objective reporting and fairness. Conrad Black—the Canadian-born, British former newspaper publisher, author and life peer—has described the situation as follows in The New York Sun:

We are living through a phantasmagoric psychodrama generated by the dishonest national political press. This is the press whose Joe Scarborough of MSNBC did not show some of President Trump’s responses to his enemies because of “concern” for the president’s family, as he “seems to have lost his mind.”

This is a new frontier in American journalism, where a television news commentator who hates the president wishes to spare the president’s family a rerun of his entirely rational denunciations of his enemies.

The House of Representatives began considering impeachment because an anonymous Democrat and former political associate of Vice President Biden received a hearsay account of a conversation between President Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, in which Mr. Trump encouraged the newly elected leader to find out if Mr. Biden and his son had done anything inappropriate in Ukraine. The president quickly made the transcript of the conversation public.

Partisan Democrats and formerly sensible commentators have portrayed Mr. Trump’s request as a demand for incriminating evidence on Mr. Biden, failing which he would not resume U.S. aid to Ukraine. In other words, this was a solicitation for a benefit of value to Mr. Trump’s 2020 reelection campaign. The reference to a resumption of aid was 500 words earlier in the transcript, and not connected at all to the Biden question.

When Mr. Biden was mentioned, it was to request to know what happened — a neutral request for the facts. Yes, Mr. Trump said the appearance of the former vice president’s son $50,000-a-month sinecure as a director of a Ukrainian gas company, along with the elder Biden’s boast of having a Ukrainian prosecutor fired, was “horrible.” And so it was. But there may be uncontroversial explanations. If the Biden allegations are unfounded, Americans will want to know. If the facts are corrupt in themselves, Americans — and Democrats especially — will want to know that, too.

In reality, the whole episode is nonsense, a farce. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi won’t hold a vote on a formal impeachment inquiry because she couldn’t win the vote. If there were such an inquiry, where the Republicans called and examined witnesses and subpoenaed documents, it would collapse as quickly as the Russian collusion fraud did when former special counsel Robert Mueller stumbled through his congressional inquiry.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff — who is usually lying when his lips aren’t moving and always is when they are — says we will not be hearing from a non-whistleblowing leaker, to give his hearsay evidence of a conversation that any person in the world can read and see has no legal implications whatever. But the investigation indomitably continues. It is like the last government of the German Third Reich, meeting in the week following the death of Hitler on the few thousand acres they still governed on the Danish border, discussing agriculture and immigration.

With no evidence of wrongdoing by the president, the Trump-hating press is now scrambling after Rudolph Giuliani, formerly one of the nation’s toughest prosecutors, as if they can pin something on him while he acted as the president’s private attorney. With Hunter Biden in hiding, this ludicrous mockery must end. Pompous commentators who don’t like Mr. Trump but have learned to live with their underestimation of him cannot go on indefinitely with wagging heads and furrowed foreheads, discussing the president’s “crisis.”

Fox News, which is generally well-disposed to the president, published a poll last week that 51% of Americans believe the president should be impeached and removed from office.

Fox’s polls aren’t very accurate, though their news coverage and comment are quite professional. But this one is bunk. Between 40% and 50% of Americans may wish there were a reason to remove Mr. Trump, or hope that he won’t be reelected. That figure is insufficient to change congressional votes on an impeachment resolution, given that about 45% of the country is militantly pro-Trump and probably 10 million others will hold their noses and vote for his substantive performance despite his stylistic foibles.

But a substantial part of the anti-Trump vote is a levitation, sustained by the unprecedented hostility and dishonesty of almost all the national political press, which has been confirmed in independent studies by Harvard University and the Pew Research Center and others.

Not all the hostile press is shrill. My rational and moderate friend of many years, Fareed Zakaria of CNN, wrote in the Santa Cruz Sentinel on October 11 that he now favors “an impeachment inquiry” because Mr.Trump’s “efforts to pressure the new Ukrainian government, including his phone call with President Volodymyr Zelensky, were profoundly wrong;” and because of Trump’s “far more troubling . . . refusal to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry.”

Implicit in this explanation is the retreat away from the Trump-Zelensky telephone call, which is effectively conceded not to be probative evidence of any impropriety. Instead, Democrats are returning to the justification that impeachment is warranted based upon unspecified, unimaginable, and surely nonexistent evidence of presidential misconduct. The pitiful squeak that is meant to be a clinching argument is Mr. Trump’s refusal to cooperate with an impeachment inquiry based on an illusion.

