The Myth of the J6 Coup

posted by Blaine L. Pardoe at American Thinker 

We all hear the talking points of the left regarding President Trump. He’s going to end democracy… there will never be a free election again, he will arrest the media, and there will be retribution against his enemies; the list of his alleged evil deeds is almost endless. 

Do these actually hold water?

Seizing control of the US government is no simple task. In writing Blue Dawn, I had to go over a number of coup scenarios for the book.  The biggest challenge is that to seize control, you must have complacency or support of the military and the means to still have a functioning government; all the while avoiding the consequences of the law. 

Those who claim that January 6th was an insurrection fail to explain how, in any scenario, Donald Trump would have been able to seize and hold power. Even if this fantasy is played out, and the trespassers had rounded up Congress and had had him certified as the winner of the election, they would have simply reversed that vote the moment they were free. Impeachment would have been a slam dunk if that had been the plan. In reality, it was a protest that got out of hand, resulting in the tragic death of a single person, a protester.

Let’s play out the fiction of January 6th with a scenario where the full House and Senate were rendered unable to fulfill their duties after the intrusion in the Capitol, i.e, they were killed. If that had happened, processes exist to replace those roles in every state. Eventually the vote would have been reversed. In the short term, it would provide a false sense of legitimacy to an overthrow of the government.

The Supreme Court would have been engaged on the matter on an emergency basis. If the Supreme Court were not negated, they would be compelled to take legal action. Trump would have moved on the court. Reminder: this didn’t happen at all on January 6th.

Nixon contemplated having the 101st Airborne and local Marine troops surround the White House should he be impeached. If Trump considered this action, chances are he would have been met by Pentagon leadership that would have refused his orders as illegal and unjust. Some commands might follow Trump’s orders but in fairness, most would not.

For someone to overthrow the government, they must have and maintain the support of the masses. Remember, a significant percentage of his own party hated Trump and worked against him. If he broke countless laws to seize power, there would be rally cries from both sides of the aisle to remove him.

Would the vast machine of the federal government continue to operate if there had been a coup? No. Trump’s calls to “drain the swamp” would have led much of the federal government to shut down. The reality is most Americans wouldn’t care or notice if the federal government were to walk off their jobs. There are exceptions though.  Once checks stopped coming out of Washington D.C. for things like Social Security, there would be a massive wave of pressure to remove any tyrant in office.

Playing this out further, assuming that through craftiness, he managed to stop a popular uprising in the nation to oust him, how long could he hold on to power? Chances are it would be days at best. Unless a coup d’état were horrifically bloody and wiped out the other two pillars of American government, it would be next to impossible to maintain control singlehandedly as Chief Executive. World outrage would be sparked even among allies. Calls to form a government in exile would have followed.  Control would wane each hour.  

The pinnacle of Trump’s power in life was when he actually was the President. If he wanted to “end democracy,” the time to do so was when he was at the peak of his power. In fact, peacefully turning over power, Trump made any of these fanciful speculations, obsolete and the stuff of fiction. Why return to the status of a private citizen and have to run for reelection when you were already the Chief Executive? Why risk losing an election a second time around?

The myth of Trump’s dictatorship does not hold water and never has. It was never about him actually doing it. The reason it exists is fear. It generates anxiety in voters; a sense of dread designed to alter their votes. It is a propaganda tool designed to influence the election, nothing more.

On the Fringe, Red Pill News, and more- May 25

 

Tyranny by Any Other Name Still Stinks

posted by J.B. Shurk at American Thinker 

Tyranny takes hold when good people are lulled into inaction.  Those of us who mind our own business and prefer government to leave us alone are particularly prone to falling into this trap.  Because we have no use for government, we hope government will have no use for us.  So we are silent while evil grows far from our homes.  We tend to our basic comforts and ignore evil as it nears.  And, eventually, we even collaborate with evil in order to avoid making a public scene.  In an effort to “get by” without causing too many waves, tyranny’s waves grow bigger and stronger until they crash upon our homes.  By then, it is too late to batten down the hatches.  Evil has already broken through our doors.

