Here’s a breakdown of the COVID-19 relief bill that shows how Nancy ‘The Red Queen’ Pelosi wields her royal scepter to build her own castle while robbing the children of peasants to the fourth generation and beyond.
Bill Whittle brings you Moving Back to America 20 times each month thanks to our Members, who run their own blog, forums and comments sections. Join them when you become a Member.
Video below hosted at Rumble.
35 replies on “ROYAL CONTEMPT: The Red Queen Pelosi and Her COVID-19 Relief Madness”
YES! This is the math people need to see and understand. Those Arschloche in Washington throw around “Trillion” like they used to throw around “Billion” and realistically, getting your mind around a Billion is still a stretch for most of us. Thanks Bill!
Yet ANOTHER great video and so wonderfully delivered. Puts it all into perspective.
Ozymandias might be another apt comparison.
I am glad Bill mentioned the $1.9T figure as really $1,900 billion.
Citing numbers in lower trillions seems like we know what that means and that it is not so big or bad after all. Putting them out as $B amounts for federal and national level budgets, etc. gives us a common metric or reference of comparison and discussion and trade-off analyses.
Using billions shows that this monstrosity is really almost three DOD’s or at least two Medicare’s and SS’s. All of the value that we provide in our economy yearly is about $22,000 billion, and that is about it. No money tree; only unrepresented future taxpayers.
This should have waited to be released until today as she fits the definition on C U next Tuesday.
Good grief. That made me want to puke. Off with her head!
We have cowards for representatives, that’s how we get here. There is a natural immune system to everything. A tribe lives by the codes and those who break the codes are expelled or eliminated in some other factor. It is like the United States Government has been exposed to too many antibiotics and the illness has become resistant.
The question isn’t why are politicians corrupt? Our founding fathers knew about the flaws of human nature especially those with power. The question is both how did they get to this point, and how do we stop it and prevent it from happening in the future.
The simplest answer (albeit the most difficult to implement) is to return the government to the principles and structure created by those Founding Fathers.
Congress was never meant to be paid a living wage. Their wages were supposed to be compensation for the expenses of traveling to the Capital and living there while Congress was in session. Serving in the legislature was intended to be a sacrifice, intended to weed out the non-committed and ensure that those who served did so because they believed in the Republic.
Not a pathway to vainglorious wealth and power for powers’ sake.
This has been going on forever and it will continue until measures are taken to stop it. That is not a Covid 19 Bill to help those made destitute or dead by the sadistic measures imposed by those who passed this bill. When are we going to physically remove them from their thrones and escort them to the guillotine? When?
😡🤬🤯
I can just see Pelosi on her way to the gibbet. “But, I let them have ICE CREAM!! Ungrateful wretches!”
Even now they have a guillotine around their hearts. They just don’t know it.
ob·scene| əbˈsēn | adjective • offensive to moral principles; repugnant. ORIGIN late 16th century: from French obscène or Latin obscaenus ‘ill-omened or abominable.
abominable’.a·bom·i·na·ble| əˈbäm(ə)nəb(ə)l | adjective • causing moral revulsion. • very bad or unpleasant. ORIGIN Middle English: via Old French from Latin abominabilis, from abominari (see abominate). The term was once widely believed to be from ab- ‘away from’ + Latin homine (from homo ‘human being’), thus ‘inhuman, beastly’, and frequently spelled abhominable until the 17th century.
Something I don’t understand and maybe someone out there can help me with this —
Where in the Sam Hell did Nancy Pelosi et. al. get their military powers and when did they get them? Since when does either house of Congress have command and control over any U.S. military organization?
“good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws” ― Plato “Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.” ― Benjamin Franklin “Without law enforcement there is no law, and without law there is no civilization.” — Rep Tom McClintock
I’m well aware of those things and thank you but … That doesn’t really answer my question.
In the United States there has to be some legal authority to deploy military assets, else the military commanders will not act. Because that lack of authority would constitute an illegal order that they are not required to obey. This is pretty cut-and-dried and I doubt that these troops were deployed around Washington DC wholly without any legal authority whatsoever. Though there may have been some pretext employed that would be sufficient to satisfy the military officers in charge of those military assets.
So what I would like to know is on whose authority or by what pretext military assets are being deployed inside the boundaries of the United States of America on civilian, non-military reservation areas. I’m well aware that those are National Guardsmen but Washington D.C. does not have its own National Guard.
I believe the states can send units if they are requested by federal agencies. The states can also decide not to send them.
That could be, I don’t know and that’s why I’m asking. But there has to be more to it than just a simple request by a Federal Agency.
I.E. what if a state got a “request” for troops, say Virginia or Maryland which are the two closest and most easily served logistically, and those troops set up a cordon around our Capital Area, denying people entry and in effect staging a de facto coup? (Are we sure this isn’t what’s happening right now?)
Then let’s say Texas or Montana cried “B.S.!” on that and sent their own troops to take back the Capital? If they cannot do that, there’s literally no checks or balances in operation and any state that could gin up a pretext and get the right “invitation” could for all practical purposes take over the nation’s seat of government.
Having armed troops on the streets of the U.S. Capital absent any clear, present and impending danger makes me very, very nervous. I’m absolutely certain that the Founding Fathers would be extremely nervous about a situation like that too.
It’s a good theoretical war game. Since the national guard falls under the powers of their state, then the governor is their commander in chief unless the national guard is ‘nationalized’ which I believe they then fall under the president. Not quite sure if my memory is correct on that. So if left friendly governors sent their units in order to deny access of the people to the city, I’m going to assume that would be considered an insurrection and or an act of war, possibly resulting in allowing the United States military to be deployed into the area.
I was thinking on those same lines but … The United States military is commanded by the Commander in Chief, the President, which this moment is an addled, senile corrupt crook rubber-stamping anything the Left demands of him. Which means no U.S. Military to counterforce a scenario like I described above.
That’s a good point. And I agree about Biden. Of course we’ve never had a scenario like that in order to base a solution for it. However Biden may be commander in chief but he does not rule over them. The military is basically ran by congress and therefore technically the people. There’s all sorts of rules and laws about this, but Biden cannot order them around as he sees fit. I heard a long time ago that the president can use the Marine Corps for up to 90 days until he needs congressional support, but beyond that I’m not sure what else his position can do.
You’re right about the Marine Corps, historically we have prided ourselves as “the President’s Own” because he can commit Marines unders certain parameters anywhere in the world — Quietly and in a very low profile manner if the mission calls for it. The Marines actually do a lot more than most people are aware of.
You’re right about the Commander in Chief thing too, as far as it goes. My point was not that he’d order the Federal Troops into action but the opposite. It’s a lot easier just to keep them out of the action if you’re staging a Leftist coup with the POTUS supporting that.
It concerns me greatly right at the moment that the scenario I described previously is playing out … The Left at a point of peak civilian political power pulls in armed Guardsmen from friendly Blue States to take over the capital and the C-in-C orders Federal forces to pretend nothing is happening but some temporary security precautions.
It’s obvious by now that the Left is power mad and seeking a solution to obtain a permanent lock on power. They know if they achieve that the backlash from the American People is going to be fierce. Best to have an Army in place to deal with that.
I’m not trying to sound paranoid here but the goal since the Democrat Party abandoned the working class blue collar people that made up their traditional base seems to have all the elements of a quiet grab for permanent and total political power in the U.S. Trump interrupted that process. They demonized the crap out of him and rigged an election to get rid of him.
Therefor I don’t think that my concerns about armed troops in control of the nation’s capital are completely unfounded.
I think your concerns are reasonable. However I don’t think that the individuals that make up the guard would actively take power from the people (considering that the military is made up of 75% conservatives). So either the commanders and governors are being lied to, or they don’t think it’s a coup. As time goes on I predict more and more people will question why there are so many troops in the city, forcing Pelosi to make a choice. If they keep the guard there it will look bad, since nothing has happened since Jan 6. Or She will let them go. Basically I go by ‘whatever makes the politician look good, and their opponents look bad, they will do or say’. My guess is as soon as it becomes politically inconvenient for her the troops will leave. But for now by keeping the troops there it shows the mainstream media that “the right is out to get her and she must protect herself”. This is just optics for her. So I don’t think it’s a coup by the Left. But if it is then it won’t be long before we know.