The Democrats are stuck with this clunker. Maybe Speaker Pelosi wanted to humiliate the young Marxist congresswomen and Mr. Schiff and the porcine Jerry Nadler, who chairs the House judiciary committee. Maybe she wanted to get this out of the way now before it caused the Democrats more embarrassment, and before the long-awaited indictments of a number of prominent members of the previous administration for its unconstitutional confection and promotion of the Trump-Russian collusion fraud.

It is not for me to read Mrs. Pelosi’s mind, but she must have had some reason to let this anemic, spavined cat out of the bag. But this cat can’t purr and has no whiskers, let alone claws. In Monty Pythonese, “It’s a dead Cat!” (and it won’t even bounce).

The Democrats’ presidential nomination candidates are a rag-tag of extremists, kooks, dolts, and bumbling geriatrics, (Hillary Clinton was back last week with her autocue squib that Mr. Trump’s “an illegitimate president”). But it is a national party because it has tens of millions of traditional supporters who are reasonable people. Their aversion to Trump enabled most of them to endure the bone-crushing defeat over the Russian fiction.

The allegation a few weeks ago of a 30-year-old act of sexual misconduct by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, which had most of the candidates screaming for his impeachment in the 24 hours before it was exposed as a completely unfounded charge, must have caused unease to many thoughtful Democrats.

But when this stinker implodes, after they have got the faithful to the edges of their chairs and exhumed John Dean and Carl Bernstein, the bloodless assassins of Richard Nixon, and the full gallery of their unctuous homelists and pietists who demean the occupation of commentator, sensible Democrats will disembark. The best way Democrats can serve their party now is to try to get a plausible semi-moderate like Senator Klobuchar of Minnesota, no world-beater but Walter Mondale in drag-she can lose with honor and dignity, and turn off the CNN-MSNBC-main network hate machine.

Mr. Trump can’t be removed from his office; he deserves and will gain reelection on his record; the Democrats will be back — both parties always are. But the sooner the country tunes out this dishonest, evil press putschism, the better for the whole country, especially the national political news outlets themselves.

See (“Impeachment Becomes A Psychodrama Of the Press“) (emphasis added)

Lots of us began as Democrats, but will never vote for one again. Lots of us began by watching the network of choice for Bob Woodward and Berstein, CNN, but we tuned it out long ago too, about the time that Donald Trump began his quest for the presidency. CNN adopted a “get Trump” policy that has permeated virtually all of its political news reporting. And it has spread to all of the so-called “mainstream media” or FAKE NEWS.

. . .

As political pundit Dick Morris underscores, impeachment is illegitimate—illegal—without a House vote. But when did the law matter to Barack Obama and the rest of his far-Leftist traitors, and their despicable FAKE NEWS cohorts?

See (“Impeachment Is Illegitimate Without A House Vote“)

. . .

Lastly, Americans of all political persuasions need to stop and reflect on the damage that is being done to our great nation by the concerted efforts to destroy the Trump presidency. Those participating are aiding and abetting our enemies, which include China, Russia, North Korea, and the other “Bad Guys” and terrorist organizations around the globe.

A perfect example of the Left’s obsession is set forth in the following article. If we have been weakened in any respect regarding our dealings with friends and foes alike, it is because of the Left’s unceasing efforts to destroy Donald Trump.

And the person who set all of this in motion is none other than the racist, un-American anti-Semite Barack Obama, who should spend the rest of his life in prison, at the very least, for sedition.

See (“Our Commander in Chief is a Petulant Little Child, and the Bad Guys of the World Have His Number“); see also (“Should Barack Obama Be Executed For Treason?“)


24 10 2019
Timothy D. Naegele

7 In 10 Americans Say U.S. On The Edge Of Civil War

Paul Bedard has written in the Washington Examiner:

Partisan political division and the resulting incivility has reached a low in America, with 67% believing that the nation is nearing civil war, according to a new national survey.

“The majority of Americans believe that we are two-thirds of the way to being on the edge of civil war. That to me is a very pessimistic place,” said Mo Elleithee, the executive director of Georgetown University’s Institute of Politics and Public Service.

And worse, he said in announcing the results of the Institute’s Battleground Poll civility survey, the political division is likely to make the upcoming 2020 presidential race the nastiest in modern history.

Highlighting findings that show voters angered with compromise and growing unfavorable ratings of President Trump and most 2020 Democratic presidential candidates, he said the poll “paints a scenario, a picture of a highly negative campaign that will continue to exacerbate the incivility in our public discourse.”

He added, “It will be a sort of race to the bottom, or has the potential to be a race to the bottom.”

The Civility Poll is an offshoot of the famous bipartisan Battleground Poll conducted by Democratic pollster Celinda Lake of Lake Research Partners and Ed Goeas of the Tarrance Group.