I had hoped that we would have more time.  That must be the common sentiment shared by every generation grappling with what comes next.  I had hoped that the sheer destruction of the twentieth century would be enough to buy us many more decades of relative peace.  Regrettably, two world wars and a nuclear-tipped Cold War did nothing to temper governments’ lust for power or their financial backers’ lust for wealth.  WWI’s clash of empires should have discouraged the growth of trigger-happy alliances and endless conquest.  The evil unleashed by WWII’s totalitarian regimes should have discouraged the growth of centralized institutions and vast, unaccountable, “just following orders” bureaucracies.  Instead, military alliances, central banks, international governing bodies, administrative Leviathans, and trade organizations have accumulated more power today than at any other time in history.  The twenty-first century is the century of empire-building and totalitarianism, and unless ordinary people rein in the excesses of their own governments, the mass destruction that follows will make the first two world wars look like measly hors d’oeuvres.

Can it be done?  Can global bloodshed be averted?  Can Western nations be saved before they devolve into hotbeds of revolution and civil war?  Or do the mounting conflicts all around us signify that we are already too late?  The answers to those questions depend, in part, on whether regular citizens sufficiently resist being used as cannon fodder in the years ahead and whether global leaders sufficiently fear losing everything they now have.  Had the great monarchies of Europe understood that WWI would facilitate their demise, perhaps they would have been more hesitant to allow a tangled web of military alliances to decide their fate.  Chasing honor and glory led European nobles straight to their graves.  Had Mussolini, Hitler, and Tojo known that they would die shamefully, perhaps their thirst for empire could have been quenched.  Lord Acton’s famous observation deserves a corollary: those who seek absolute power must be destroyed absolutely.

One of the peculiarities of our own time is that so many people remain blind to the totalitarianism growing and spreading around them.  Western governments have seized the authority to tell us what is true and what must be censored as harmful “disinformation.”  They openly spy on our phone calls, read our emails, record every Internet search and keyboard click on our computers, and monitor our social media conversations.  They tell us which “politically correct” words we must use and which words are outlawed for inciting “hate.”  They have criminalized reading from parts of the Bible or acting with religious conviction.  They insist on manipulating the value of money and rigging markets in ways that confiscate the meager savings of the have-nots and further enrich the well-to-do.  Corporations and government ministers work together to spread the same propaganda.  Mainstream news media operate as compliant mouthpieces for the State.  Banks discriminate against customers due to their personal beliefs.  Companies fire employees for not being sufficiently “woke.”  Prosecutors contort statutes into weapons that can be used to punish innocent people for their political speech. Westerners have no need to learn about the rise of totalitarianism from dusty history books describing the decades between WWI and WWII.  It thrives right outside our windows.  Hell, it operates on every piece of technology with a camera or microphone already inside our homes.

Totalitarianism has triumphed under the guise of “progress.”  Behind every shiny new toy’s discreet surveillance of our private lives is a steroid-induced, rage-filled strongman working not-so-secretly to enslave us.  Would you like to safeguard your most intimate photographs?  All you have to do is upload them to a magical cloud.  The corporations entrusted with your valuable secrets promise to respect your privacy.  Would you like your automobile to provide real-time traffic alerts?  Then just tap, “yes,” when the geolocation satellite system seeks to track your movements.  Would you prefer the ease of buying convenience store items with a wave of your hand?  Then please allow your Obamacare government doctor to insert a computer chip under your skin, so that the Federal Reserve can track how you use its central bank digital currency.  Technological convenience is the gateway drug to universal surveillance.  And universal surveillance is an iron fist in a velvet glove demanding compliance.

Western governments learned nothing from global war, famine, economic depression, or State-sponsored genocide except how to hide their worst impulses inside the glittery wrappers of Orwellian language.  How many times have we heard unaccountable functionaries from the United Nations, the Bank for International Settlements, or the World Health Organization claim to be acting on the public’s behalf?  Yet regular people have no control over these immensely powerful organizations.  The UN, BIS, and WHO are elitist institutions that cater to other elites.  There is no way for an average Joe or Jane to influence their policy decisions, even when those decisions regulate the most personal details of an individual’s life.  There is nothing remotely “democratic” or “representative” about self-described “experts” using their powers to coerce ordinary people into submission. 