Also I don’t think the Left will use guns and armies to take power. They can just twist the system to do it. Just like they’ve done and are currently doing. They hold the executive and the legislature. They hold the culture and schools. All they need to do is de-humanize us and they can talk all of our freedoms. Which is what they’re doing now. White, bad. Male, bad. Republicans equal Nazis. Capitalism equals evil. Not caring about someone’s skin color and caring about their content of character equals racist. I think they are far more sinister than we think they are. And I believe that those who have. committed the greatest evils the world has ever seen, have justified their actions. They will always be good in their mind no matter the atrocities they commit.
I sincerely hope you’re right. However, my experience includes quite a bit of global travel to places unlike the U.S. Some of those places were where things like coups and juntas are a reality, not an abstract idea simply bandied about on political forums.
(I’m not saying that’s what you’re doing and I do very much appreciate the discussion so please don’t get me wrong here. You are clearly an informed, intelligent and thoughtful civil person and I’m just explaining my position.)
The thing about that personal experience, what really hit home to me and what I feel I have learned from that sort of thing — Is that we as Americans have enjoyed an amazing degree of insulation from that kind of thing, indeed from war and civil strife of any great magnitude like is involved in something like a civil war — And so have adopted the idea of “it can’t happen here.”
Having seen the results of a civil war (Lebanon in the early ’80s) among other personal experiences I have come to the conclusion that the idea of “It can’t happen here” is a false paradise. I think it can happen here, I don’t think it would be easy and I don’t think it will be less than subtle until it’s too late.
Having read Mao’s “Red Book” I understand that popular support is a vital and inescapable feature for any coup, revolution or civil war to be successful. However, popular support isn’t a measure of right and wrong as the Founding Fathers well knew when they crafted a Republic instead of a straight Democracy.
So for many years I have viewed events through the lens of “It can happen here too. What separates us from such things is the Republic because people can screw things up anywhere, including America, for the seemingly best of reasons.”
Or as Bill Whittle has so sagely put it several times — “It’s a lot easier to vote your way into socialism (or any other disaster) than it is to shoot your way out of it.”
That’s a quote I use with considerable frequency in conversation.
I see a threat to the Republic in having troops stationed on the streets of our Capital.
I’ll be very happy and breathe a sigh of relief if those troops are withdrawn.
So I hope and pray that you’re right and politicians on the Left are still subject to public perception and have not discovered and begun to implement a way to “do what’s best for us whether we like it or not”.
Thanks for your respectful reply. You ask reasonable questions, but my point is we aren’t living in reasonable times. Without constitutional authority, governors are shredding the Bill of Rights and state legislatures do nothing. Without authority, presidents issue executive orders that defy federal law, and Congress does nothing. Without authority, federal lower court judges issue illegal nationwide injunctions, and the Supreme Court does nothing – even when different circuits have issued conflicting rulings on the same issue. We’re living in a post-constitutional age. Judging by their behavior, the military has become as political as the rest of the federal government, so why should we expect them to abide by a constitutionally-based controlling authority when no other branch does?
You’re welcome for the respect, I was only applying the Golden Rule. Which is not some namby-pamby, pie-in-the-sky principle. “Do unto others” has implicit implications, you show other people how you deserve to be treated by the manner in which you treat them.
I agree with most of what you said except the last part about the military having “become as political as the rest of the federal government”. I know that not to be so, not the Federal Military anyway, I can’t speak to the National Guard establishments in each state. There’s a difference between Federal and State forces and it’s a huge one that might be somewhat lost on people who have not served in either. After all, the uniforms look the same …
Each state in the United States of America has its own army and air force. Those forces operate at the discretion of and are controlled by the State Governor. You have to be discharged from a federal military service to join the National Guard. These military forces are completely distinct entities from federal forces and even require a legal process to “federalize” them if the need is great enough.
Civilians do not generally think of their National Guard as an actual fighting force “army” because what you see them doing most is providing aid and security after a natural disaster. But they ARE a very capable fighting force trained, armed and equipped exactly the same as the U.S. Federal Armed Forces. Most of them (but by no means all) are veterans of federal service.
