The Left’s Plot Against George Washington

Daniel Greenfield  @ Sultan Knish Blog 

 

In Portland, the BLM mob toppled a statue of George Washington. Four years later, local leftist activists and officials have continued sabotaging efforts to restore it again. In New York City and Chicago, officials have discussed removing statues of Washington. And the Father of our Country isn’t even safe at the University of Washington where calls to remove him continue.

But the War on Washington isn’t just a recent phenomenon.

The Left didn’t want until George Washington was a statue to topple him. Newspapers like The National Gazette, The Philadelphia Aurora and The New York Time Piece, which were the vanguard of the emerging Democratic-Republican party, depicted him being led to the guillotine.

Democrats today claim that they oppose George Washington because he was a slave owner, but why did Democrats who were not only slave owners then but defended slavery (unlike Washington who favored liberating slaves and whose Washington Benevolent Societies were the organizing network for black conservative voters in the 1800s ) oppose him then?

Long before their relatively recent interest in organizing black people, American leftists were great enthusiasts of the French Revolution and favored bringing it to this country. My book, ‘Domestic Enemies: The Founding Fathers’ Fight Against The Left’, reveals how the Democrats got their start as the “French Party” built around “Democratic Societies” modeled on French radical Jacobin clubs and set up with the aid of foreign emissaries of the French Revolution.

George Washington’s great crime in the eyes of the leftists of his day was his refusal to turn over America to the forces of the French Revolution which was the USSR of its day. “Ten thousand People in the Streets of Philadelphia, day after day, threatened to drag Washington out of his House, and effect a Revolution in the Government, or compell it to declare War in favour of the French Revolution,” John Adams would later remember.

French Foreign Minister Charles Delacroix had urged Citizen Pierre-Auguste Adet, the French ambassador, to “use all means in his power to bring about a successful revolution, and Washington’s replacement.”

Washington, always a fighter, would not take the leftist campaign against him lying down.

In his address to Congress, President George Washington had warned of the threat of “certain self-created societies.” By those he meant the Democratic Societies. In a private letter he even more explicitly described how “these societies were instituted by the artful & designing members (many of their body I have no doubt mean well, but know little of the real plan),” by an agent of the French government “under popular and fascinating guises, the most diabolical attempts to destroy the best fabric of human government.” The Democratic Societies, he warned, were created to “sow Sedition; to poison the minds of the people of this country.”

First Lady Abigail Adams later wrote at the height of the crisis that, “France has setled her plan of subjugating America” through “Agents and Emissaries, whom with truth & reason she bosts of having thickly scatterd through our Country, saving her Principles, her depravity of Manners, her Atheism in every part of the united States” so that “she will seduce the mind & sap the foundation of our strongest pillars, Religion & Government.”

“And if there be a Nation on Earth capable of going the necessary lengths, and making the proper Sacrifices to stop its course,—it must be one that is already possesed of substantial Liberty, that knows how to appreciate it, & how to distinguish between it, and that Sort of Liberty which France is trying to propogate throughout the World.”

That “sort of liberty” with its depravity, as opposed to American liberty, was the Left.

And in ‘Domestic Enemies: The Founding Fathers’ Fight Against The Left’, I describe the rise of the American Left and its violent and treasonous plots against Washington and America.

Despite the threats and attacks, George Washington not only refused to give in to the Left, but five years away from death and suffering from arthritis and hearing loss, he became the first and last president to lead troops in the field when he rode out to confront the Whiskey Rebellion.

“We are ready for a state of revolution and the guillotine of France,” the leader of the Mingo Creek Democratic Society had declared. But the guillotine proved no match for George.

Washington rode out with the troops because he feared that America was on the verge of falling to “mob or Club government” under which “there can be no security for life—liberty—or Property”. While Washington won the battle, he earned the undying enmity of the Democrats.

In his Farewell Address on leaving office, George Washington warned about the “mischiefs of the spirit of party” which “opens the door to foreign influence and corruption”.

Both the French and their leftist allies in America were furious at Washington’s message.

“If ever there was a period for rejoicing, this is the moment,” the Philadelphia Aurora responded. “This man who is the source of all the misfortunes of our country is this day reduced to a level with his fellow citizens.”

Adet, the French ambassador, sent a copy of the Farewell Address to his government while raging against “the lies it contains, the tone of insolence”. Adet and the French regime launched a campaign of naval terror “to arouse the attention of the public at the moment of choosing the electors who must choose the President.” The campaign was treasonously coordinated “with our friends in Congress” who, according to Adet, “only saw me last winter in secret.”

But attempting to terrorize Americans backfired badly. Adams responded to French attacks on American ships with the Quasi-War and Jefferson refused to end America’s neutrality.

Nonetheless the Democratic Societies influenced the new Democratic-Republican Party and American leftists continued to dream of bringing the French Revolution to these shores.