While it found that 87% are frustrated with the rudeness in politics today, it also revealed that the public really isn’t interested in traditional compromise. For example, a nearly equal 84% said that they are “tired of leaders compromising my values and ideals.”

Elleithee explained, “It seems to me what they’re saying is, ‘I believe in common ground, it’s just that common ground is where I’m standing. As soon you move over to where I am, we’ll be on common ground.’”

Goeas pointed to the poor favorable ratings of presidential candidates and said that 2020 may be a rare race between candidates that less than half the country likes.

“There is going to be a large body of voters who dislike both of them, and that’s going to be the swing vote in the election, which means it dictates the kind of campaign that’s run,” he said.

Lake agreed that the national division is widening. “There is relative consensus that divisions in this country are getting worse,” she said in her memo accompanying the survey released Tuesday.

Both pollsters noted that the public blames social media, the news media, and President Trump for the growing division.

But Goeas, not a fan of the president’s, said he believes that Trump didn’t start the rudeness in today’s politics. “He is a symptom of where we are, not ‘the’ disease,” he said, adding, “One of the things that I have focused on as we have gone into this death spiral of incivility in the country, that we had to be at a certain point for Trump to become acceptable.”

The poll backs that up. It found that 84% believe that “behavior that used to be seen as unacceptable is now accepted as normal behavior.”

See (“Battleground: 7 in 10 say US ‘on the edge of civil war’”) (emphasis added: screenshots and tweets omitted)


24 10 2019
H. Craig Bradley


I think its more about the range of topical divisions within the population (body politic). More than ever, you can not openly voice political views or opinions that go against the narrative presented by the (Liberal) media. The predominant views of the State you live in determine the kind of consensus one should expect, be it towards the Left or Right.

You need to emulate that regional bias or keep quiet to avoid possible conflicts or confrontations. Essentially, many Americans find themselves having less and less common ground with their fellow citizens or even neighbors. Growing incivility is mainly due fewer well-rounded, informed voters. Everyday stresses and financial concerns have resulted in a population that is often tightly sprung and therefore, predisposed to “go-off ” over seemingly little things. Ubiquitous “road rage” is a symptom of modern living and has become so common place we just ignore it in most cases.

For brevity and efficiency, we often boil down complex issues into simpler sound bites or concepts such as Us vs. Them or Liberal vs. Conservative and then start shouting if you disagree. Indeed, thoughtful discussions about events and public policy have become very rare indeed. We just don’t want to bother with the tedious process of persuading and instead want to jump to the conclusion and dictate. Everyone is a (little) potentate these days, it appears.

If a civil war were to actually happen, it will be because the various differences between groups of individuals got way too personal. The low I.Q. components are prone to emote and on occasion, become bad actors. These morons are given full press, as if to set an example as to what others should be doing or saying. The activist class can “organize” these clowns and incite them to cause trouble on the street at particular times and places.

Glenn Beck referred to this strategy as “Top Down, Bottom Up” in which elected officials push policy down the throats of everyone and then organizers on the street push back, catching the middle class in-between and forcing hard positions.

Middle Class suburban homeowners usually prefer a low profile and tend to keep to themselves and are not inclined to run around stirring-up trouble. If trouble happens for any reason, its because it came to them, as nobody I know is out there, looking for a fight, as yet. We hide to avoid the possibility of any confrontations. In the long run, the commonplace Passive-Resistive approach may not be the most effective coping strategy.


24 10 2019
Timothy D. Naegele

Thank you, Craig, for your comments. They certainly represent one point of view.

As I wrote in my latest article:

Americans have not given up on democracy at all. While many are at odds with their fellow citizens about the direction that our great nation should take, they are exercising their rights of free speech dramatically, for an often-troubled world to see. Is it a pretty sight? Is democracy in action an edifying experience? Not always, but it is a sign that our great democracy is functioning.

See (“Is Democracy A Dying Species?”)

Fewer Americans are willing to “run and hide.” Regardless of their political perspectives, many/most are moving in the direction of not “cowering” anymore, or remaining silent. Richard Nixon referred to them as the “Silent Majority,” while others have referred to them as the residents of the “Flyover States.”

To them, enough is enough. They have had it . . . even in states like California.

They are awake, and ready for whatever comes next. And yes, they represent members of our military, law enforcement, and vast numbers of Americans who control an estimated 300 million guns, and they know how to use them. They have had their fill of Antifa and other thugs.

See, e.g., (“7 In 10 Americans Say U.S. On The Edge Of Civil War”)

They are determined to “take back their country,”and make no mistake about it, Donald Trump is their leader—not the spineless, weak members of the GOP, or America’s Left and far-Left, or its so-called “mainstream media” that they have tuned out completely.


What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: