Image 01 Image 03

America Under Attack: Riots and Looting Nationwide

America Under Attack: Riots and Looting Nationwide

The country is on fire. It’s not about George Floyd, if it ever was about George Floyd. Outside groups, agitators, and extremists have seized upon a tragedy and are destroying their local communities, torching small businesses, and beating people senseless. And for what?

The media is lying to everyone, to themselves. These are not right-wing Trump supporters who are destroying businesses, burglarizing stores, and assaulting innocent bystanders in the name of “justice.”

This should lay to rest one of the anti-gun crowd’s favorite questions —  “but why do you need a gun?” It won’t, but it should.

A compilation of riot news.

Look at all of these “white supremacists”:

Stay safe.



Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Democrat cities are busy giving a master class on why you NEVER try to appease a mob. They will keep going and going and going because all they see is weakness.

The ONLY way to stop it is for them to be confident that violence and looting will be met with swift and severe consequences.

I honestly think that they’re intentionally letting their cities burn to try and force Trump to send in the Army.

A bunch of National Guard folks showed up here in LA. It had a positive effect back in ’92 during the Rodney King riots. Hopefully, it does some good now. I’m not impressed by the cops with respect to this latest unrest, but it’s way better than back in ’92 where the police basically just withdrew and abandoned the riot zone, letting the rioters loot and burn with absolutely no resistance. Emergency services couldn’t even go into the area at that point. It was no-mans land.

Only a Democrat would argue that Antifa cannot be designated as a terrorist organization.

If Trump deployed the Untied States Military, the same Democrats calling on him to do more would be the first people to scream that he is violating posse comitatus.

They are asking Trump to call tails on a two headed coin.

    legalbeagle in reply to dystopia. | June 1, 2020 at 3:26 pm

    Deploying the United States Army without the request of the Governor or State Legislature is a very big deal.

      Declaring they first no longer have a republican form of gov’t would allow it.

      It would be true in certain cases. But no one – not even Trump – would have the balls to do it and make it stick (the entire rest of the national gov’t would fight them).

        Milhouse in reply to GWB. | June 1, 2020 at 3:59 pm

        No, declaring that they don’t have a republican form of government would just be an obvious lie, and would have absolutely no legal effect. If he were to rely on a lie like that to take power into his hands, he’d be impeached for real, and the Republicans would go along with it because he’d deserve it.

        But he doesn’t need to do that. The Insurrection Act gives him enough authority to send the militia or army into a state whenever “domestic violence [..] so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection”. And that is an explicit exception from Posse Comitatus.

        However, back to dystopia, I am the farthest thing from a Democrat, but Antifa cannot be designated as a terrorist organization for one simple reason: there is no such thing in US law as a “terrorist organization”. There is such a thing as a “foreign terrorist organization” (designated by the secretary of state, not the president, but that’s a minor point because the SecState works for the president). But the key word there is “foreign”. A domestic organization cannot be so designated. And there is no corresponding designation for domestic organizations.

          GWB in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 4:36 pm

          No, Milhouse, it would not be a lie in some cases.
          Stop being obtuse.

          As to a terror organization… *facepalm*
          If you have to put the adjective “foreign” in front of something, that means, by linguistic definition, there can be a “domestic” of it.

          Now, not putting those words into a law might restrict what the President can do. But if the law talks about “foreign terrorists” then it acknowledges there can be “domestic terrorists”. It might not do anything about them, but it sure as shootin’ does NOT mean they simply don’t exist.

          GWB in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 4:38 pm

          And, you’re right about the Insurrection Act.
          (I didn’t downvote you, btw.)

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 4:45 pm

          GWB, it would be a lie in all cases. All fifty states — even California — have clearly republican forms of government, beyond any possible doubt, so if the President were to declare otherwise and use it as an excuse to send in the troops he would be lying and would be stopped dead in his tracks. The military would probably refuse the orders. And he’d deserve impeachment and removal.

          And no, there is no such thing in US law as a domestic terrorist organization. The law creates a category called “foreign terrorist organization”, and says how such organizations can be designated. It does not create any corresponding domestic category. So Antifa cannot be designated one. (Perhaps you missed that word “designated” in dystopia’s original comment?)

          tom_swift in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 5:09 pm

          But the key word there is “foreign”. A domestic organization cannot be so designated. And there is no corresponding designation for domestic organizations.

