In 1979, after Iraq’s Saddam Hussein seized power, he immediately implemented a “loyalty through fear” program. Calling 400-plus Ba’ath Party members to a pavilion, the doors were locked behind them. Saddam sat on stage at a small table, cooly puffing a cigar. A nervous official stood at the podium to Saddam’s right and began reading names of those who had opposed Saddam’s rise. One by one, each person was led away, to be shot or imprisoned. Realizing what was happening, some members nervously began vocalizing their support for the dictator chanting, “Long live Saddam Hussein!” By the end of this “learning” session, 68 people had been removed. Saddam then went on to widen his purge, targeting all those with potential influence in Iraq who could challenge him, including union leaders, intelligentsia, businessmen, etc. The purge continued as hundreds more died, enabling Saddam to rule securely for almost a quarter of a century, falling from power only after the 2003 U.S. invasion, which led to his 2006 execution.
Democrats have now initiated their own “loyalty through fear” program.
In the aftermath of the Capitol riot, Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi called for President Trump’s immediate impeachment should he not resign or should Vice President Mike Pence not use the 25th Amendment to trigger his removal from office. She accuses Trump of being a national security threat and, as such, a continuing danger to the country. Since neither a Trump resignation nor a 25th Amendment activation occurred, Pelosi submitted an Article of Impeachment to the House accusing Trump of inciting a riot, which Republicans initially blocked.
Before getting to the Democrats’ effort to implement their own “loyalty through fear” program, let us examine some of Pelosi’s outrageous actions that suggest she, in fact, is the real national security threat.
First, Pelosi fails to recognize why the 25th Amendment is worded as such. Drafters recognized an opposing party could initiate removal under the amendment for purely political purposes, as Pelosi has done. Therefore, activation was left to those working closely with the president on a daily basis – his vice president and members of his Cabinet – who would be best situated to know whether a physical or mental impairment prevented him from performing his duties. They then would initiate the appropriate action to suspend or terminate his authority. The amendment’s wording was designed to deny opposing party members a political weapon – a weapon Pelosi now seeks.
Second, Pelosi has overstepped her authority. Nowhere in the military chain of command is the speaker of the House listed. While the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) – a position currently held by Army Gen. Mark A. Miley – is by law the principal military adviser to the president, the National Security Council, the Homeland Security Council and the secretary of defense, there is no “dotted line” connecting the CJCS and the speaker. Yet, Pelosi outrageously called Miley, apparently seeking to encourage him not to take any orders from Trump involving military action.
Doing the above was totally irresponsible – an act done purely for political show. This was evident by the fact Pelosi then boasted to the Democratic caucus she had sought to prevent “an unhinged president” from using the nuclear codes. Imagine an enemy looking for the right time to attack America by taking advantage of our ongoing political chaos to initiate a strike. Pelosi’s action could be embraced by that enemy as creating sufficient uncertainty within the military to buy it additional time to take out our defenses. Miley made no commitment, obviously recognizing Pelosi’s act was pure political theater and inappropriate.
One other time the American military was cautioned about responding to a presidential order occurred during Watergate’s final days. Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, worried that President Nixon, with his presidency collapsing around him, might take military action, advised his JCS that any orders from Nixon should only come through Schlesinger. Two big differences from the Pelosi situation were that Schlesinger was in the direct chain of command, and what he told the JCS was done privately with no effort at publicizing.
Third, as Democrats continue beating the Trump presidency pinata, they encourage our enemies to become more aggressive. As the Democrats’ focus remains on Trump, Iran brazenly seized a South Korean oil tanker passing through international waters to use as a bargaining chip to press Seoul to release Tehran’s assets; Iraq, waiting until Jan. 6 to be assured Trump’s last effort to claim the presidency failed, issued a warrant for his arrest for his having assassinated the world’s most wanted terrorist, Iranian Maj. Gen. Qasem Solemani, in a January 2020 airstrike outside of Baghdad’s international airport; Tehran threatened to assassinate Trump after leaving office for the same offense; and Russian hackers enjoyed a field day targeting U.S. government websites.
The vengeance that is Pelosi’s has made her incapable of performing her duties. While she cannot be impeached, she should be removed as speaker. Eight months prior to the Capitol raid, about 376,000 people agreed, signing a petition she be so removed.
Now seeking to throw salt on an open wound, Democrats play their own “loyalty through fear” card. Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., introduced a resolution to expel members of Congress who dared to question the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election. Her argument is that, simply by contesting the issue, they too contributed to inciting the Capitol riot. She hypocritically argues “We can’t have unity without accountability” while ignoring “we can’t have unity without knowing we had a fair election.” Rather than support an election investigation to discover the truth, Democrats prefer to eliminate Republicans from office for challenging the election’s fairness. Saddam would be proud.
Democrats have taken a lesson out of the old communist handbook: Those successful in limiting the freedom of the people will soon control them. At a time we hear talk about creating a third political party, failing to challenge Pelosi and her ilk could very well leave us with having just one.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.