A toast at the Democratic Society of Philadelphia envisioned France’s revolutionary movement spreading until it will “have the whole earth for its area, and the arch of heaven for its dome.”

That mission outlived George Washington and the French Revolution. It continued on through European revolutions, the Communist takeover of the Soviet Union and it still continues today.

That is why leftists really want Washington to fall.

'Domestic Enemies: The Founding Fathers' Fight Against The Left' is now out. 

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.

When Resistance Became Sedition and Sedition Became Resistance

Daniel Greenfield February 03, 2021@ Sultan Knish Blog

In 2008, “dissent” went from being the “highest form of patriotism”, a quote by Communist revisionist historian Howard Zinn that Democrats falsely attributed to Thomas Jefferson, to treason when George W. Bush made way for Barack H. Obama. The old bumper stickers about the patriotic value of dissent were swiftly replaced with others touting the value of change.

In 2020, resistance just as quickly turned into sedition once the political tables were turned.

In one month, questioning a presidential election went from a commonplace proposition to a shocking attack on our democracy. And we all know that if President Trump had been inaugurated for a second term, there would be no censorship or censure of the Democrat politicians and pundits claiming that he was only reelected because of Russia or UFOs.

Nor would we be hearing any talk of “sedition” and “insurrection” as if they were bad things.

When November was just decorating the flagstones of D.C. with faded leaves, the Democrat cliques inside federal agencies were still touting their skill at undermining the White House in chats with reporters at bars where drinks cost more than most Americans earn in a day.

These members of the “resistance” had spent four years undermining elected officials while falsely claiming that they were entitled to do it because the 2016 election had been illegitimate.

Government officials boasted anonymously of undermining President Trump, members of Congress and their staffers helped protesters get inside to disrupt hearings, rioters who assaulted police officers and attacked federal buildings were bailed out by Democrat officials and celebrities who enlisted Silicon Valley and major corporations to support the riots.

By the time November was done, resistance had been rebranded as “sedition”. Storming Capitol Hill went from a passionate endeavor by Democrat activists protesting the Kavanaugh nomination, the environment, or some other lefty cause, to the single worst event since 9/11.

Black Lives Matter riots had besieged the White House and set fire to its guardhouse, while still being defended by Democrats and the media as peaceful protesters. The media agonized over photos of federal agents protecting the Lincoln Memorial as a sign of incipient fascism. Less than a year later, 25,000 troops occupying D.C. like Baghdad are being cheered by the media.

The difference between resistance and sedition, between protests and insurrections, is who’s in charge. Democrats resist Republican elected officials. Republicans however commit sedition against Democrat elected officials. Democrats protest, Republicans riot. These aren’t distinctions in law. The only real distinction is who’s in power and who’s on the barricades.

Political hypocrisy isn’t a new phenomenon, but Democrats weaponizing the national security state to suppress the political opposition over the same behavior they engage in is a serious threat to the survival of the United States as anything other than a banana republic in a civil war.

The Democrats fired the first shot when the Obama administration used the national security system to target members of Congress during its time in office and then, in an election year, went after President Trump’s associates based on Hillary Clinton’s opposition research.

Instead of being held accountable for abusing national security to target their political opponents, Democrats, their media, and their allies in the system doubled down with fake investigations of the same worthless allegations that they never managed to substantiate.

After four years of falsely claiming that President Trump was a Russian agent and that the 2016 election had somehow been rigged with Facebook ads in an event that was worse than 9/11, the Democrats have pivoted to claiming that questioning the 2020 election is worse than 9/11.

Now the old abuse of the national security state under the guise of hunting down the evidence that Republicans had rigged the 2016 election has turned into abusing the national security state to punish Republicans for suggesting that the Democrats had rigged the 2020 election.

The only consistent thing here is the Democrat abuse of national security to target their political opponents while magically transforming election skepticism from the highest form of patriotism to sedition, and riots from a moral crusade into a major threat because they are now in power.

The failure to have any kind of reckoning with the Obama administration’s national security abuses has taken us to a new era of national security abuses by the Biden administration.

Democrat officials and their media allies are already touting a new campaign against “domestic extremism”. And the same people who labeled John McCain and Mitt Romney “extremists” when they were running against their boss will get to define who the “extremists” are. Black Lives Matter, a hate group that injured hundreds of police officers and caused $2 billion in damage while taking its motto from a domestic terrorist wanted by the FBI won’t make the list.

The abuse of national security to target the political opposition isn’t a new phenomenon. The Clinton administration insisted that the real threat to America was coming from militias even while Al Qaeda was prepping the attacks that would kill nearly 3,000 people on September 11.

Democrats repeatedly claimed that the Bush Administration’s campaign against terrorists was punishing political dissent, but despite these false claims, Bush’s counter-terrorism never even came close to eavesdropping on, investigating, or shutting down the political opposition.

