It's interesting when you look back in time and watch people make absolute fools of themselves by misrepresenting American patriots and by backing a tyrannical government, claiming that they are, in fact, the upholders of the law.
Such is the case with self-proclaimed anti-government extremism writer at Forbes, JJ MacNab, and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
In a short video of MacNab and the SPLC lying to Congress about the Bundys, it's painfully evident that neither understood the position of the Bundys, their supporters or the Constitution.
The Pete Santilli Show dug up the video from "House Democrats" on YouTube, and then inserted text comments into a shortened version that dealt specifically with the Bundys to correct the misrepresentation and lies that were told. Take a look.
Keep in mind that this forum took place shortly after the Orlando nightclub shooting. In attendance were:
- Richard Cohen, President, Southern Poverty Law Center
- JJ MacNab, Center for Cyber and Homeland Security, The George Washington University
- Tim Blount, Executive Director, Friends of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
- David Jenkins, President, Conservatives for Responsible Stewardship
- Garrett Reppenhagen, Rocky Mountain Director, Vet Voice Foundation
Of course, not one person represented the Bundys at the hearing. It was nothing more than propaganda.
Richard Cohen, who is known for his hateful propaganda against those he disagrees with, stated the Cliven Bundy and his supporters were "anti-government activists."
I ask Mr. Cohen, when a man appeals to the law of the land, the US Constitution, how is that anti-government? How is that hatred? It is indeed anger at how the FBI and the Bureau of Land Management have dealt with things, especially considering the Bundy and his family have maintained the water rights in the area, which are more valuable than the land for 150 years, long before the FBI or the BLM were installed.
No, the Bundys, their supporters and this author are not "anti-government." We are for government that obeys the law and protects the rights of the citizens that it serves. There is a huge difference and since Mr. Cohen doesn't seem to know the difference, he should really try and understand what ANTIFA is all about and he would know that is all about "anti-government," but alas, Cohen and the SPLC coddle the real anti-government types and attack American patriots who appeal to the words of the Constitution.
He also went on to state that US citizens came to support the Bundys "in defiance of federal law." Cohen never cites what law they were defying nor does he state how they were doing so.
Why? Because Bundy had called for help because the FBI had begun to surveil his home and the BLM had deployed snipers to his house. All of this came out during the last Bundy trial which was declared a mistrial because.... wait for it... the US attorney prosecuting the case, Steven Myhre, was not defying federal law... he was breaking it! And it wasn't his first time, either.
When will Mr. Cohen be appearing before Congress to call Steven Myhre out as "anti-government"? Even though Myhre continues to have a job after being demoted for his crimes, he remains at large to break the law even more against the citizens of the State of Nevada. What about it Mr. Cohen?
He went on to attack the actions of the Bundy in Oregon at the Malheur National Refuge over the same issue, government land grabbing that is unconstitutional.
Yet, what did we learn? Reporter Pete Santilli had all charges against him dropped while the Bundys and several others were acquitted of any wrongdoing in that case, as well.
Will Mr. Cohen apologize? Probably not. Someone give that man a handkerchief, he has egg all over his face.
Cohen then went on to state that "anti-government violence" should be referred to as "terrorism." Well, I agree, but the Bundys and their supporters were no more engaged in terrorism than our founding fathers were when the British came for their guns.
Again, why is Mr. Cohen not calling out real anti-government types like ANTIFA? It's because that's whose side he's really on.
MacNab, on the other hand, blasted the "Patriot Movement" by saying that she didn't like to use that term and she also referenced the Bundys and supporters as "anti-government extremist movement."
Again, she said this with absolutely no evidence of such a matter against people who simply took the words of the Constitution as written.
However, she too coddles the ANTIFA crowd. Take a look at some of these tweets.
The rest of the antifa movement should be pretty freakin' pissed at the group poking sharp sticks at a heavily-armed, barely-napping dog.
— JJ MacNab (@jjmacnab) November 2, 2017
They claim that Antifa is trying to shoot them. pic.twitter.com/uxv1SBxLRm
— JJ MacNab (@jjmacnab) September 18, 2017
She then went on to poke at militia members who were simply surveilling the area surrounding an ANTIFA protest before it started.
Their enemies are imaginary but their weapons are real.
— JJ MacNab (@jjmacnab) September 18, 2017
To be fair, though she did take up for Ben Shapiro and said he wasn't a Nazi, she merely tweeted this article about an ANTIFA leader calling for violence without any comment.
Antifa leader justifies violence before Ben Shapiro's Berkeley speech https://t.co/aPIFOPcEit
— JJ MacNab (@jjmacnab) September 14, 2017
To solidify who she is really on the side of, what was her reaction to the November 4, 2017 threats of ANTIFA, the Soros and Hillary Clinton-funded Communists who were going "To The Streets And Public Squares in cities and towns across the country continuing day after day and night after night—not stopping—until our DEMAND is met"?
She was concerned for the ANTIFA people that militia members might commit violence against them. Note that ANTIFA's stated goal for November 4 was that the "Trump/Pence regime" "must end" and "must go."
They were out to overthrow an election by the people of the united States. Does that sound extremist to you? Does it sound "anti-government"? You bet it does, but here's how MacNab responded.
I'm getting apprehensive about Nov 4th. I haven't seen this level of "I'm going to kill people" rhetoric in a very long time. pic.twitter.com/SjojeeO9fb
— JJ MacNab (@jjmacnab) October 25, 2017
But that's not all as Canada Free Press pointed out. It seems that MacNab was just not being, shall we say, honest about what was going on.
So, when an Antifa Facebook group declares “Revolution Begins,” people may get a bit out of sorts. But JJ MacNab is not a fan of context, as any cursory glance at her Twitter page reveals. After finding the Facebook post, this writer helpfully clued in MacNab and pointed out that the vitriol that made her “apprehensive” was in response to anti-government extremism and violent rhetoric, the very thing she claims to be against!
But MacNab responded that the Texas Antifa group is a “troll account” and should therefore, presumably, not be held to account for its anti-government extremist viewpoint and violent rhetoric.
As an aside, this mentality is reminiscent of so-called hate crime “hoaxes.” Hate crimes, we are told, are even worse than regular crimes so their penalties are greater. But when a hate crime turns out to be a “hoax,” the perpetrator is usually released with a slap on the wrist. This is the opposite of blind justice.
Why would MacNab use a known “troll account” (and it is) that is being used to deliberately provoke conservatives?
Maybe she doesn’t care about the truth.
I give you all of that so that you understand the mentality of the woman when she claims to be an expert on the subject of "anti-government extremism" and yet seeks to protect real anti-government extremists and vilify people who actually care that anti-government extremists are in their midst.
MacNab said that the Bundys and their supporters "knew next to nothing about land right, cattle grazing or the various recent attempts of Sagebrush politicians to transfer federal land to state control."
How does she know this? In fact, I wonder if Ms. MacNab knows anything, constitutionally speaking about any of those things. Cliven Bundy and his family have ranched the land he is on for 150 years. They were there long before the BLM existed. Does Ms. MacNab understand water rights? I doubt it. Does she understand that the BLM knew Cliven Bundy had water rights and that they sought to take them away from him? I doubt it.
Most people who came there knew exactly what the BLM was and is and they disagreed with them and wanted to protect a simple rancher and his family, despite MacNab's claims to the contrary.
As for knowing about land and rights, she really should learn something from Ammon Bundy on the subject.
She also said that Cliven Bundy made a "false claim" that sniper rifles were pointed at his son. We know definitively now from court records that snipers were deployed at least four days prior to the impoundment date. There's no nice way to say it, MacNab is a liar.
I've gone on long enough. Watch the video and pay attention to the comments of people who were actually there and reporting on it. Ms. MacNab probably wasn't even in the state when that was going on. Yet, she sat before the people's representatives and lied all the way through her talk.
I agree with Pete Santilli, MacNab and SPLC owe Cliven Bundy, his family and supporters a major apology, like on the front page of Forbes and every media outlet in the country, and then they should be sued for their slander. What do you think?
https://youtu.be/4NGTbT0R_QkDon't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.