          No, the key word is “legal”. A term need not have legal significance to be perfectly intelligible and meaningful. And it’s certainly more than arguable that right now the concept of “domestic terrorist organization” means something, and it’s bloody obvious what it is. The President can call anything he wants a “terrorist organization”, because the bully pulpit isn’t a court of law. The term means whatever he wants it to mean, and in a case like the current one, a huge chunk of the country is likely to agree with his definition.

          DJT is of course not a lawyer, which may be why he actually manages to get something done every now and then.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 6:09 pm

          Tom, we are not talking about whether Antifa members are terrorists — obviously they are, or whether the President is right to say so — obviously he is. We are talking about whether it can be designated as a terrorist organization, which is what the President purported to do. (If you doubt this, just look above at the comment this whole thread is about, which is the one by dystopia at 3:21 pm.)

          Your claim that “the bully pulpit isn’t a court of law” completely misses the point. An official designation is not the bully pulpit. And foreign terrorist organizations, which is a status that exists in US law, are not designated in a court of law, they are designated by the Secretary of State saying so.

          So it is very relevant that there is no such category in US law as a domestic terrorist organization, and therefore the President telling the plain truth about Antifa doesn’t have any legal effect, whereas if Antifa were headquartered in Canada he could order Pompeo to declare it a foreign terrorist organization and legally it would then be one.

          That is the point here.

          GWB in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 8:37 pm

          Also, Milhouse, pertaining to “domestic terrorism”, there is 18 U.S. Code § 2331(5):

          the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
          (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
          (B) appear to be intended—
          (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
          (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
          (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
          (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States;

          So, I’m seeing “domestic terrorism” defined right there in US law. It must exist, now, right?

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | June 2, 2020 at 3:44 am

          GWB, how is that relevant? Nobody claimed there’s no such thing as domestic terrorism. But there is no such thing as a domestic terrorist organization. Therefore Antifa cannot be designated as one.

          Nor can the president or anyone else “designate” Antifa’s actions as domestic terrorism. There’s nothing to designate. Any given act is either a terrorist act or it isn’t, depending only on the facts, not on anyone’s declaration. And whether it is or it isn’t doesn’t affect the organization’s legal status.

    sidebar in reply to dystopia. | June 1, 2020 at 3:31 pm

    Despite what Democrat Media Buffoons may opine, we still have a Federal system of Government. The deployment of Federal Troops without the approval of a Governor or State Legislature is an extraordinary step. I don’t see any Democrat Governors requesting assistance yet.

      sequester in reply to sidebar. | June 1, 2020 at 3:33 pm

      None of these “technicalities” seemed to apply to Obama. The Democrat Media was remarkably incurious and unconcerned.

      Milhouse in reply to sidebar. | June 1, 2020 at 4:02 pm

      The deployment of Federal Troops without the approval of a Governor or State Legislature is an extraordinary step.

      It is an extraordinary step, but the Insurrection Act allows it whenever “the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection”. That would seem to be the case now.

        dystopia in reply to Milhouse. | June 2, 2020 at 6:21 am

        So in essence the Insurrection Act codifies a condition where a State cannot guarantee a Republican form of Government due to insurrection.

      BierceAmbrose in reply to sidebar. | June 2, 2020 at 12:02 am

      On election night, who knew there was this much more crazy to be had.

      “The deployment of Federal Troops without the approval of a Governor or State Legislature is an extraordinary step. I don’t see any Democrat Governors requesting assistance yet.”

      If they don’t ask they screwed. If they do ask they’re screwed. If they dither they’re screwed. If they react they’re screwed.

      On top of no good choices, now the opposition governors’ political operations will be all tangled up navigating a way through this alternative. They’ve lost the initiative.

      This guy’s instincts are uncanny.

      The political double-bind created for mayors n governors with this is incredible. (Great. The Greatest. Incredible. Like nothing before.)

      So, they don’t ask for help, riots continue, and it’s now all their fault. They’re more than incompetent, they’re complicit. Every second demonstrates how they’re not working with the feds, because OrangeManBad.

      They do ask for help, and they’re ineffective — they had to ask for help. Once they ask, they’re beholden to the OrangManBad for whatever happens next. And they’ve alienated their “resistance” supporters, full spectrum from street thugs, through aids n policy wonks in their administrations.

      Either way, they’ve handed him a talking point every time he gets in front of cameras. The barking press asks about “military”, he talks about riots, destruction, and helping people.

      By god, they’re gonna flip votes in the urban n black demographics to the OrangeManBad exactly the way they flipped working class folks last time round.