I know that the U.S. Military forces have not “become as political … ” because I know quite a few people of respectable rank in those forces. My son is second in command of a base. I know the people who make up our federal armed services quite well and if they are political, well if anything they lean to the right pretty hard. I have every confidence in those people as I know them to be good men and true. It is an insult to them to say that they’re operating in support of the Leftist agenda to control America but …
Because they are good and true human beings their hands are tied in many ways by laws. Which they obey. Because as an FBI friend of mine explained to me many decades ago, “The difference between the good guys and the bad guys is that the good guys follow the rules.” That might seem to be pretty rudimentary stuff but it is stuff that bears repeating. Come to think of it, I’m not sure if it was him reminding me or me reminding him …
Which brings us full circle back to your point. You can tell who the good guys and bad guys are by how they follow the rules (laws) or not. You’re right, there’s an increasing problem with not following the rules that were established by all of us to protect all of us. We need to make more people not only aware of that problem but also why it constitutes a clear and present danger to all of us.
Not everyone was taught the principles of the American Republic and even among those who were, many never “got it”. Americans in general seem to think “It’s our country and we can do whatever the hell we want with it” and that’s true to a degree. However, there is a process for changing things and ignoring those rules that are inconvenient to an agenda is not part of that process.
Ergo, bad guys. In many cases not prosecutable by laws on the books but bad guys even so. Being able to dodge, manipulate, bend, or twist the letter of the law does not negate the spirit of the law.
Excellent response; thank you. Thanks to your son for his service, and thank you for creating the fertile ground from which it sprung. I sure hope you’re right about the military, but when I see BS like this, I fear the direction it’s headed (h/t Sarah Hoyt at Instapundit):
https://oldnfo.org/2021/03/01/this-is-just-chilling/
Critical race theory is horrifying. First, because of its Marxist roots (if you’ve never heard of Noel Ignatiev, you should read this:)
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/06/the_russian_origins_of_black_neomarxism.html
Second, because one cannot simultaneously believe that some are more equal than others due to spurious superficial characteristics, and that we are all equally endowed with unalienable rights. I know which principle your son took an oath to uphold. It’s looking like leadership is increasingly forcing him and his fellow service members into an impossible situation. Do they uphold their oath or obey their orders?
Six years ago I was at the Navy War College in Rhode Island for a ceremony where the CNO (Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jonathan W. Greenert) spoke. He pointedly reminded all personnel present, which included Navy, Marines, Army and CIA, of their oath.
Very pointedly.
I’m not sure if this was because we were still in the throes of the Obama Administration or if it was just his reading of the times. It’s really not important why he felt the need to bring up The Oath, the relevant fact is he made it clear that everyone in the room was expected and duty bound to honor it..
I know of an instance recently where a career Marine, a Master Gunnery Sergeant, retired. Upon retirement military people get a letter from the President thanking them for their years of service. It is traditional to read that letter at their official retirement separation ceremony. The OIC (Officer in Charge) refused to read the letter because it was signed by Donald J. Trump. This nearly caused a mutiny but, like I said about these guys being good men and true …
They all went out to the parking lot after the “official” ceremony, the Master Gun’s immediate superior read the letter out loud and then they all went out for drinks. Lots of drinks.
The point being that they found a way.
Like I said, I have every confidence in our guys. They’ll do the right thing, they’re not only good people, they’re the best of America and I love them dearly.
Those people in uniform don’t like this Leftist hogwash any more than we do and the only people who are willingly going along with it are a tiny minority of ass-kissing career worms.
In the Marines we call such people “pogues”. Not “POGs”, that’s a backronym and it doesn’t have quite the same connotations. They get every bit of respect their rank and uniform merit and none for the man wearing them.
Our guys are on our side, meaning the side of all right thinking, patriotic Americans. I know it’s hard to believe right now the way things are but there are even still a few Democrats that fill that bill.
Don’t let the noise drown out the signal.
I’d be interested to know this also.
In my honest opinion the reason for laws isn’t to prevent something from happening as in murder but in order to apply a punishment for committing the act (breaking the law) and thereby preventing it. I think we all know how foolish a no gun zone is especially since how many shootings occur in them, the law shouldn’t be no guns in this area, it should just fall under committing murder.
You’re so right. And, as any middle-school substitute teacher can tell you, the opposite is also true – the failure to impose consequences for bad behavior is a near-certain guarantee of ensuring more and worse bad behavior.
This brings up a very good point, and one other thing what justifies them to continue to maintain military forces in Washington DC, and what is the limit that they can keep them there? At some point those troops need to be withdrawn.
Always a good watch. I hope Bill feels better!
And with this, I think we have moved back to the “Unbearable” status.