It is curious, claiming the Constitution is a flawed document when you fail to abide by any of it. As you say, the Constitution did not fail us, we as Americans have failed it. It is good indeed to know there are still those who will fight for it.

Expand full comment
May 30Liked by Grant Smith

I suppose I should also address the subtopic: the Constitution and cynicism.

I think it is a divinely inspired document that is better than anything that has come before it or after it. But as the founders said: it is only suited for a moral people. It's only suited for an educated populace, including and especially educated in civics. It's only suited for people who follow the rules and let words mean what they mean and not what you twist them to mean. In short, the Constitution didn't fail, the people did.

We are in a lawless post-Constitution Oligarchy. It's best to get your mind right about that, pain and heartbreak and probably jail time await you otherwise. Just ask "Enrique" Tarrio. He was an FBI informant and he's still going to jail. Assuming they don't Oswald him, like Lee Harvey.

Power matters, and only power. The stakes are who can take power and use the State to advance their agenda. So far, it has been the Left, Democrats and rich f**knuts who actually run things without bothering about elections. If the Right is going to reverse the trend...well...they aren't. The Right writes books. The Left occupies cities and gets their foot soldiers bail and charges dropped. And then give book deals to the real sellouts that pay 100 times what the books make in sales. Or 10,000 times.

Not a cheerful view, I suppose. But everything dies, and there's no going back to the way things were. The way forward will be dominated by one side or the other. And the Right is still trying to pick out their running shoes, while the Left bolted before the starting gun even went off.

But thank you for the post man. I appreciate hearing from you.

Expand full comment
May 30Liked by Grant Smith

Having been negative, here’s some founded and experienced hope; this system dies with Biden, there are no feasible successors at any level. Not in the apparently all important peaceful, orderly and above all legal sense. Harris cannot hold, nor Pelosi, nor any of them nor this apparatus. Everyone else that hasn’t walked away will be running, a mere gaggle of grandmothers has them groveling on the floor of the house.

In terms of this ends with Biden, they’re victims of their own success. They excel in core goals.

The system excels at 2 things;

1. Poppy cropping at every level, eliminating or ruining, or driving out talent. There are no challengers or feasible successors.

2. Corruption and rice bowls, to the point of consuming the seed corn. Again, success to ruin.

As to what follows Bello Fortuna!

Do cheer up, the world is at your feet! Boots. Swordpoint.

Do embrace the primal, you are holding onto a corpse you cannot admit is dead, breathing into and pumping the chest of rigor mortus. She’s gone.

Let’s go get another, my God the French have had 5. We are widowers, so lets *very carefully* remarry, we’ll do it for the children.

🇺🇸 are children, but they deserve better.

Stop moping SIR, think of the children.

Expand full comment
May 30Liked by Grant Smith

“The people have failed.”


Now work the problem without emotion or moral delusions as a doctor evaluates cancer, or perchance as a soldier plans to kill a large number of strangers who have done him no wrong.

By moral delusion I really mean your apparent “should” is hopelessly clouding analysis of facts.

Fact; the Republic has fallen.

Fact; the Constitutional elected government had long since lost power over the bureaucracy , it was gone by the late 1940s.

Fact; we didn’t uphold our oath, because we had no orders to defend the Republic. In fact the opposite was done to defend the government and keep the Empire we call The Rules based International Order.

Fact; elections are now firmly in the hand of the government.


Are we bound to something that was dissolved because it wasn’t defended?

I say no.

Above all; What is to be done?

Done, not said.

Expand full comment

>I have faith that endeavoring to uphold the rule of law under the U.S. Constitution is the worthiest of causes

Yarvin is one of the staunchest supporters of the Rule of Law. Not under the Constitution, though.

> in violation of sacred oaths

> It is just a document, after all

I can't read your mind, but it seems to me that you consider that document to be sacred, not "just a document". I know I subconsciously did.

Expand full comment

What can I read about the trickery and deception of Oliver Wendell Holmes? I am intrigued.

Expand full comment
May 30Liked by Grant Smith

Thanks for the heads up about the book, I'll check it out.

Expand full comment

I'm going to try and get this article to the young military men in my acquaintance.

Expand full comment

Given the interest here in constitutionality, I'd be interested in what people think of the "1930s Redux" narrative that is constantly being put out, and how that narrative erodes constitutional government. In the wake of the Durham Report, take a look at this article just out in The TransAtlantic for context, you might get something from it…


Expand full comment

This hero is not a soldier, but a litigant.

Expand full comment