How many times have we heard U.S. State Department officials, Canadian politicians, U.K. prime ministers, NATO strategists, or European Union talking heads lecture citizens about the need for Western “democracies” to fight “authoritarian” regimes?  Yet Western governments were every bit as authoritarian during the “Reign of COVID Terror” as the authoritarian States that they denounce.  Communist China implemented the most draconian COVID lockdowns in the world — incarcerating entire cities with scarce supplies of food and “disappearing” those who dared to resist — and Western governments not only applauded China’s brutal despotism but also attempted to replicate its evil machinery throughout the West.  Even more perplexing, the same Western “democracies” that routinely demonize Russia as an authoritarian boogeyman that must be destroyed nevertheless enrich communist China with lucrative trade deals and shower Chinese tyrants with obsequious displays of respect.  Could it be that Western leaders are perfectly happy with authoritarianism so long as they are the authorities making money and maintaining total political control?  Their hypocritical actions speak for themselves.

Communism, fascism, Nazism, Maoism, socialism — it doesn’t matter what it’s called.  To butcher Shakespeare’s Juliet: Tyranny by any other name still stinks.  All forms of collectivism are inherently totalitarian.  They are unsustainable without violence and eventually survive on force alone.  So-called “anti-fascists” are the most fascist street thugs operating today; they use billionaire donations to fund domestic terrorism that is meant to intimidate civilians into complying with the wishes of wealthy elites who already control the levers of government.  If Antifa members were really anti-fascist, they would beat up themselves.

The prudent way to understand our volatile times is to recognize them as the opening battles in an incipient war between government totalitarians and staunch defenders of human liberty.  What is globalism, after all, if not a system for maximizing the coercive power of a small number of international elites while denying citizens inalienable rights and freedoms?  Everything else is a calculated distraction.

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

'Civil War': I Saw It, So You Don't Have To

Jim Thompson reporting for RedState 

A movie my wife had no interest in seeing (she's smarter than me) was “Civil War.” She was out of town for a week, so I decided to go see it myself. 

It had been in the theater for about two weeks at that point. I was one of three people in the theater. I don’t know what I expected, but I think I got what I deserved “good and hard.” The plot wasn’t about a second American civil war. The plot was a back massage of journalists. And a subplot seems to be “Orange Man Bad.” 

The film opens with Nick Offerman playing a Trumpy “third-term” president. Trumpy intones that “victory is at hand” and "Some are already calling it the greatest victory in the history of mankind.” Even Politico recognized the "Trumpy" allegory. 

There is no explanation for how a Trumpy president managed to stay in office for a “third term,” but I think that was the filmmaker’s point: There is no "point" to a Trumpy presidency. 

Kirsten Dunst is the star of the film. She’s fearless. She is a weathered war journalist. She’s snapping photos of a New York protest when a bomb explodes, killing dozens of cops and bystanders. There is no explanation as to why anyone would suicide bomb a New York protest. Dunst is uninjured while she documents the carnage. What’s the point of the bomb? There is no point. It’s just the first back massage for photojournalists risking life and limb to document war.

The next scene has Dunst and her colleagues in a New York hotel bar chatting each other up and preparing for an interview of “third-term” Trumpy. They leave the next morning. The crew of four pile into a car and take off for Washington, D.C. 

They pass through scenes of bodies hanging from bridges and suburbs with sprinklers watering lawns. They go "shopping" in a store and tell the clerk that "there's a pretty huge civil war going on." The clerk doesn't care. What’s the point? I don’t know. 

Within hours, they are stopping for gas. Washington, D.C., is 240 miles away, but they need gas? No thought to topping off in New York? No full extra cans of gas? Nope. 

They pull into a “gas station” that looks like a parody of “Deliverance.” The only thing missing was an inbred kid playing a banjo. Horror film characters are Einsteins compared to this crew. Sadists are torturing two men in an adjacent field by hanging them like sides of beef. Dunst and her young protégé convince a sadist to pose with the dying men. The young photographer is using a film camera. Apparently, she can drop off her film at Walmart for developing? What’s the point? I don’t know. 

A sniper is sniping random people. He’s killed by another snipe. What’s the point? There isn’t one. 

The film’s trailer scene is next. A white dude wearing ruby shooting glasses is standing close to a pile of POC bodies in the back of a truck. He asks: “What kind of American are you?” Wrong answer. He kills two POC journalists. One of the journalists saves the day by running over Ruby Glasses and his sadist buddy. But the journalist takes a bullet in the side and later dies.  