      Meanwhile, demonstrations of why you maybe wanna own a gun, and a walk to a church squish in a couple more voter slices. He’s squishy on 2A, and no religious paragon. However, he’s just reminded folks he’s an opportunist. Who you gonna vote for, the folks who hate you and want you dead (including beaten to death by thugs on your own street, while they do nothing to help), or the guy who can be bought?

Bring back the old rule that looters should be shot. The problem will disappear.

    Milhouse in reply to MAJack. | June 1, 2020 at 4:04 pm

    Could someone please find somewhere where it is documented that that used to be the rule? I went looking for it and couldn’t find it. And maybe someone can inform us exactly when it stopped being the rule, and why. I would like to know, but so far the people I’ve asked don’t believe it ever was the rule. Because it certainly seems like it ought to be.

      Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 4:16 pm

      Try Tennessee v Garner. This was the keystone case which said that using deadly force against the perpetrator of a non-violent felony was a violation of the 4th Amendment unless “the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.” This has been built upon over the years by other courts.

        Milhouse in reply to Mac45. | June 1, 2020 at 4:58 pm

        Yes, I thought of that but I don’t think it’s relevant. The shooting looters on sight rule (assuming it ever really existed, which I’m fairly sure it did) doesn’t seem connected with the fleeing felon rule. My understanding is that in the old days looters could be shot without even trying to arrest them first, and without their making any attempt to flee. Whereas ordinary felons could never be shot unless they were fleeing. It seems to me that the shooting looters rule would come under the category of the riot act.

        Also, the whole point of Tennessee v Garner was that the rule was invented at a time when there were few felonies, they were almost all violent, and they carried the death penalty if caught, so fleeing felons could automatically be presumed to be dangerous. Nowadays there are so many felonies, and many of them are not violent, so it’s not reasonable to assume that just because someone has committed one he’s therefore a danger to the public. But even under that ruling, police can shoot a fleeing felon if they reasonably believe this one is a danger to the public. That would seem to apply to all rioters, but only if they’re fleeing.

        Finally, Tennessee v Garner was based on the fourth amendment, and therefore applies only to state actors. Under the common law anyone could shoot a fleeing felon; most states had already changed that by the time T v G came along, but in those states that hadn’t it would seem that the rule is still available for non-state actors.

          txvet2 in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 7:49 pm

          I don’t know about elsewhere, but here in Texas, shooting looters on your own premisis would seem to fall quite easily into the category of “Castle Doctrine”. I don’t know about the cops, but they seem to shoot perps with fair regularity, so I’m not sure it would be a real problem there, either.

          Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 9:00 pm

          There was never a single publish “rule” that looters or other felons could be shot on sight. However, in the early 20th century, up until Garner, it was legal for law enforcement officers to shoot people committing felonies or fleeing after committing or attempting to commit such felonies. What happened is that the law evolved, over the decades. The courts ruled that using deadly force against a person, who did not represent a reasonable physical threat to the police officer or other people, was a violation of the person’s 4th Amendment rights. This has been stretched to cover the use of force by non-LE personnel in defense of person and property, as well.through the 14th Amendment. Then as you noted, most states placed statutory limits upon when deadly force can be used against others.

          What Tennessee v Garner did was to codify when deadly force could be used against a fleeing criminal, by a LEO.

It’s not about George Floyd, if it ever was about George Floyd.
Yes, the protests were about Floyd. The riots most certainly are NOT.

We – American citizens – need to take back our country from these insurrectionists. We need to ferret out their funders and their organizers (oh yes, they have them), and hound them out of our country or into prisons. And I’m being kind.

    Geologist in reply to GWB. | June 1, 2020 at 8:42 pm

    We all “know” that Soros is funding this whole riot situation. How does a prosecutor prove it, so that Soros can be charged?

Trial by press and an em-pathetic appeal (i.e. witch hunts and warlock judgments). Redistributive change without borders. #WickedSolution #HateLovesAbortion

2smartforlibs | June 1, 2020 at 3:46 pm

Same people that have been doing this since the 60s. Its just 3 generations down.

Of course it’s not about George Floyd. None of these people ever gave a sh*t about him when he was alive, and if he were still alive they’d as soon rob him as look at him.

The Portland mayor claims that he has asked Oregon Governor Kate Brown to activate some national guard troops and she “has demurred” each time.

    Milhouse in reply to maxmillion. | June 1, 2020 at 4:07 pm

    So let him ask the President instead. Yeah, right. I thought so. This is the same mayor who ordered his police to let Antifa do whatever they liked all of last year. Suddenly he doesn’t like them?!

johnny dollar | June 1, 2020 at 4:13 pm

Those “white supremacists” sure have good disguises.

