Once again, Democrats are screaming that the ones who must pay the price for a lunatic’s evil are those who had nothing to do with that evil. Knowing that almost all the guns in this country are owned by their political opposition, they see every mass shooting as an opportunity, a gift, if you will, by which they can achieve something truly immoral and unjust: the forcible eradication of the right of self-defense against enemies, foreign and domestic, though mostly domestic. They still haven’t forgotten that they will never fully overthrow this country if its citizens are armed and can resist totalitarian fascism, which is always preceded by disarmament of the populace. Disarmament is a unique trait of the political left.

What makes this rerun all the more galling is the fraudulent emotionalism with which they try once again, before the bodies have even been identified, to manipulate peoples’ decency into agreeing to a “solution” that solves only the political dilemma of how quickly they can prevent us from defending ourselves against them. To achieve this political goal, it has become necessary to demonize guns, making each and every one of them a non-negotiable instrument of evil incarnate. By doing so, they have successfully fooled the gullible and weak into agreeing that we should not focus upon who is holding the gun at the time of a crime, or what motivates their actions, but only upon the fact that there is a gun, creating the absurd alternate reality in which the gun controls the person, rather than the opposite.

The left loves alternate realities. Indeed, their existence depends entirely upon impressive numbers of people who have accepted alternate realities and live their lives based entirely upon them. All whites are racist, white supremacists, and Nazis, but all blacks and Hispanics are victims, merely helpless or incompetent rubes who cannot succeed without the benevolence of the left. Human fetuses are not developing humans, but are lumps of tissue. Boys can be girls, and girls can be boys. Islam is a religion of peace. All weather is bad because it is caused by global warming. Republicans hate everyone, while Democrats love the people they used to own but who they now simply trick into living in poverty, waiting for the redemption that never comes and never will. And guns kill people, so no further inquiry is required.

But if we are going to have this great national discussion concerning guns, shouldn’t we be looking for actual patterns and trends? Shouldn’t we investigate things that repeat? Instead of blaming those who do not pull the triggers, shouldn’t we be focusing almost entirely on the commonalities of those who do? After all, if most of those committing gun violence can be narrowed down to a specific subset of society, and their anomaly can be identified and eliminated, while still preserving the rights of the law-abiding, wouldn’t that be a more sensible, logical solution to a clear problem?

Of course, but the left does not want this. Like the Palestinians, who want the war more than they want the peace, the left wants the violence more than they want to solve it. This is so for a couple of obvious reasons. As pointed out previously, they will never stop trying to disarm us so that they can own us and all we have. They pursue socialism and the redistribution of however much wealth they can steal through the force of government. Gun crimes are useful to the left. Mass shootings are gifts, which they cynically exploit as quickly and hysterically as possible, establishing an alternate reality their puppets will believe, before the truth comes out about the shooter.

Which leads me to the second reason the left does not actually want to solve the problem of “gun violence”. In most mass shooting incidents within the last several years, with the notable exception of Dylan Roof, the shooters are either on the political left, or are beneficiaries of the protections of the political left, including those practicing extremism on behalf of the so-called Religion of Peace. There have been examples of how the political left attempted to get out ahead of the facts and prematurely blamed a conservative, such as in the Aurora theater shootings, but then it came out that the shooter was actually a Democrat and the media’s bigotry and hatred were exposed for all to see.

However, merely being exposed would not dissuade the press from telling lies, since they still do that. No, the reason they have stopped talking about who carried out the latest shooting is because it is almost always someone on the political left, including those who have registered to vote as a Democrat, or identify as an anarchist, or a socialist, or a communist, or a “resister”, or whatever leftist grievance-correction mechanism they embrace. They are both victim and avenger. The political left is the country’s incubator of irrational social violence, and nothing so distinguishes them from the rest of the spectrum as their propensity for and embrace of violence as a tool. Whether in the streets of Chicago, or in an MS-13 murder, or while yelling “Allahu Akbar”, or on a baseball field in Virginia, those under the umbrella of the political left are responsible for almost all “gun violence” in this country.   

In their mental-illness cult, they rationalize the immorality of their violence as a moral means to their end, which is their dominance and control over all of us. If we really wanted to stop gun violence, we wouldn’t have to look very far for something to correct. The mentality that encourages the belief in the morality of the use of a gun against one’s “enemies” has preceded every mass shooting carried out by someone on the political left. The mentality that purposefully shields this from public view to bring about political dominance is equally to blame.

The political left cannot afford to have more people understand that it is they who have created the problem they pretend to try to solve by disarming those they deeply hate and wish to see subservient.  They could not be more dishonest or disingenuous than they are each time they step up to a microphone, within minutes of a crime committed by one of their own, or quoting statistics that derive from the actions of their political brethren, and demand that the rest of us be punished for what they allow to persist every day. We help them whenever we fail to point out that this supposed crisis is almost entirely of their own creation, carried out by almost entirely by their adherents.  

If we really wanted to solve gun violence, we should start by identifying the political movement that invites and then hides that violence and its causes, so that the criminality it enables can be used as a political tool to disarm its enemies. 

Now that Tom Price has been forced out of office as Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Left has established a standard for the conduct of federal officials that may come back to bite a few of its favorites. Jeffrey Lord has noticed that Robert Mueller, when he was head of the FBI, has got some explaining to do. From The American Spectator:

The headline in The Washington Post dates back to March 21, 2014. It reads:

Personal FBI flights for Holder and other Justice officials went unreported

The story begins:

The agency that tracks federal travel did not report hundreds of personal and other “nonmission” trips aboard government planes for senior Justice Department officials including Attorney General Eric Holder and former FBI Director Robert Mueller, according to a watchdog report.

Congress’s nonpartisan Government Accountability Office determined that the 395 flights cost taxpayers $7.8 million. But the General Services Administration, which oversees trips aboard federal jets, did not require documentation because of a GSA reporting exemption that covers intelligence agencies, even in cases of unclassified personal travel.

And when one follows the link from the Post to the General Accounting Office report one finds a report that says, among other things, this:

For example, in February 2013 GAO found that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)—which is a member of the intelligence community—did not report to GSA, based on the intelligence agency exemption, information for 395 unclassified nonmission flights taken by the Attorney General, FBI Director, and other Department of Justice (DOJ) executives from fiscal years 2009 through 2011.

And who was the Director of the FBI in that period between 2009 and 2011? Yes, of course. It was now Independent Counsel Robert Mueller.

Jeff asks the key question:

Thus the question: Did Robert Mueller (not to mention then-Attorney General Eric Holder) reimburse the government just for his own seat on what the GAO describes as “unclassified nonmission flights” — which is what Price did? Or did Mueller do what Price did not — pay for the full cost of the flights in question. Since the cost of these flights would undoubtedly run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars if not several millions, one can reasonably suspect Mueller did exactly what Price did — pay only for the cost of his seat.

In which case? Why, if he did exactly what Price did, is he back in government at all?

In the normal (pre-Trump) GOP, this double standard would be accepted as the way the world works. But I hope that the president will note Mueller’s private jet travel for non-mission purposes, and raise the question as to why his abuse (if that’s what it was) is to be tolerated.

Keep in mind that Saul Alinsky now works for us, as the MOTUS blog always says. We are the insurgents fighting against an establishment that refuses to treat us with justice. So, let’s invoke his rules 4 and 5:

“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

When they hit us with new standards, we hit back harder, applying those standards to them. That sounds rather Trumpian, and I hope the president raises these questions of Mueller.