Skip to the final battle for D.C. The Lincoln Memorial is blown up with a shoulder-fired rocket. The “First Lady” tries to escape the White House. Her car is blasted, and she’s executed when she steps out. Inside the White House, part of the Special Forces “Western Alliance” team enters the walled-off White House. The team includes a short black woman. Why? Most of the film is devoid of live POC, so [insert black SpecOps woman]. The Western Alliance soldiers intend to find and execute “Trumpy.” Dunst is with the Special Ops guys as they kill everyone in their path. Dunst sees a Secret Service agent point his weapon at the protégé. She jumps in front of her. Dunst’s character dies to save someone she had met two days before. Brave journalists.  

Trumpy is found. He begs for his life to no avail. He’s executed. 

Dead Trumpy is photographed by the remaining brave photojournalist.   

Who liked this movie? Mostly liberals. Who went to see this mess? Mostly people who wanted to see a Trumpy president get executed. 

What is my point? I saw "Civil War," so you don’t have to. 

U.S. Forced to Take Action As Hamas Continues Attacking Gaza Pier

Spencer Brown reporting for Townhall 

The U.S.-built temporary "humanitarian pier" on Gaza's Mediterranean coast — announced by President Joe Biden in his March State of the Union address and completed last week — has quickly turned into a chaotic, dangerous place. 

In addition to American troops injured in non-combat accidents, the pier is not moving aid to residents in the enclave at the level hyped by Pentagon officials. Earlier this week, the Department of Defense said that none of the hundreds of metric tons of aid delivered across the pier to Gaza had made it to Gazans. 

Even worse, the pier has been the target of attacks by terrorists in Gaza — and now defensive U.S. weapons are being activated to protect the floating aid delivery platform.

In April, terrorists launched a mortar attack on the marshaling area where the pier connects to land in the Gaza Strip during its construction. The mortar caused minimal damage and the Washington Post said U.S. servicemembers weren't in harm's way — a generous assessment given American troop's presence immediately adjacent to a war zone filled with terrorists who'd celebrate a successful hit on a U.S. target — but it highlighted the shortsightedness of Biden's plan. 

Now that the pier's construction is complete, American C-RAM systems to intercept incoming fire have been set up because Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and other Iran-backed terrorists continue to attack humanitarian aid — not that pro-terrorist voices would admit the inconvenient truth that terrorists are the ones disrupting aid delivery. 

The U.S. pier is not the only entry point for humanitarian aid being attacked by terrorists. On Thursday, the Kerem Shalom border crossing between Israel and Gaza near Rafah was attacked by Hamas for the fourth time this month following attacks on May 5, 9, and 12. The first attack killed four IDF soldiers. 

At Kerem Shalom, "hundreds of trucks continue to cross into Gaza daily to provide humanitarian aid to Gazans," noted Foundation for Defense of Democracy (FDD) Adjunct Fellow Seth Frantzman of the crossing. "This is important as the IDF expands operations in Rafah and in northern Gaza. The aid provides for Gazan civilians even as Hamas terrorists continue to target the aid crossing," he added. 

Joe Truzman, the senior research analyst at FDD's Long War Journal, emphasized the fact that "Hamas attacks on locations that facilitate aid to the people of Gaza continue because international pressure has failed to prevent the terrorists from doing so. Meanwhile, Israeli military operations in the Rafah area have so far failed to stop Hamas from firing on Kerem Shalom," a "crucial hub" for humanitarian aid distribution in Gaza.

CONFIRMED: Hunter Biden's 'Laptop From Hell' Is Authentic and Will Be Trial Evidence, Per Special Counsel

Ward Clark reporting for RedState 

Federal prosecutors on Hunter Biden's illegal gun purchase case will now be using a wealth of information taken from Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop in the First Son's upcoming trial - and over the objections of Hunter's attorneys, Special Prosecutor David Weiss told Judge Maryellen Norieka that the laptop is authentic and he can prove it. Hunter Biden's past may be — finally — about to catch up with him.

Federal prosecutors plan to deploy thousands of pages of electronic records from first son Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell” and other technology — including a message demanding more “chore boy” to smoke crack cocaine, court papers show.

President Biden’s 54-year-old son goes on trial June 3 in the Delaware federal case accusing him of illegally owning a gun while addicted to drugs and prosecutors in special counsel David Weiss’ office have said they plan to show damning evidence taken from the laptop, a hard drive and an iCloud account linked to his iPad and iPhone XR.