There’s pretty much only one way to deal with anarchists, and the funny thing is that these guys are such pussies motivated only by their handlers and not their passions, that they’ll be back in mommie’s basement before the their friends reach room temperature.

Only a few days ago the Supreme Court and the People’s Democratic Republic of California we’re giving all of us sanctimonious lectures about pressing need to maintain “social distancing” during the worse-than-Hitler evil of … wait for it … Sunday church service. Anyone who dissented was smeared as a “white supremacist”.

Barely 24 hours later actual terrorists rampage through the streets of deep blue cities and all we get from the MSM/DNC axis is glum silence, gaslighting attempts to blame “white supremacists”, or outright support and encouragement to commit more murder and mayhem.

going to have trouble using domestic terrorist legal branding (as opposed to tweet) due to laws. domestic terrorism a “name” not an actual criminal offense. the destruction carried out by the “terrorists” is the criminal offense.
non-patriot act has bunch of stuff about it but nothing really codifying it.

insurrection act actually defines a criminal act and punishment and is what allows military to bypass posse comitatus.

been years since had to know that stuff, us army mp had to know it as army mp (in the 80’s) was closest military police force to civilian police force is how that actedpatrolledetc.

    Milhouse in reply to dmacleo. | June 1, 2020 at 5:02 pm

    Yes, there is no such thing in US law as a “domestic terrorist organization”, so the president can’t designate one. The law does have such a thing as a “foreign terrorist organization”, but not a domestic one. The law classifies certain acts as domestic terrorism, but no designation is needed.

Blog Boss, Question? Why does this blog allow countless multiple posts by one individual??

It happens all the time; some character calling himself millehous must have 10 posts already; he turns everything into his personal conversation, and worst of all, he is just a contrarian, contributes nothing of substance.

Please check his medications and age; he may have the illness as groping biden has, and just cannot remember what he posts or how often.

    Geologist in reply to Candid. | June 1, 2020 at 8:49 pm

    I don’t always agree with Milhouse, but I respect his postings. He is a valuable contributor to this blog.

    Candid, please feel free to skip over his posts.

      DSHornet in reply to Geologist. | June 2, 2020 at 8:48 am

      Agreed re. Milhouse.

      Many of us disagree with him regularly but certainly not all the time. He candidly explains his reasoning and often seems to invite discussion. As a non lawyer I sometimes get lost in his prose but he rarely gets emotional. Too bad the same can’t be said about some of our fellow commenters.

Let me suggest a cure for your Milhouse problem: Go elsewhere.

I figured it all out. I cracked the “white society” scam.


Here we go:

America was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics. In other words, we do not live in a “white” society a black society or a brown society, but a Judeo-Christian society where everyone is equal.

For the swamp/left/islamic axis to succeed – or any fascist entity, for that matter – Christianity and Judaism must be destroyed, or subjugated.

Given that fact, we can finally understand the axis’s war on Christianity, and the left’s hatred of Israel and Jewishness in general – and their alliances with radical Islam (a religion and culture highly negative towards the existence of Christians and Jews; as the old Islamic saying goes: ‘The enemy of my enemy is my friend’; it also explains the alliance with the ChiComms, who are pretty good at exterminating Christians..)

So now add “white guilt” nonsense into the equation, and you have a culture where leftist and Islamists who hijacked our educational system (way to go Bush, boehner, mccain (great that you’re gone) and the rest of the GOPe offal) hve bee allowed to brainwash a generation of young people into ‘white guilt’ drivel.

Mix it all together and at the end of the day you’ll have an Islamic republic where both non Muslim white and blacks are subservient – and America is no more.

(Meantime, Barr has mentioned this…. 🙂

Two years earlier this guy you quoted said Now is a good time to talk about gun control.

Just called the police because there was just a dangerous standoff between my neighbor and some protestors and got the response: “Sir, the city is under attack. Do what you have to do.” And they hung up. Did that really just happen?

— Scott Barry Kaufman (SBK) (@sbkaufman) June 1, 2020

The country is on fire. It’s not about George Floyd,
No it’s not, it’s more along the lines of George Soros.

When in doubt, shoot the looters.

What’s the point of having police on site if they just stand and watch looters.