That didn’t stop Democrats from repeatedly invoking the Gestapo and the Stasi when attacking the Patriot Act, Ashcroft, and Gonzalez. It also didn’t stop them from abusing the Patriot Act and the national security system built to fight Communists and Islamic terrorists to target members of Congress and the political opposition including President Trump and his associates.

Democrats and the media quickly got back to comparing President Trump to Hitler and accusing him of fascism, yet his administration never did to Biden what Obama had done to Trump. The Trump administration didn’t eavesdrop on Biden associates under the guise of national security. The damaging material about Hunter Biden and his father’s ties to China came out of a laptop shop in Vermont, not from the synthesis of political operatives and national security personnel which had exploited the Steele Dossier’s false claims about Trump and Russian prostitutes.

And the same alliance between Democrat political operatives, the media, and Silicon Valley that had spread these false allegations far and wide, acted to suppress news stories about Hunter Biden on the false and familiar grounds that they represented Russian disinformation.

The suppression of the Hunter Biden story may be the last hurrah for Russian disinformation.

Biden is moving to appease Russia and that means the Democrats and the media will spend a lot less time justifying their abuses of national security by connecting Republicans to Russia. It would be awkward for Biden and Putin to hug one day after our government media got through with another concocted story justifying a crackdown on conservatives by exploiting Russia.

The Russia hoax generated a national security angle that justified abusing the broad discretion meant for chasing spies and terrorists to instead chase conservatives and Republicans. The Capitol riot provided a new pretext that has allowed the Democrats to dispense with Russia while labeling membership in the political opposition as evidence of a national security threat.

Anyone who questioned Biden’s election can be accused of “incitement”, “sedition”, and “insurrection” without Democrats and their media having to find Russia on a map.

These grotesque abuses of national security are being carried out by the same Democrats who had been neck deep in what they’ve now defined as incitement, sedition, and insurrection. Yesterday’s seditionists now fantasize, in their own words, about using the government they have seized to “investigate”, “suppress”, and “deprogram” the political opposition.

The Republican governing class has failed to come to terms with the reality that its Democrat counterparts operate by a very different definition of law and government than they do. The Democrats don’t simply disregard the Constitution, as they have ever since Woodrow Wilson, but they regard their own power as legitimate and the power of Republicans as illegitimate.

The Democrats are hypocrites only in that they don’t openly state their central principle, but they are remarkably consistent in its application by seeking to dismantle any part of government or society that aids Republicans while building up the power of any part of it that serves them.

Republicans take a legal or philosophical perspective on everything while Democrats have an expedient activist take on it. Republicans turn to the law or tradition, while Democrats decide whether the Filibuster, the Electoral College, the institution of marriage, the existence of white people, and the biological reality of women serves their purposes or ought to be eliminated.

That’s Obama’s thesis about the right side of history in a brutal nutshell.

Democrats approach politics from the simple and consistent perspective that any office currently held by a Republican is illegitimate and any held by a Democrat is sacrosanct. The reasons for this, whether it’s the Russians or white supremacy, are just a propaganda detail. That’s why Democrats “resist” while Republicans commit “sedition”. The difference between resistance and sedition is the legitimacy of the movement and the legitimacy of those in power.

Their approach to the national security state is motivated by that same understanding that its purpose is to promote “resistance” to Republicans and the suppression of Republican “sedition”.

When Republicans failed to carry out a meaningful reckoning of Obama’s national security abuses they didn’t just allow an injustice to go unpunished, but they ensured a much worse repetition by emboldened Democrats who committed the worst political abuse of the national security system that had been possible until then and got away with it. That’s the next step.

The Biden administration is moving to criminalize the political opposition, to investigate and dismantle it using all of the tools at its disposal. That is the only thing Republicans can expect. It’s exactly what they should have been expecting all along. Obama’s abuses of the national security state were not an outlier. They are the new normal. And they’re only going to get worse.

Republicans failed to hold the Democrats accountable when they were in power. They will now have to learn how to hold them accountable when they’re out of power, not with hearings or investigations, but by showing who the oppressors and the oppressed in the system really are.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

This article first appeared exclusively at Front Page Magazine.

Tags: Biden, recent 

Share This: Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest Linkedin

 

About Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Greenfield is a journalist investigating Islamic terrorism and the Left. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center

 

Liz Cheney says Strzok-Page texts 'whole lot like a coup ... could well be treason'

May 27, 2019 By Thomas Lifson

As A.G. Barr and U.S. attorneys Durham and Huber investigate possible crimes committed by FBI and DOJ officials related to the 2016 election, Rep. Liz Cheney has joined President Trump in mentioning the T-word: treason. She did so on ABC Television's This Week program, speaking to a very unhappy-looking Martha Raddatz, who appeared to cry on air reporting Donald Trump's apparent victory Election Night 2016 (Raddatz disputes this).

ABC News found it newsworthy enough to tweet out video of those remarks, part of a longer interview (complete video here):............. Read more