In all, the feds say, they have more than 18,000 pages of Biden’s electronic records which they want to summarize in a chart for jurors.

Here's an example of Hunter's own words from the "laptop from Hell":

One message says, “I need more chore boy,” according to court papers filed by prosecutors on Wednesday.

Hunter's team is preparing objections:

Hunter’s team also said they should be allowed to object to some of the laptop evidence being shown, claiming the hard drive was hacked and the incriminating evidence was planted there.

But prosecutors say they would be able to corroborate and prove the digital evidence they plan to show is authentic and taken from Biden’s own devices.

Weiss’ prosecutors also want to include messages between Hunter and “Witness 3,” previously identified by The Post as his sister-in-law-turned-lover Hallie Biden, that were sent to and from the phone of Hunter’s ex-wife Kathleen Buhle and thus “not synced to his iCloud account.”

Hunter Biden is currently preparing to stand trial on charges of illegal purchase and possession of a .38 caliber Colt revolver, which was later illegally ditched by Hallie Biden.

If the prosecutors can establish the veracity of the information on the laptop, the information presented is pretty damning. Using the defendant's own words against him would be a strong case against the First Son and his alleged illegal purchase; not only that, but any information on the laptop, if similarly verified, will be valuable in a host of other investigations, such as the Biden family's business dealings in China and Ukraine.

The evidence cited directly documents, in Hunter's own words, his ongoing drug use. All legal firearms purchases from licensed dealers require the completion of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) Form 4473, which includes a required answer to part 11e:

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?

Hunter answered in the negative; the records from his laptop appear to show otherwise, as they document his ongoing drug use. The purchase of a firearm after making a false statement on Form 4473 is a federal crime.

It's unclear whether Hunter's problems could have any effect on the November election — he is not, after all, the candidate — but it certainly isn't helping his father's re-election efforts.

Hunter Biden is also facing tax evasion charges in an unrelated California case.

The Most Dangerous Part Of The NYT Alito Flag Meltdown Is The Politicization Of Patriotism

The New York Times is convinced an iconic banner of American patriotism is an emblem of extremism. It isn’t.

Tristan Justice reporting for The Federalist

On Tuesday, the Times published another smear piece on Justice Samuel Alito to indict the conservative judge as a partisan ideologue corrupted by far-right politics. The evidence presented to suggest Justice Alito is a right-wing provocateur incapable of serving as an impartial jurist? An “Appeal to Heaven” flag, also known as the Pine Tree flag, with historical roots in the American Revolution, flew outside his New Jersey home on Long Beach Island last summer.

“Last summer, two years after an upside-down American flag was flown outside the Virginia home of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., another provocative symbol was displayed at his vacation house in New Jersey,” the Times reported. “This time, it was the ‘Appeal to Heaven’ flag, which, like the inverted U.S. flag, was carried by rioters at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.”

Ah, yes. The flag is considered a symbol of extremism now because a few people carried the flag to the Capitol for an hours-long demonstration three years ago. If only The New York Times applied the same rules to the militant anarchists who terrorized the nation in 2020 under rainbow banners of identity politics.

Will The New York Times publish a follow-up story chronicling the extremism on display at congressional offices hanging the “progress pride flag?” What about at the State Department? Or K-12 classrooms? Should the generic rainbow pride flag be considered a symbol of virulent extremism?

No, even if some who drape themselves in the colors act increasingly extreme. The media, however, have a toxic habit of tying the masses to the loudest voices who’ve embraced their respective banners, whether it be a couple of crazy teachers obsessed with virtue signaling or a group of wannabe revolutionaries on Jan. 6.

According to The New York Times, the fabricated flag debacle now drawing hysterical headlines across the corporate press demands Justice Alito recuse himself from several high-profile cases central to thwarting Donald Trump’s third bid for the White House. Last week, the Times published a separate story highlighting an upside-down flag signaling a nation in distress three years ago amid the turbulent month of President Joe Biden’s inauguration.

The manipulated flag, however, was flown by Alito’s wife following an argument with a neighbor over a profane anti-Trump sign, and there is no evidence to the contrary. Even if the justice had hung the flag himself, it would be no grounds for recusal. Still, the most dangerous aspect of the New York Times’ latest flag hysteria isn’t even the attacks on the Supreme Court, but the politicization of patriotism itself.