When protestors cross the line which includes acts of sedition and/or disrupting the lives of other innocent people, blocking their movement, violent acts, or stopping them from accomplishing their jobs or purpose, blocking their speech, and/or unnecessarily interfering with the activities of their environment, or smear tactics, then they are violating their 1st amendment rights, breaking existing laws, and need to be brought to justice. Protesting has its limits and place. These protests are not spontaneous and are organized activities by outside domestic terrorist groups. Many are paid by George Soros, BLM, Antifa, and related extreme liberal groups ( Obama). Those who incite and/or fund riots/looting/arson (George Soros) need to be arrested for being an accomplice and/or sedition. They need to account and pay for the damage they create including costs created by obfuscation. Rioters and looters/arsonists should be placed on notice that they can/will be shot! Likewise any rioter/looter/arsonist arrested who lives outside of the immediate area does not have a “dog in the fight” and deserves an additional citation for being a paid rioter/looter and face felony charges. It is a federal crime to cross state lines or to use interstate facilities to incite or participate in violent rioting. Those rioters/arsonists arrested need to have a criminal/outstanding warrant background check, students need to be expelled, and all face loss of any government subsistence. Unmasking and disarming protestors of weapons should be enforced and Mayors, governors, government officials allowing out of control riots or preventing the police from doing their jobs should be arrested and held accountable.

Peaceful demonstrations are one thing, but rioting, arson, and looting are criminal actions and ALL law enforcement agencies need to ramp up and stop at all costs per their oath they took as an officer. This includes arrests and lethal force as warranted.

I’m really hip with the view seen recently in these pages that “Antifa is the paramilitary wing of the DNC”; yes, tip of the spear.

The Dem-Left rhetorical evidence for and lack of evidence contrary to this claim seem substantial enough. Note Pelosi & Schumer’s recent reflexive comment on OMB’s, you know, the poor judgment thing, etc, evidenced especially in front of St John’s Church in DC (after a short walk from the WH with his entire security entourage) with absolutely no mention of — not any express operational/theoretical distancing from, mind you — Antifa’s tactics, methods, and insurrectionist business model (someone’s whispering, ” . . . because of Open-Society Soros’ numerous and intermingled puppet strings”) complicating the Floyd peaceful protesters’ exercise of their I A rights, in order to begin healing a nation.


Remember the violent struggles in Northern Ireland, a good generation ago? As much as it probably wants to see itself popularly as an American iteration of, say, a Sinn Fein, Antifa is surely no such thing as the “We Ourselves” movement is presently constituted. But Sinn Fein’s past ties to and support of IRA-led terror is, for historians anyway, considerable and copious.éin#Past_links_with_Republican_paramilitaries

In service to the DNC, this theory runs, Antifa’s actions and aims are probably more similar to the paramilitary, PLO-inspired wing of the former IRA. There’s no comparison, then, to the presently more civil, albeit historically pro-violent, democracy-oriented core of Sinn Fein today — a thriving and effective political party in Ireland today.

In any case, Antifa (Anti-Fascism) is, despite its claim to the contrary, and paradoxically, far Left, revolutionary and wholly fascistic. (Where are you when we need you, Jonah Goldberg?) Their actions and deceptive maneuvers are enough to make the ghosts of Lenin and Stalin proud; it’s to further imagine, Marx’s would be delighted, too.

Wait, Biden . . . is of Irish descent — right? (I wonder, what are his sentiments, if any, about the Sinn-Fein/IRA role in the ballad that is the modern history of Ireland/Northern Ireland; that might prove highly relevant today, even instructive w/r/t his past and present silence re Antifa).

Am I sensing nonsense, a vile and seditious conspiracy when there’s just none possible? Or, are Biden and his handlers/promoters/puppeteers modeling something here — maybe?

Maybe there’s even a KNOWN but highly classified linkage — an essential material, foreign linkage in this vein for AG Barr to commence the task he was just delegated to begin by PDT: the fleshing out of the international element needed for FBI/DoJ to start and finish its investigations into the role, enterprise, and aims, both immediate and down-range, of Antifa — leading to its key members’ arrest, indictment, conviction, serious sentencing, and resolution. For now. Just perhaps.

(Maybe I should quit this line of thought, lest I be compared in style to Susan Rice’s recent, almost groundless wonders about RUSSIA (being maybe behind the protester-complicated riots, looting, arson, and killing).

On this view and if it’s got legs, the time might just be ripe for REAL FISA warranting and other work authorized by the super-secret (unless its work is leaked) court.

Let’s have some real, good, effective government for a change. The thought is enough to inspire an idyllic painting.