Alito’s banner to “Appeal to Heaven” was designed by George Washington’s personal secretary and was adopted by the colonial military in 1775, becoming the official flag of the Massachusetts Navy in 1776. The text was inspired by British political philosopher John Locke, whose ideas became the foundation for American independence. According to The New York Times, “Justice Alito declined to respond to questions about the beach house flag, including what it was intended to convey and how it comported with his obligations as a justice.”

The fact The New York Times is writing to millions of readers who likely live in online echo chambers that the Pine Tree flag “conveys” anything but a patriotic message of democratic resilience warrants an American flag flown in distress on its own. And it’s not just the Pine Tree flag that’s now written off as an overt symbol of extremism. Just about every other flag with historical roots in the American fight for independence has now become the target of far-left attacks as banners of radical opposition. A nation steeped in self-hatred, where patriotism itself is written off as extreme, will not survive as a governable nation. And even if the nation does survive, it won’t be “united.”

Last year’s Gallup poll reported the number of U.S. adults who say they are “extremely proud” to be American remains near a record low, at just 39 percent. The number is down more than 30 percent from 20 years ago, when 70 percent said they were “extremely proud” to be American. One would hope that number will be 100 percent on Monday, when the nation collectively remembers the nearly 1.4 million who died in service of our country. Meanwhile, Flag Day is approaching on June 14. The New York Times better brace itself for an outbreak of extremism.

♦️𝐖³𝐏 𝐃𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝

 

W³P Daily News Open Thread. 

posted by DarkGoldenMan

Welcome to the W³P Daily News Open Thread. 

Post whatever you got in the comments section below.

This feature will post every day at 6:30am Mountain time. 

The Top 11 Flags You Should Fly To Trigger Communist Enemies Of The People

The same people mocking ‘An Appeal to Heaven’ flag will never be satisfied so long as you view God and country as our Founding Fathers did.

posted by Jordan Boyd at The Federalist

Corporate media recently took old smears about a Revolutionary War-era flag and applied them to Justice Samuel Alito after his wife allegedly displayed the “provocative” symbol in front of his home.

The meaning behind the “An Appeal To Heaven” flag, a pine-tree-adorned symbol used by squadrons of the Continental Navy during the Revolutionary War, is rather innocuous. George Washington’s secretary Col. Joseph Reed created the flag in 1775 to publicly display “an appeal to God to save the colonists from the King’s oppressive ruling.”

The same outlets fomenting fake scandal about the alleged Alito flag have never taken issue with any Americans displaying Black Lives Matter, Ukraine, pro-terrorist, and rainbow flags, despite their connections to anti-American agitation. The New York Times, however, suggested the historic “An Appeal To Heaven” flag was associated with a “push for a more Christian-minded government.”

Here are 11 flags you should fly to not only show your loyalty to God and country but also your disdain for the top enemy of the people that is constantly looking for ways to smear Americans who love their original flag and the Constitution it stands for.

U.S. Flag

If you want to show your patriotism and peeve the American-hating people who run our nation’s institutions, proudly display Old Glory to show your support for the land of the free and the home of the brave (what’s left of it).

If you’re a little more daring and want to teach your Trump-hating, slur-slinging neighbor a lesson, consider flying it upside down to express your belief that our country is in “dire distress.”

Gadsden Flag

Named for Col. Christopher Gadsden, a Revolutionary War-era leader of the South Carolina Sons of Liberty and brigadier general in the Continental Army, the Gadsden flag draws on themes invoked by Benjamin Franklin’s famous “Join, or Die” cut-up snake cartoon. The coiled-up American timber rattlesnake on the yellow background suggested the American colonies were finally united enough to strike at the foreign power threatening their rights.

The pro-liberty message and jarring image still, against the wishes of unelected bureaucrats, serve as a warning to anyone who tries to take away Americans’ freedoms. If 12-year-old Jaiden Rodriguez can boldly display the Gadsden flag patch on his backpack after facing backlash from school administrators and peers, you can too.

Gonzales Flag

The Gonzales or “Come and Take It” flag gained popularity after the 1835 Battle of Gonzales, a showdown between Texas settlers and the tyrannical Mexican government. The Spanish cannon in the center of the flag represents a real cannon Texans were gifted to fend off Native American-led raids.

When the Texas Revolution began brewing, the Mexican government tried to take the weapon back. The Texans refused, challenging the dictator’s soldiers to “Come and Take It.” The Texans ultimately prevailed.

The story of the cannon demonstrates Texans’ and later, Americans’ defiance against anyone who denies their independence and right to self-defense. In more recent years, the Gonzales flag has become synonymous with Americans’ fight to protect their right to bear arms and defend our borders.

Bedford Flag

The Bedford flag is often considered the “oldest flag carried into battle in the history of America.” The flag features a red background, an armored arm wielding a sword, three cannonballs, and the Latin inscription “Vince Aut Morire,” which translates to “Conquer or Die.”

The flag was believed to be carried first by Bedford Minuteman Nathaniel Page at the Battle of Concord in 1775 as a symbol of American patriots’ willingness to die for their freedoms.

Betsy Ross Flag

Betsy Ross’ version of the flag that would come to represent the newly independent United States of America serves as a “proud symbol of the American Revolution” and the liberties American colonists fought to secure.

Since its inception, the iconic flag has suffered several cancellation attempts and smears. In 2019, failed NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick convinced his corporate partner Nike that their Betsy Ross flag shoes were racist.

The principles and ideas represented by the flag endorsed by our Founding Fathers haven’t changed. The number of people opposed to those values, however, has grown exponentially.

Culpeper Minuteman Flag

The Culpeper Minuteman flag is a beautiful blend of the key Revolutionary War messages that fueled the Continental Army’s fight against the British crown.

The flag features a rattlesnake, “don’t tread on me,” and part of Patrick Henry’s famous quote “Give me liberty or give me death.”

It was first adopted by the Culpeper, Virginia Minutemen militia in 1775 but remains popular today as a symbol against tyranny.

Goliad Flag

Capt. Philip Dimmit designed the “Bloody Arm flag” in 1885 to celebrate the Goliad Declaration of Independence in Mexico-controlled Texas. Although only flown for a short time, the flag honored Texas as a “free, sovereign, and independent State” and “represented a dramatic shift towards complete independence from Mexico” that was solidified with the Texas Declaration of Independence in 1836.

The flag now represents Dimmit’s belief that “I would rather cut off my right arm, than live under tyranny.”

Huntington Liberty Flag

The first version of the Huntington Liberty flag featured nods to the British Red Ensign and King George III. Once news of the Declaration of Independence spread to Huntington, New York, “the King’s Colors and the word George III were ripped off the flag.”

The red emblazoned with the word “Liberty” showed a stark contrast between the British crown’s autocratic reign and colonists’ vision for the 13 colonies.

Christian Flag

The Christian flag is often smeared by corporate media as a weapon of white nationalists and opposed by local governments as a violation of a version of the separation of church and state that the American founders never believed in.

In reality, Sunday school teacher Charles C. Overton pieced together the red, white, and blue fabric and cross symbol to represent Jesus Christ’s blood sacrifice, purity, peace, and fidelity to God and His kingdom.

“The idea for the flag came when Overton presented a lecture on the American flag and its virtue, impact, and meaning, so the identical colors prove to be appropriate and intentional,” one analysis article notes.

Navy Jack Flag

The Navy Jack was “first used as a signal to engage the enemy” by Commodore Esek Hopkins in 1775,

The 13 red and white stripes covered by a lengthy gold and red rattlesnake and “don’t tread on me” declaration were designed to showcase the Continental Navy’s defiance of the British crown.

The flag was the official naval jack for the U.S. Navy from 1975 to 1976 and post-9/11 from 2002 to 2019.

Bunker Hill Flag

The Bunker Hill flag was allegedly flown at the Battle of Bunker Hill in 1775. While the flag has a historically debated past, its iconic pine tree and patriotic colors still represent freedom for the New England colonists of the past and Americans of today.

“They often modified existing British flags with pine trees to show they were still loyal to the British Crown, but were going to defend their liberties,” one account states.

Let Your Freak Flags Fly

The same people mocking Alito’s wife for reportedly showcasing “An Appeal to Heaven” will never be satisfied so long as you view God and country as our Founding Fathers did. So fly your Bedford, Gadsden, Gonzales, and most importantly, U.S. flags high, you patriotic, Consitution-loving Americans.